Avatar Review
Avatar
Written and Directed by: James Cameron
Starring: Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Zoe Saldana, Giovanni Ribisi, Michelle Rodriguez, Joel Moore
We’ve been waiting for over a decade now to see James Cameron return to the world of big budget filmmaking. After Titanic there was simply nothing left for him to conquer, and everyone knows that the one thing that drives James Cameron is a challenge. Now that technology has had time to progress to the next stage, he has finally decided to up the ante all over again.
Despite Cameron’s untarnished track record, many questions remained. Had he been away from the game too long? Was the hype starting to exceed all reasonable expectations? And was he asking too much of audiences to embrace a strange new world when they’ve grown accustomed to so many familiar sequels, remakes and spin-offs? Valid questions, perhaps, and yet they quickly fade away after being absorbed into the world of Avatar.
Avatar is a fantasy/sci-fi epic that takes place on Pandora, a lush, green planet where an humanoid alien race known as the Na’vi live in total harmony with nature. Humans want to get their hands on some of the valuable minerals contained beneath the planet’s surface, but in order to do that, they need to relocate the natives. To gather intelligence and learn more about their culture, the U.S. military creates genetic Na’vi clones that can be controlled remotely by human soldiers using a neural link. When Jake Sully, a wheelchair-bound Marine, infiltrates the Na’vi clan, he soon finds himself torn between two bodies and two opposing ways of life.
This movie is equal parts Star Wars, Jurassic Park and The Lord of the Rings, all passed through a James Cameron filter. It’s hard to shake the feeling that you’ve seen a lot of these elements before, but at the same time, you’ve never seen them quite like this. The story is fairly straightforward, and it’s a little light on plot and character development, but your appreciation for Avatar will hinge almost entirely on just how earth-shattering you find the visuals.
From a sensory standpoint, there is nothing comparable. The environments are stunning, the CG is absolutely top notch, and the 3-D enhances everything in subtle yet significant ways. People who thought that the Avatar previews looked like Star Wars: Episode 1 (or worse yet, Battle for Terra) have no idea what they’re in for. The character models are ridiculously detailed and expressive. The eyes and the mouths are so eerily real, and the motion capture so fluid that you can’t quite believe what you’re seeing. Live action and CG intersect seamlessly and with flawless execution.
The 3-D also helps with the realism because it distances you from the characters slightly, and obscures some of the details when the camera is moving. This can be frustrating during some of the action scenes, when you find that you can’t quite focus on anything. On the other hand, it really immerses you in the world; you are constantly surrounded by floating seeds, falling ash or thick foliage. And the aerial scenes truly give you a sense of speed and height like never before.
Sam Worthington (Terminator Salvation) proves why he is the next big action star. Even if he didn’t seem to do much physically on screen, his presence and personality carry this movie through to the end. It’s great to see Sigourney Weaver in another strong female role, Michelle Rodriguez is surprisingly likable, and Giovanni Ribisi is the best corporate douchebag since Paul Reiser in Aliens.
The two standout performances, however, come from Zoe Saldana and Stephen Lang. Saldana (recently seen as Uhura in Star Trek) plays the Na’vi princess Neytiri, and through the performance capture process manages to sell the character about as well as any CG character has ever been sold before. Lang, on the other hand, is the hulking Colonel Quaritch, the movie’s memorable (albeit two-dimensional) villain. Some of his dialogue definitely rides the line of cheesiness, but at the same time, the macho military stuff is pure Jim Cameron and perhaps the greatest tie to his earlier films.
Like Michael Bay, James Cameron subscribes to the theory that bigger is better, and at times Avatar feels like it’s trying to wow you into submission. Almost every vehicle or creature has to be absolutely gigantic, and the environments also rely more on overwhelming scale than intricate detail. The world is impressive, I just wish there was more of a sense of discovery throughout the film. I also think he overdid it a little bit with the Na’vi spirituality and the environmental themes, which seem clumsy and heavy-handed, and sometimes border on being comical. But we all expected that, right?
Yes, the movie is a bit too long as well– I felt it dragged a bit in the middle while Jake was learning the ways of the Na’vi with no real conflict to push it along. That being said, the last half-hour is an all-out assault that barely pauses to let you catch your breath, and it is pretty awesome. Regardless of how the movie gets there, the action sequences are beyond thrilling, and the relationship between Jake and Neytiri packs enough of an emotional punch to make it mean something.
On a purely technical level this movie is unparalleled and easily earns four stars in that department, but it is debatable whether or not it deserves a perfect score overall for that alone. Due to the relatively predictable story, occasionally cheesy dialogue and uneven pacing, I am inclined to rank it somewhere alongside Star Trek as another 2009 blockbuster that is highly entertaining, but not particularly deep. I just happen to think Avatar stops a bit shy of being a masterpiece.
Your mileage may vary, but one thing’s for certain: this is the beginning of a new powerhouse sci-fi franchise and it is a must-see movie if ever there was one. You should not wait to see this on DVD, because the home theatre experience won’t even come close (at least not for a couple of years anyway). Whether or not James Cameron has truly changed the industry remains to be seen for the time being, but in the end I think all the money and hard work was definitely justified by the final result. — Sean
SCORE: 
Recommended If You Like: Star Wars: Episode 1, Aliens, Jurassic Park
Comments (103)
I am giving it a 3.5 as well..
olthough if it wasn’t for Cameron or crazy CG i ll had given it a 2.5..
Posted by KYriakos on December 18th, 2009”Avatar stops a bit shy of being a masterpiece.”
And thats why i am so PISSED Sean..
i hope Avatar 2 ..judgement day will Fucking blow our minds FAR away…
Posted by KYriakos on December 18th, 2009It’s official. I don’t give a crap about this movie. Heavy-handed moralizing, overlong, le sigh.
I guess if the IMAX version comes to my area I might give it a whirl.
Posted by hungSolo on December 18th, 2009Don’t be an idiot man, just go see the thing. ‘Le sigh?’ Are you kidding me? You feel your senses are too delicate to sit through anything short of “Precious” or “The Hurt Locker” but your comfortable in the combination of ‘le sigh’ and the title of hung solo…
Posted by Nick Robertson on December 18th, 2009Get over yourself and make sure you see this in the cinema – one day you’ll grow up and appreciate what you were witness to.
the moralizing is there, but I’d hesistate to call it heavy-handed. its not the driving force of the movie whatsoever.
Posted by Goon on December 18th, 2009And before “Avatar” and “Star Trek” there was Bill Shatner speaking Esperanto, in the horror film called “Incubus”.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F77k6SQX7iQ&feature=related
As an Esperanto speaker I found it terrifying! His Esperanto pronunciation that is, not the film.
Your readers may be interested in http://www.lernu.net
Posted by Brian Barker on December 18th, 2009If people want a film to pick on, spare Avatar and retire once again to your old punching bag: http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/watch-this-70-minute-video-review-of-star-wars-the-phantom-menace/
Posted by Nick Robertson on December 18th, 2009So funny, so true.
Nick Roberston is an angry, angry man. Le I don’t care.
