Visitors Review

(2012-05-26 11:45)

No-spoilers review: Its shortcomings don't matter; see this, and in a theater, and in 3D

I just saw "Avatar" with three other veteran science fiction fans--two middle aged couples.Bottom line: James Cameron hasn't become a writer since doing "Titanic." That leads to the film's main shortcomings.But it doesn't matter. This is such a breakthrough in film--in nearly erasing the boundary between live action and animation--that anyone who cares even a little about film must see it, and see it in a movie theater, and in 3D. I don't care if you mainly like sombre low-budget Sundance films or Swedish movies so depressing you want to step in front of a train afterwards. I don't care if you find most Hollywood films jejune, or whatever other artful adjectives you prefer. You still have to see this. You can't talk about cinema unless you do. Besides, it's an eyepopping, unforgettable experience.Someone had described it as a film you have to have seen in order to be able to talk with anyone under 40. I suppose that's so, unless you have the sort of prosaic mind that can only relate to movies about people who look and act like you in places much like what we see around us.I'm not sure it's a great movie. But it is great fun, as long as you don't think too much. And a bit moving, as long as you don't feel too much. And it redefines what you can put on a screen (if you've got his $300M budget)!To me the most important aspect is facial animation. One of our group was underwhelmed by it--by how they'd been able to instrument the live actors' faces and transmit their expressions to the animated