Posted by hungSolo on December 18th, 2009It was better than I thought it would be…. and while the trailer did give away some major plot points, It had enough stuff plot wise to be fresh. People are gonna eat crow! I’m still trying to talk my wife into going so I can go again…
Posted by Big Hungry on December 18th, 2009I gave this a 5/6. I’m too lazy to translate the review, but it was great, the only thing holding it from a perfect score, was it’s story. To reach a 6/6, it would have had to been as innovative in its storytelling as in its graphics.
Posted by Henrik on December 18th, 2009I find it quite funny Sean that in the “Recommended if you like” section you put Star Wars: Episode 1, after writing in the review:
“People who thought that the Avatar previews looked like Star Wars: Episode 1 (…) have no idea what they’re in for”
So colour me confused. What is it about Episode 1 then that we should relate to with Avatar, since if i’m reading your generally glowing review correctly, its not on a visual level. So is it the cheesy plot both have in common?
It might just be me but having Episode 1 there comes off as having a go at Avatar which goes against the grain of your review. Or am i just reading it wrong?
Posted by Teo on December 18th, 2009@hungsolo – Sorry man, I had just woken up and took your comment to heart a little.
I just love the movie and hope that people can look past the hubris. I’m Avatar’s Malcolm X.
Again, sorry. I didn’t mean to sound like such an asshole.
Posted by Nick Robertson on December 18th, 2009Avatar, solving problems and bringing people together.
Posted by Itchy-Finger on December 18th, 2009Totally – christmas miracle and what-not.
I really found Sam Worthington to be very good in this. I didn’t dig him too much in T4 but he impressed in this.
I’m curious to know if Reed would like this as it’s – visually – some shit he has never seen before but I guess he’d rely on the story being generic to base is argument on.
Did get want to bang Neytiri?
Posted by Nick Robertson on December 18th, 2009It was just as good as I new it would be; plus it had Ripley in it…woohoo! James hasn’t really ever let me down, when it comes to the movies he’s directed. Don’t get me wrong…titanic wasn’t my kinda flick to begin with; but I can’t think of too many directors that could have done a better job, sinking a boat with Leo on it.
These folks that are tryin their asses off to find things they didn’t like about the movie, Avatar, kill me… I mean the guy hasn’t made a movie for more than 10 years, until now. What the hell are these people expecting to see, “Schindler’s List: In space”? O.K. so maybe the guy’s a little “rusty”; but what was the last “great” Sci-fi you’ve ever seen? Transformers 2?
Posted by Derek on December 19th, 2009There’s no such thing as a perfect movie.
AVATAR IS SPECTACULAR!!! I can see people being a little numb struck with their initial reviews but I have poured cold water on my head and can think clearly now. AVATAR IS SPECTACULAR!!!
It is amazing when you sit back and think of a comparable cinematic world and realize Peter Jackson had 50 years of literature, and volumes of supporting artwork, to do LOTR, where as, Cameron marshaled all this in the last number of years! On initial viewing Avatar’s cinematic world is completely realized on a physiological, sociological and biological bases and all these elements are tied in to the story. Many have ragged on the film being a liberal minded, tree hugging fest, but I submit Cameron has done the first film were the ecological argument (or spirit) isn’t stuck on as a plot device but is completely fused to the story. If the ecological elements are taken away the film would fall apart, period. This even goes to the physical body parts of the Na’vi that some are questioning. I feel the idea is smart and fully part of macro environment. Just because a good idea is similar to other things in our current world does not automatically make the idea not a good idea. Sorry so cryptic, trying to avoid spoilers, what I’m saying is take the body part and look at how it fits in to the micro and macro elements of the cinematic world presented – it works and is brillant.
I disagree with the notion that the story is weak and the characters are bland. I have new respect for Worthington due to this film. The training and maturing of his character in to a leader is well done and makes the way the new Star Trek handled Kirk look like a joke. You felt this character slipping away. I felt the video diary was a masterful exposition idea, again brilliant.
Zoe’s character is to die for! I was in love the first five minutes her CGI loveliness entered the frame. Fuck you Mr. Cameron, if he didn’t do the same thing he did in Titanic by giving us both the visceral (for the boys) and the true romance (for the girls). It should not be forgotten how hard it is to design a new race and make them both different yet sexy. Think about that, that is hard to do – you could really fuck it up one way or the other. I agreed with Sean, the game has changed on expressive CGI faces.
On the story front I’m in awe. Yes, Cameron has giving us Dancing With Wolves In Space, and you know what? Its brilliant and its what we need. He has done exactly what Tarantino just did with the World War II film to the Native American epic – he digested its parts and pooped out a new and recycled version that we needed. Why wouldn’t you do Native Americans in space – they are the perfect model for another race of beings in a Sci-fi fantasy.
This is this generations Star Wars, God I would love to be 13 again! I can just imagine the kids around the world that are going to spend the next few weeks drawing and rendering, dreaming and discovering their creativity!
Posted by rus in chicago on December 19th, 2009Watching a movie with Sean and Jay is like watching a movie with Vulcans. Sean will chuckle occasionally, but at the end of the movie, it’s hard to tell how much they enjoyed the movie.
I won’t say too much about Avatar because I have a tendency to spoil things. I think I’ll be on the next podcast, so Sean can edit out my verbal spoilers. Ha ha.
I think my opinion might be skewed because it was the first time I’ve seen a long movie in 3D. Avatar is quite the spectacle. I wish the Star Trek movie had been about the planet Pandora. I did get motion sickness and I got a headache from the 3D. I didn’t get emotionally involved as I hoped I would, but I don’t think I would fault the facial capture technology for this because I thought it was excellent. I must admit that my eyes started to glaze over after the two hour mark, but as I’ve said before, I need interesting dialog to keep me awake. I would recommend all Film Junk readers go see this movie, even if you end up hating it. It’s that good. Ha ha. Oh, the ending disappointed me, but the mainstream crowd should love it.
Posted by Reed Farrington on December 19th, 2009reed is always right
also why the fuck where the navi all african? that ruined it for me.
if the cg was a little better (making the bridge of nose more flexible, or not using certain colors (like that pale green) which punched down the realism it would have been mind blowing. the best part where those oil black creatures and nuances like those semi-erotic nasal openings. also imax didnt matter, because the major flaw in the cg was they didnt correctly animate the strange proportions of the navi, like say district 9. seems like they gave up at times/
i loved the idea of taking body modification as far as possibly through technology and i hope they make more movies that have transformations similiar
Neytiri Dis’kahan A’itey’s sideboob
Posted by kris on December 19th, 2009really, the actors hired to play CGI characters, the bridge of the nose, and a color ruined it for you?
how do you find joy in your life?
Posted by rus in chicago on December 19th, 2009“The training and maturing of his character in to a leader is well done and makes the way the new Star Trek handled Kirk look like a joke.”
I can see this, beyond the obvious paraplegic stuff you can really see him getting swept away into the world more convincingly than the other movies with this same sort of storyline. you feel bad for him every time has to get back to the real world.
I’m not so sure about it being this gen’s Star Wars though, but its probably at least this gen’s Jurassic Park.
Posted by Goon on December 19th, 2009It can be when you take in account the 3D. Put yourself, in your 13 year old self, and think what you would be thinking. Pretty cool, huh. I mean Cameron even threw in a little National Geographic-like nudity. 13 year old boys are going to be going nuts! Can you imagine the meetings with the ratings board. He is a master storyteller, or more accurately, a master blockbuster creator.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 19th, 2009I must say one thing i loved about the movie was SAm Worthington Legs…
The way they were shown in the movie was fantastic..
Posted by KYriakos on December 19th, 2009Well save your 3-D glasses because the Three Stooges Collection vol.7 has a 3-D Stooge episode…that’s what I call worthwhile…
Posted by xego on December 19th, 2009I just came back from the IMAX viewing here in NY, and all I have to say is WOW. I now hang my head in shame for ever doubting James Cameron! This is a cinematic achievement and simply one of the greatest films ever made. If this movie isn’t up for best film then I’m never watching the Oscars ever again.
Everyone MUST SEE THIS IN 3D!
That said I’m so fucking tired of everyone saying that the story was predictable. I mean really, what the fuck did you want in this film. Yes I could see where this film was going from a mile away but you know what, it was told in a way we’ve never seen before and that’s what mattered in the end. James Cameron promised to take the audience to a new world and did just that!
In the end this movie made me feel like a kid again and I can’t wait to go back to Pandora a few more times in Imax.
Posted by Marc on December 19th, 2009This is a reply to “kris’s” comments.
The Na’vi weren’t based entirely on African culture. It was more native American in nature.
You can see influences from the Sioux Indian tribes and some Cherokee as well. All in all I thought that the Na’vi culture was fleshed very well and and handled with class.
Posted by Marc on December 19th, 2009“it was told in a way we’ve never seen before and that’s what mattered in the end.”
Ebert says “Its not what a film is about, its how it is about it” and I think that applies here. It doesn’t ‘lack plot’ as people say. It’s not Gerry.
Episode 1 has a lot more plot than A New Hope. Does it help Episode 1 all that much?
Basically, in the case of Avatar, when you have that premise, for a first movie at least, I actually think you can only have so complicated a plot before it actually comes back to harm your premise. As mentioned, its important to watch Jake get swept away into this world and become one of them… if he had to enter the avatar world to solve a murder mystery while at the same time becoming one of them and preventing their holocaust and also there’s a trade war and an intergalactic blockade, etc, even for a nearly 3 hour movie that is wayyyyy too much.
If there’s a second or third, story will be more important. But at the same time, there is a danger of going Matrix Reloaded on us – too much plot, too much pointless talking and exposition.
I’ve said all along I’m not the hugest Cameron fan. I guess with him I think “Keep It Simple Stupid” is a good mantra – I’d rather have him obsess over the details of the world around his stories.
Posted by Goon on December 19th, 2009http://i45.tinypic.com/6ekgsp.jpg
Posted by Goon on December 19th, 2009This gave me a huge headache – prepare for hours of 3D by doing this: http://www.tictacdo.com/ttd/Create-3D-Television Also, There’s no action until the end – a huge build-up for nothing. Like Titanic all over again…
Posted by Brant on December 19th, 2009What movie did you see? there is action all over this film. you really don’t consider any of the training stuff action?
Posted by rus in chicago on December 19th, 2009“There’s no action until the end”
booooowellllsheeeetttt
Posted by Goon on December 19th, 2009I could not see anything interesting in this film. It was all big marketing hype and buzz that will make this film earn big bucks.
Posted by Ebrahim Kabir on December 19th, 2009I’m beginning to hate reviews, because when it comes down to it, I watch the movie whether people hate it or not.
And I am starting to get annoyed of people who are expecting every movie to be a f**king masterpiece to them. If there is one thing I have learned, is that you can’t trust anyone’s review. PERIOD.
I know too many people who hate Fight Club, I loved Fight Club.
I know so many people who say No Country For Old Men is the best movie ever made… I slightly enjoyed that movie, but I love the actors.
ohh and once more, I grew up playing and watching Transformers… I F**KING LOVE both movies so kiss my ass.
So look, stop looking at reviews and just go watch a movie if it interests you, or base it on the positive things they say about as supposed to the negative. People like to talk shit so you will always hear more negative than positive to any movie.
p.s.
Posted by mr grimm on December 19th, 2009I loved this movie so much i have seen it twice.
First sober and the following completely S***ed out of my mind. I felt like I was actually going to fuck a Na’Vi the 2nd time.
I’ve never wanted to go see a movie again so bad before….
Posted by Drew on December 19th, 2009Loved every second of AVATAR – went to see it twice the last two days.
The last time I had a similar experience in a theater was back in 1977 when I saw Star Wars with my father.
I was 11 then – and today my 13 year old son asked me to go see Avatar a third time….
I don’t give fiddlers fart about any review on this movie – ’cause I LOVED IT and that’s enough for me
Posted by Sly on December 19th, 2009Exactly Sly…its about YOUR reaction to the film, not some critics. Critics/review are only a guideline, not a be all / end all on a movie.
Posted by Tommy on December 19th, 2009Question for everyone that has seen it in 3-D????
Towards the end I forgot about the 3-D and did not notice it much. I was wondering if others had this happen to them. 3-D is the way to see this movie, but I think I became desensitized to it.
Also – I wonder if they were to feather the edges of the film if it would help with the strange cut off that occurs with the 3-D items that are close to you get chopped off when they hit the edge of the screen.
Posted by Big Hungry on December 19th, 2009If people don’t care about reviews, why do they read them?
Posted by Dave on December 19th, 2009(didn’t see the 3D version – doesn’t work for me)
Posted by Sly on December 19th, 2009@dave : like Tommy posted I also use reviews as a kind of guideline. But after having seen and loving the movie I don’t care about them reviews no more
I’m a fanboy now – LOL
Posted by Sly on December 19th, 2009“On a purely technical level this movie is unparalleled and easily earns four stars in that department”
Agreed.
The visuals are so amazing in this movie that I think Sean will have to make a stronger case for deducting 1/2 star from its overall score.
I want to encourage movies fans like myself who rely primarily on Netflix and only make it out to the theater once or twice a year to make an effort to see this movie in 3D at the theater. It is an immersive experience that you won’t soon forget.
Posted by Jeff on December 19th, 2009I’ll second that, Cameron has been very clear in multiple interviews that he convinced Fox to do this film project and they would have the groundwork for multiple features. He has said it is key the film makes money to keep Pandora alive. I just started reading: Avatar: A Confidential Report on the Biological and Social History of Pandora
http://www.amazon.com/Avatar-Confidential-Biological-History-Camerons/dp/0061896756/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_c
Trust me, we as film lovers need to support this film. The work they put in to this is crazy and there is so many possibilities and directions they can go. I have visions of the Na’vi saving mother earth….
Posted by rus in chicago on December 19th, 2009Yeah! People love Avatar – I’m not crazy. Seeing it again on Tuesday. I’m going to try and catch this once a week for a couple of months to know that I saw the film in it’s best presentation so when I get it on bluray I’m not like ‘ It looks awesome but I wish I could see it in IMAX again ‘
I loved how the Na’vi are Native American influenced – we don’t see enough of that kind of culture on film. My favorite native culture. Though when Quaritch refered to them as ‘aboriginal’ my crowd chuckled, most likely not knowing that aboriginal means native people and not just the title of this country’s native people, Aboriginals.
Posted by Nick Robertson on December 19th, 2009The movie is great, if you don’t like it,that’s cool but the movie is somthing great to say otherwise is silly.
Posted by 81 on December 19th, 2009Avatar is by no means a masterpiece as a film. On a technical level it is. It is by far THE BEST CGI ever created for a movie and probably will be for a very long time. The story however is shit, predictable unoriginal hackneyed shit. It’s been a long time since I groaned so often in a movie that takes itself so damn seriously. And Cameron’s themes are as subtle as a kick in the nuts.
Posted by swarez on December 19th, 2009But then Cameron’s films have never been particularly deep in any way, Titanic is just the most expensive chick flick ever made and the Terminator films are just B-movies in a shiny package. Abyss is the only other film of his where he’s tried to say something in particular and that was done in a slightly less heavy handed way than this.
I thought I add this just to cut off peoples complaints. Everyone needs to calm down on the “Its a story stolen from Dances With Wolves and Dances is a better film, so see it” BULLSHIT. To educate, Dances With Wolves is a DIRECT STEAL of Fuller’s Run of the Arrow.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050915/
Plot Summary for
Run of the Arrow (1957) More at IMDbPro »
advertisement
A Rebel vet, O’Meara has refused to surrender when Lee does at Appomatox. O’Meara travels west and after escaping from, he joins the Sioux and takes a wife. After denouncing himself as an American, he must make a choice when the Army and Sioux go to battle.
What JC did is take totally differnet, differet world, calm down.
As an aside, Run of the Arrow has some good shots but the way they belittle the Native American culture is sooooo pathetic. Fuller claimed to honor them but the public conscious was so different in the 50s. This was the era white actors were painted to look like Indians.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 20th, 2009James Horner is the man!
Posted by AdamH on December 20th, 2009I really enjoyed Avatar. I managed to see it in the IMAX in London which is the biggest screen in Britain. Well worth the trip to the UK.
Posted by Stepen on December 20th, 2009The 3-D effect made me want to puke – I was so dizzy
Posted by Brant on December 20th, 2009Saw this in IMAX 3D yesterday. Looked pretty damn awesome, but I actually fell asleep for a few minutes, which never happens to me, due it being a bit boring. I also don’t really get the point of 3D.
Never really felt invested in the movie and did not care about anything going on. Funnily enough I felt more attached to Wall-E than anything in this film.
Still worth seeing for the effects though.
Posted by KeithTalent on December 20th, 2009I really enjoyed watching this film on IMAX 3D. I was overwhelmed by the visuals in the film, but got accustomed to the all the CGI towards the latter half of the movie.
It’s one of those films where you know it’s not going to be as good on dvd/blu-ray and it must be experienced on IMAX. Worth every cent of admission.
Posted by Primal on December 20th, 2009Enjoyed the visuals and the action. Found the story to be at times dull, the characters a little dry and I didn’t like the dialogue. Didn’t mind the 3D for the most part but started to get a headache near the end. didn’t mind the acting but didn’t see any truly captivating performances. I did like it enough to watch again one day.
Posted by Byron on December 20th, 2009Looking forward to the review of this and to see what the guys thought.
Posted by Nick Robertson on December 20th, 2009I had almost no interest in this movie, and I’m still undecided, but thanks to the all the praise in these comments I’m at least considering making a trip to the theatre to see Avatar. It probably doesn’t hurt that I’m stuck up North and it’s the only semi-decent thing playing.
Posted by Wintle on December 20th, 2009I just watched the movie today and I have to say I was impressed with both the FX and Cameron’s command and his filmmaking chops. There’s no doubt that he is back, not that he was ever away. You have to give a lot of props to him for investing so much time and effort into a totally new concept and one that was very mysterious at first. That he kept the story and concept quiet for a long time is a credit as well. I had not seen a new 3-D film until this one and I think the presentation really works and I hope more movies are presented in 3-D that properly utilize it. It will be a shame to see this movie on Blu-ray because it won’t do it justice after seeing it in 3-D. I didn’t think the 3-D was intrusive or obvious, and certainly it worked with this kind of film. I thought the native Nav’ii characters were a little more ‘believable’ than than the avatars just because you didn’t have a human counterpart to compare them to. It certainly got better as the movie probably because your eyes get used to seeing them. At first their bodies look a little stiff but then again these are the avatars not the real ones so maybe they don’t control their bodies quite as well. There were certainly a lot of Cameronesque elements such as the militarism, the look of the ships, the human-controlled big robots, the overbearing greedy military-industrial corporation, etc. Of course you could also complain about the story as well, but really this is James Cameron we’re talking about. Like with Titanic, the bloody ship still sinks at the end. You know how this movie will progress and end. There’s nothing surprising, no twists, no real spoilage. That’s not where this movie has it’s good elements. It’s in the presentation, the direction, and the effects. If anything, after all the hype, the one thing that you can say that was really transformative about this movie with respect to the future of movies and movie-making is that Cameron has shown a way to almost completely immerse a movie in CGI and still tell a pretty good story. Is it the only way to go? No. Is it the best way to go? Maybe, maybe not. But Cameron showed that it’s possible to use the absolute cutting-edge of tech and to tell his story in his way. Of course it helps to have a huge budget but for me, the one rule about budget is that I don’t care how much it costs as long as it looks like you put all that money on the screen and Cameron sure did.
Posted by Maopheus on December 20th, 2009This movie was a landmark movie in the technical aspects. Yes, the story has been done, but EVERY story has been done before and this retold one in a beautiful and unique and groundbreaking way. It wasn’t perfect but just shy of amazing. I gave it an A-.
The fact that you gave a better score to District 9 than you did Avatar shows how drunk you are on D9 kool-ade. Its ridiculous.
Please tell me one way that movie was better than this? (if I remember right, Star Trek was right in this range, which seems about right.)
Posted by Justice on December 21st, 2009i will admit the liberal economic sub story line within this movie makes me hesitant to see it, but it looks so awesome that i’ll give it a pass.
Posted by Rick on December 21st, 2009The pro-environment, anti-military/corporate tone is pretty heavy-handed, but Cameron doesn’t know anything but heavy-handed. On the other hand though, this movie’s point is really nothing different than say ‘Braveheart’ where you have a people who are defending their land from outside conquerors. Yet, Braveheart is pushed as some kind of a great ‘conservative’ movie. The only difference between ‘Braveheart’ and ‘Avatar’ is that ‘Avatar’ starts from the perspective of the conqueror and changes the sympathy to the other side, whereas ‘Braveheart’ keeps the sympathy totally on the side of the defenders. I’m not saying that you should compare these movies equally, but I’m just picking out Braveheart as a movie that has a similar kind of premise (much larger, more powerful army trying to conquer a smaller, more ’savage’ race) and how changing up the historical setting and the sides can make a big difference. If the human side weren’t Americans and were say the Empire from Star Wars then there’d be no problem.
Posted by Maopheus on December 21st, 2009@Justice.
“Please tell me one way that movie was better than this?”
Better story, better characters and not so heavy handed.
That’s it really.
People call this an allegory, but there is nothing allegorical about it, it’s right there on the table and force fed to you.
And be honest, if this was directed by anyone else than Cameron, people would be taking a dump on this because of the recycled story and in your face politics but people seem to forgive Cameron for that because of the pretty pictures he produces.
Posted by Swarez on December 21st, 2009“And be honest, if this was directed by anyone else than Cameron, people would be taking a dump on this because of the recycled story and in your face politics but people seem to forgive Cameron for that because of the pretty pictures he produces.”
Well, if people forgive Cameron literally for the way he directs his films, how the hell do you figure this argument to make sense?
Posted by Henrik on December 21st, 2009I saw this movie last night at 1045pm…if there was a showing after 130am when i got out, i would’ve watched it again. I was in awe. It’s hard to believe anyone can fully grasp this movie based on it’s scale alone. I was so taken aback by the visuals I have to see it again to really grasp the plot, acting, and music. I loved it.
Posted by Mike on December 21st, 2009James Cameron should direct Halo the movie. After seeing the enviroments and characters in Avatar that would be pretty awesome.
Posted by JR on December 21st, 2009Yeah Swarez, The science and characters are soooooo much better in D9. Cameron created an entire world and even published a book with all biological, sociological, physiological aspects of the world detailed (I know cause I read it this weekend). D9’s science and PLOT fall apart if you debate it. The wife and gang characters in D9 are some of most basic characters ever written for the screen. Support your argument and prove how much more advance the plot and science in D9 is than Avatar. And I say this as a fan of D9, but get off the dope, it is not all that.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 21st, 2009I have to give Cameron an A plus in terms of creating a very detailed and realized fictional world, with animals, plants, and a believable ecosystem. He even invented a language as well. It’s right up there with Tolkien in terms of the detail and the thought put into it. I wish more sci-fi/fantasy creators would do that amount of work and thought. Also, I thought that the future setup of the human side was pretty complete and consistent too, except that you’d think that in the mid-22nd century people wouldn’t smoke or need to wear ties. There’s no indication in the movie of where the Pandora system exists, but they do mention that the journey in cryogenic sleep took 6 years I believe. I also like the rotating section on the space ship to allow for Earth gravity. Speaking of D9, I wonder if the same ‘force’ that keeps the floating mountains floating in Avatar is what keeps the spaceship floating in D9? LoL.
Posted by Maopheus on December 21st, 2009@Rus
Did I say that the science was better in D9?
First of all, D9 is not about the science and doesn’t even go in to that. And who gives a shit if they published a book about the “science” in Avatar? I don’t care if Cameron created a fucking universe for this film. It doesn’t make it better for me. If the film needs to publish a series of books to make me like it more rather than hook me from the start with the actual film then it’s a big ass fail. I’m interested in the character and story, not if the Navi shit pink turds because of the glow stick plants they eat. And for the record, the animal “science” in Avatar is bullshit. Utter fucking bullshit.
Avatar is a tech demo, nothing more.
D9 is better because it has more interesting characters, helped by good performances and a more interesting story. It’s more honest, personal and real than Avatar will ever be.
Posted by Swarez on December 21st, 2009Once again typical Swarez gives all bombast and nothing to support it.
I submit D9 and Avatar are essentially the same only different in tone and style, much like classic rock and punk rock are different in tone and style. Is one better than the other… no. One or both is the taste of the viewer at a particular time.
Let me show you, SWAREZIEEEEEEE!
Both are films about alien and human contact in a bizarre environment.
D9 has the aliens coming to earth and being sequestered in a compound. The setting for the film is an existing slum in South Africa that has never been seen used in this type film before. The setting supports the story due to the disadvantage the aliens are in.
Avatar has the humans going to an alien world and being sequestered in a compound. The setting for the film is a wholly new moon and ecosystem that has never been seen before. The setting supports the story in that its design is inherent to the story about conservation, balance etc.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Both films use tired and true story structures as their backbone.
D9 is about a military / industrial complex that is taking advantage of the aliens to gain their resources. A “set-up†worker decides through the actions of this military / industrial complex, and personal connections he has with the aliens to fight against the system and help the aliens.
Avatar is about a military / industrial complex that is taking advantage of the aliens to gain their resources. A “set-up†worker decides through the actions of this military / industrial complex, and personal connections he has with the aliens to fight against the system and help the aliens.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Both films are about the main character transforming into the alien race they initially oppose.
D9 uses the bite and virus idea to start the characters transformation. The character slowly mutates and has personal contact with a father / son alien group learning more about the alien culture. The character becomes a leader in the alien group. The character is disoriented and confused what to do when his superiors/family object to his involvement. Seeing unethical treatment being brought by the race he still belongs too, the main character decides to forsake returning to his race and complete the transformation in to the alien race.
Avatar uses an “avatar tool†made of both alien and human DNA with a mind link to send the character in to study the aliens. The character is taught by the beautiful princess and learns the ways of the aliens, passes test, wins her heart, and becomes a leader in the alien group. The character is disoriented and confused what to do when his superiors object to his involvement. Seeing unethical treatment being brought by the race he still belongs too, the main character decides to forsake returning to his race and complete the transformation in to the alien race.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Both films have an overarching message.
D9 is another film about race relations, immigration and the hard choices people need to make to coexist with other cultures.
Avatar is another film about conservation, ecology and the hard choices people need to make to coexist with nature.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Both films are essentially a canvas for the certain film concept that will be developed by other filmmakers.
D9 uses, or expresses, a DIY aesthetic and the power documentary type film making and using found locations can have on a creative story and budget.
Avatar uses and expresses a new unobtrusive 3D aesthetic and the power this total immersion type film making can have on a storytelling in the theater experience.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Posted by rus in chicago on December 21st, 2009OH and I forgot that both films use the same idea that the transforming human can automatically connect and control through their mind alien animals/ships through use of appendages on their body! SAME FILM!!!! Only different in tone and style!!!!
Posted by rus in chicago on December 21st, 2009Get out while you can, Swarez, before he moves the goalposts clear out of the stadium.
Posted by Wintle on December 21st, 2009“Only different in tone and style!!!!”
And that’s why I like District 9 more than Avatar.
Posted by swarez on December 21st, 2009Which was my point RUSSSSSSSSIE.
go read your comment #58 asshole. I just refuted everything you said there.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 21st, 2009Asshole?
Posted by Swarez on December 22nd, 2009*tch*, C’mon guyz….itz Christmas!
Posted by Tommy on December 22nd, 2009And you didn’t refute anything Rus. Unless you have some sort of mystic powers for changing people’s opinion. Which you don’t.
Posted by Swarez on December 22nd, 2009I like D9 better than Avatar, you won’t change that so stop crying.
You started this by claiming to Justine D9 has a better story and characters and the only reason anyone is liking Avatar is Cameron’s name.
I refuted that by showing the films are relative the same in story and the main characters journey.
You refused to get in a debate about the science in both movies.
You then switched to agreeing with me on the tone and style argument basically ignored your previous comments about story, character and the “Cameron love” from before.
Now you are switching to “I just like D9 better”. You have yet to defend any of your opinions about D9 being better than Avatar.
If you really don’t want to honestly debate the two films,compare and contrast them, show me why your original points to Justine are valid, fine.
Merry Christmas
Posted by rus in chicago on December 22nd, 2009I don’t care about the science of both movies Rus. It’s not what makes them good to me. Plus the science of both films, good or bad had absolutely no baring on them plot wise. I like STORY and EXECUTION. That’s the deal breaker. That’s what I told Justin.
And I still think people give Avatar a pass for a weak and predictable story because it’s Cameron and focus solely on the visuals. There is no denying that Avatar looks phenomenal but I was expecting more from him rather than the recycled ideas he presented.
Posted by swarez on December 22nd, 2009Once again, no meat. you still have yet to give any examples of how the story is better in D9. you just keep repeating yourself but never defend anything. I showed how the stories and main character arc in both are the same, you have yet to prove they are different.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 22nd, 2009For the record, I agree with swarez and I talked a little about this in the spoiler podcast for Avatar.
District 9 is different, and I think more interesting, because the main character hates the aliens but is forced against his will to become one of them. Unlike Avatar where the hero just joins them because he thinks it’s the right thing to do.
Also I never knew where District 9 was going, it kept me guessing right to the end.
There are a lot of impressive things about Avatar, but the fact that James Cameron made a real language and all of that is kind of irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. District 9 had an alien language too, and it sounded real enough to me. I don’t care that no one can actually speak it and write books about it.
Posted by Sean on December 22nd, 2009“District 9 is different, and I think more interesting, because the main character hates the aliens but is forced against his will to become one of them. Unlike Avatar where the hero just joins them because he thinks it’s the right thing to do.”
D9s character doesn’t outwardly hate the aliens at the begining of the film?! I think its very clear he’s a stupid pawn in the governments plan. Avatar’s character is the same. Avatar’s transition is more developed and more real as we see a solider, in a spy role, fall in love with a world and alien. He doesn’t “just join in”. you forget all the struggles he has returning to the real world.
D9s character arc falls apart when the lead character gives up on returning to human form at the first sign of trouble. He also fights for a father/son alien passionately because he saw them relate to each other?! Really? That films motivation is better than Avatar, come on, its the same at best.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 22nd, 2009You guys can keep ignoring all the background and science in the Avatar D9 debate, but all of the plot holes and question marks in D9 are the result of the filmmakers not developing the technology behind the story.
Everyone conveniently glosses over the “magic substance” in D9 and how looking for it, the little amount, the fact it is used for everything including transforming the main character, how does an advance alien race get so fucked over it.
Avatar fully developed their background to the point the science and ecological aspects of the world are key to the story. They don’t cause problems for the film like they do in D9. Their is a reason for the floating mountains in Avatar, the only reason for the floating mothership in D9 is it’s the easiest way to get bang-for-the buck simple CGI. Which film is abusing the visuals now.
Listen, I like D9, I think the floating mothership is a great way to ground the story and give the audience a marker as the characters race around. My overall point is the Avatar lovefest is no more justified than the same lovefest people have for D9, me included. I’m just glad we live in a time were I got to see both.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 22nd, 2009Whoa, sides are being taken! Rus, I’ll join your side to balance things out, and because you intimidate me. You’re a master debater. (Sorry, I let my juvenile side out. And yeah, I know, you probably don’t want me on your side. Ha ha.)
Critics complained about Star Trek V because Kirk, Spock, and McCoy weren’t making choices in their adventure, and were instead being led around by Sybok. So I think what makes District 9 less appealing is that Wikus “is forced against his will” as Sean says. In Avatar, Jake makes the morally correct human choice which makes for a more satisfying ending.
Sean, when you say District 9 kept you guessing, can you give specific examples where the plot of District 9 didn’t go where you might expect? (I think I asked you this before, and your answer didn’t satisfy me. Ha ha.)
For me, the major reason why I might prefer Avatar over District 9 is that I find Pandora a more compelling place to visit than South Africa. (No offense intended; I’m sure there are lovely places to go in South Africa.)
Posted by Reed Farrington on December 22nd, 2009Reed and Rus unite..in form of ..
to be clear Reed I like both films EQUALLY. my point is one is not wildly better than the other. I do agree with you that the script structure and “higher purpose” in Avatar is better than D9. Yes, it is a traditional story structure.
D9s “magic substance” is also the problem in Star Trek, interesting, is D9 more like Star Trek than Avatar? Visually stunning films that take the easy way out with the science?????
Posted by rus in chicago on December 22nd, 2009*Sigh*
If it will make you stop caring so much about why I like something different from you.
Like I’ve said time and time again, I liked the story better and the execution in D9 better because it’s an original take on the apartheid story.
There the aliens are the lowest of the low, even below the regular slums. The main character isn’t integrated in to the alien society by choice and doesn’t ever take sides like you claim. His only reason for him to help the aliens out is for his own gain. Never does he care for them or why they are leaving. And he doesn’t become a leader in any way. He’s a pawn thrust in to a situation and has to take sides to save his own skin. That was not the case with Avatar and as such not similar.
“Their is a reason for the floating mountains in Avatar”
Posted by Swarez on December 22nd, 2009Which is what, other than to look cool? Incidentally the “science” behind that is utterly ridiculous and has no bases in logical reality. As are the six legged creatures that roam the planet. There is a reason that no land animal on earth has more than four legs. That didn’t seem to bother Cameron and only did it so it would look “alien” enough.
Just because they’ve written books about how everything works doesn’t mean it has any basis in reality or logic and as such doesn’t make it any better or more important than the magic substance in D9.
“There the aliens are the lowest of the low, even below the regular slums.”
what are you talking about, were is this evident in the film? what are regular slums? I think you mean they are below the Nigerian gangs, big difference.
“D9 better because it’s an original take on the apartheid story.”
How? In this allegory they just substituted the Native Africans with violent aliens that eat cat food? Even the writer/director has spoke publicly not to take that stance.
“The main character isn’t integrated in to the alien society by choice and doesn’t ever take sides like you claim.”
at a critical point in the film the character makes a clear choice to fight against humans, he doesn’t leave the fight, he doesn’t make any action to save his skin and stay in the human race in a way other than taking sides with the aliens, he is then resigned to become fully alien. Same as Avatar
The floating mountains are in the same realm as the resource the humans are trying to get. There is partial exposition in the film about the power conductive qualities of the resource and the weird magnetic fields of this MOON around a larger planet, also established.
Here’s what D9 establishes about their mothership and magic substance – nothing.
The problem with D9 is the magic substance is the ONLY plot device in the entire film it does everything. In Avatar the magic substance is the catalyst for the story not the end all be all.
D9 is guilty of the same boiomorphic problems you have with Avatar. The aliens are yet again 2 legs, 2 arms, a head.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 22nd, 2009http://www.cracked.com/video_18123_5-moments-from-avatar-that-are-suspiciously-familiar.html
Posted by Tommy on December 22nd, 2009I really enjoyed the film, but I don’t think it had quite enough humor in it as a ‘Star Wars’ type film.
You want the funny… you got it!! http://tinyurl.com/ylpf938
Posted by Corey on December 24th, 2009I have no idea who the people were who funded this movie (maybe entirely the elitist James Cameron himself with his own money. One thing it does show is how utterly confused, hypocritical and contradictory Cameron’s world view truly is). All the way through the story and acting it frothed and mockingly pushed a long typical list of totally pathetic, elitist, hypocritical pacifist, new age/earth worship cliches.
Then add to that this overall frothing hatred that portrays all American Military and mankind itself as being all demented psychotic murders who glee in genocide and destruction of all living things, who need to be destroyed or change their ways so they can become like hypocritical new age globalist aliens.
The story line and cliches was such pathetic hypocritical, contradictory, reverse psychology, globalist, Marxist new age propaganda it was unreal. It really is prophetic as to how far American society has fallen for this filth to be made and paid for.
Don’t go to pay to see this movie unless you enjoy funding hypocritical, nihilistic, globalist earth worship propaganda indoctrination, and story lines which shamelessly mock everything good and honorable about all the military and mankind itself. It is pure animalistic, anarchistic, Marxist propaganda meant to indoctrinate ignorant simple minds into changing the world into the traditional Marxist, nihilistic antichrist earth worshipping genocidal world view which all true Marxists live, kill and die for and always will until they control all.
Posted by Max on December 25th, 2009The movie has political and environmental themes but the main comment is common sense, that if/when the world runs out of resources, those with the means of control will carry a sense of entitlement and take what they want from who they want, and it won’t matter if they have to rip apart an Eden to get there. It’s happened before, it will happen again, it is happening now, and its not just about Americans and oil, just about every culture and country has some dark past present or future. In South America they’re already burning down their Pandora and forcing out their natives.
I know our society is fucked when a straight forward idea like “take care of the earth or eventually it wont take care of you” is “Marxist new age propaganda”. I hear similar if not the same worries from libertarians, tree huggers, economists, anarchists, all over the map. Whats the alternative? everything is fine? there’ll always be resources, and if not get the fuck out of our way and don’t complain?
Posted by Goon on December 26th, 2009“..everything good and honorable about all the military..”
because the military has not now or ever done anything wrong, and saying or even warning of otherwise makes you a communist.
If a critique of the military is an attack on Joe Schmoe from Indiana serving in Iraq, then I guess making fun of WalMart is an attack on old people trying to make a few bucks and get out of the house, and critiquing the government is an attack on your local alderman who just wants to fix the potholes on Main Street. I’m so sick of people turning any critique on the military into “They’re calling our troops Nazis”. They bully everyone to stay in line from one side of their mouth while screaming ‘propaganda’ out of the other. The only insult in Avatar towards a grunt would be that they’re pawns in someone else’s greed game, forced to extremes because of the mistakes of previous generations. So really in a way its not about the military, it comes back to us, and I guess a person like Max doesn’t like a finger wagging in his face about the way we live and where it may lead.
I hate to go and get political on a thread like that, I’d hate to see it out of control and really don’t see it as a typical left-right issue. Its aggravating to see that the 2009 chapter of the House Un-American Activities Committee doesn’t even take Christmas off. I’ve even seen some noted conservative reviewers write off people like Max and say that calling it some subversive message film is giving it far too much credit:
From Ed Morrissey and Gabriel Malor’s reviews:
“People have presumed that the film is anti-military, but it’s actually more anti-mercenary.”
” The villain of this film is so generic and the situation presented so far removed from reality, the connection between the film’s mercenaries, natives, and corporate greed and the real-world’s U.S. military, Iraqis, and War on Terrorism exists mostly in the minds of people desperately hoping to find it.”
In the end it cribs from real life happenings and may even have an opinion, but its not such a direct analogy to lose one’s shit over it. It’s getting annoying that every major blockbuster gets turned into “King Leonidas is Bush! No, he’s Xerxes!” or “The Dark Knight is about the war on terror!”
I’m not even sure Max has seen the movie. This may be like Tim1974 and his goal to keep people away with movies with penises in it, or the Harry Potter turns your kids into Satanists crusade. If he had, he’d know the main human character is a Marine, a self styled “warrior” of high moral character. Michelle Rodriguez is also an ex-Marine and resists being a pawn for someone else/giving up her honor and SPOILER ALERT her life. Yeah there’s other guys who aren’t so nice, but if Cameron hated the military so much he could easily have had protagonists with a different background.
Posted by Goon on December 26th, 2009“It is pure animalistic, anarchistic, Marxist propaganda meant to indoctrinate ignorant simple minds into changing the world into the traditional Marxist, nihilistic antichrist earth worshipping genocidal world view which all true Marxists live, kill and die for and always will until they control all.”
Man, if only.
Posted by Henrik on December 26th, 2009The Avatar review written and directed by James Cameron is fantasy and quite the spectacle.It’s smart and fully part off macroenvironment.Just because a good idea similar to other things in our current world.Not only that,the Avatar to give feel enjoying when audience watching the film.This film also is cinematic achievement and simply one of the greatest films ever made.This film also can give experience that you won’t soon forget.
Posted by St Lailatus/39.X11A1 on December 28th, 2009The conclution,The Avatar is very interesting.
Ha ha ha!
Posted by Swarez on December 28th, 2009Indeed. Avatar is very interesting. One of the greatest films ever made it’s not.
Only 3% drop from opening weekend, all on word of mouth. The public doesn’t lie with that strong of a second weekend. I guess that makes Swarez’s stupid #58 comment that the media and public are sucking up anything Cameron another of his bogus opinions.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 28th, 2009Avatar, predictable storyline maybe.. but most films are. In fact I am bored of films which try to be too clever.
As a person in the street I found Avatar to be the most amazing cinematic experence I have ever had ( My first film I ever saw in the cinema was Star Wars a new Hope in 1977-78ish I was 8 or so at the time )
I was dumbstruck and fully entertained by the visuals from the start. I liked the story, I have seen many simular storylines with many different films.
Unless your a paid film critic, you are daft not to see the amazing landmark stage in film making..
Avatar is in the top 3 of My overall top 10 films, I took My 8 year old son and he was spellbound by the film, brought back memories of My first cienma experiance..
10/10
Posted by Marcus Monk on December 31st, 2009* cinema
Posted by Marcus Monk on December 31st, 2009Interesting comments. I thought the movie was beautiful and the technology is amazing. That said, I was bothered by the way the Navi were so blatently based on existing aborginial cultures (I’ve been looking for some First Nation reviews with little luck). More importantly, I was not happy with the continued equation “living in balance with nature = being technologically primitive”. It would have been more intreging if the Navi had deliberately given up some technology, but not all, in order to live in balance with their planet. They could then have demonstated an ability to defend themselves that did not include suicidal charges and an army of animal friends saving the day. It would have been more interesting to see our western mind set humbled not by our own style of violence, but by a superior expression of power. Now that would have required real imagination. 3 stars out of 5
Posted by Paul B on December 31st, 2009I’m intrigued, what would be a superior expression of power? your idea about being tech savvy but still in balance is nice.
Posted by rus in chicago on December 31st, 2009As with books, music and food – we all have very different tastes in films. What you like, I may think is a stinker, and when I suggest that Avatar is a splendid piece of cinematic entertainment you may disagree. There is no problem with that.
Posted by Jeff on January 2nd, 2010The purpose of review sites such as these (IMHO) is to provide some learned insight into the film-making process, and also hold up the specimen against some worthy comparison material. Reviews help people to understand more about a film, and enhance the appreciation of it. While I may not agree with Sean 100% I do find that he is even-handed in his review, and presents some interesting food for thought.
James Cameron is one of the fathers of the Blockbuster, and I do think Avatar deserves as much praise as we’re all prepared to give it. He may not be the most original, but he knows how to create involving characters and situations. If I were young again, Avatar would be my multi-must-see.
Instead of putting shit on Avatar or Cameron, the nay sayers should be concentrating on the demise of the film industry: squeakquels and movies that are derived from toy lines or comic book characters are the greatest insult to what we love. This is what we should be bemoaning for being unoriginal and tacky.
Cameron has done something remarkable, and hopefully it paves the way for more films that buck the Hollywood-machine trend.
Agreed swarez…. D9 is a better movie for many reasons except visually, but considering the budget for D9 the visuals are in fact more impressive than this chuck money at it project.
The story sucked the characters were boring Weaver actually annoyed me in this.
having said all this, I had to see the movie to see what visual treats i was install for and i wasnt disappointed in that department. The visuals and creature designs were astounding but to all those who saw it in 3d go and see it in standard cause like someone else said 3d aint all that. i have seen it in both and preferred the standard showing for its clarity
so yeah wow to look at zzzzZZZZzzzzzZZZZZzzzz story.
It’s like when i saw spielbergs jurassic park – same thing, great visuals wasted on a trite story.
this is now what i come to expect from cameron, the titanic looked great but was ultimately the most expensive chick flick of all time.
I recommend avatar for the wow factor, but dont expect to give a damn about any of the characters and take pillow with you because all the rich visuals will eventually tire your eyes and you may want to sleep.
Posted by Piny Tenis on January 5th, 2010one final thought… i prefer the navi to ewoks! :p
why do we care at all.
and before i’m attacked for seeing this movie twice whilst not really liking the story…. the visuals do make up for the short fall in the story plus the fact i saw it 3d alone and in standard with my gf.
as for logic and explanation for the science in movies…. two words Science FICTION…
I cant wait til they re-destroy Dune!
Posted by Piny Tenis on January 5th, 2010If you didn’t see it in 3d you didn’t experience the beauty of this world cameron has created. Wow I felt like I do when I read a good novel. It was a fantastic escape from reality. Go see it.
Posted by Richard on January 7th, 2010I thought Avatar sucked….boring…storyline sucked, special effects, seen better.
Posted by jackarmstrong on January 10th, 2010Outstanding when seen in 3D on IMAX sceen. Get over the plot and details this is a spectacular step forward in movie making and everyone should share in the experience of this form of moviemaking. All you naysayers get a life.
Posted by John Robertson on January 11th, 2010Honest opinion-
I thought the film was beautiful- lush scenery, vivid colours, nice message (of course our govt would go in and destroy! what else is new!)
But I thought it was a bit boring. Probably because of the length. I felt no connection to the characters or the “love story.” Cuz it dragged.
I always cry at a good love story.
I’d give it three stars on the special effects alone.
on a scale of one to 10 I thought it was a 7.
Posted by Monique on January 12th, 2010So I would say something myself about this movie but one of my close friends Keith took the words right out of my mouth before I could. Here is what her had to say…
‘The secret to film is that it’s an illusion.’ – George Lucas
Everyone who I talked to that has seen this movie has expressed how awesome it is. One even said, and I quote, ‘it’s the most awesome of awesomeness’. Others have labeled it, ‘amazing’. And the reviews have been mostly positive. A lot of buzz surrounds it. It looks like it may sank Titanic (finally!) It’s the most talked about movie in a long-long time. And yet, no one can explain to me what it is about or rather, why it is awesome. So let me simplify the story for you…
A long time ago in a galaxy – far – far – away…
Ex-marine John J. Dunbar longs for the ‘final frontier’. He is talked into, by the Bush administration, to go to Planet Skull Island because there is oil under the ground. There, he plugs into the Matrix using the stargate to turn him into an eight-foot-Smurf. He then makes friends with the other eight-foot-Smurf’s, and falls in-love with Pocahontas, who tells him about the ‘colors of the wind’. He learns their language, culture, and finds that his own kind are evil. He sides with the locals and fights alongside them in an epic battle for Narnia: the Last Rain Forest!
Okay, you get the point. This isn’t exactly the most original piece of storytelling you can find. The facebook status’ and the reviews’ I read suggest that clearly. However and let’s be honest here – is Star Wars really original? George Lucas went on record himself and said he ‘lifted’ a lot of ideas, meshed it together, and created his own mythology. James Cameron has done the same thing here.
He knew he was creating a science fiction/fantasy ‘Dances With Wolves’. And in essence, he knew he would be nailed for some of the obvious comparisons to other movies. He has no shame in it. That’s why he probably took ten years perfecting the special effects. This would have been timely five+ years ago, right when Bush Jr. decided to go back to Iraq. This is also Al Gore’s alley, as it is pro-Earth. I wonder if the filmmakers went green with everything during production.
The movie’s appeal rest on the shoulder’s of its impressive and dare I say it, ‘magical’ special effects. Not since the first Jurassic Park has a movie wowed me to the point that I am asking myself, ‘how did they do that?’ Not only do you have jaw-dropping effects but also you have visuals that will take your breath away. Cameron was very specific when he dreamt what Pandora would look like. He was very detailed what the Na’vi are like. And he knew what all the creatures functions would be . Like the original Star Wars trilogy, there is authenticity to this movie. It looks, seems, and feels natural. And like the first Jurassic Park back in 1993, I was left in my theater seat, blown away by what I just experienced.
Every movie with high special effects like this has flaws. Even Mr. Lucas hasn’t been able to find a way to blend CGI and real life actors in a believable way. There are still traces of actors in front of a screen. The King of the World has masterfully found a way to blend both, and go one step further by enhancing the experience in a 3-dimensional world.
Days later, I am still amazed by what I saw. I even find myself wondering if what I saw was just a dream. James Cameron has been known as a director that has the craft for memorable images in his movies. Some of the things I’ve seen in this film felt too familiar – like the plot itself. But there was a lot that I have never seen before, or could even imagine. That’s why this movie has the wide-range appeal it has. And why it has the ‘word of mouth’ marketing it does (like Cameron’s Titanic did 13 years ago).
It’s grounded in its own genre, and it doesn’t hide from it. But it goes beyond its potential to a place we have never been before. That’s the magic of the movies. It’s rare to see realism and surrealism blend together evenly. So evenly, that you can’t tell one from the other. I am sure even Steven Spielberg, Peter Jackson, and Lucas has said, ‘how did he do that?’.
I now know what Stanley Kubrick meant when he said, ‘If it can be written, or thought, it can be filmed.’
Welcome back James Cameron. Now, can you fix the Terminator series, please?!?
Posted by mrjasonthelegend on January 30th, 2010Leave a Reply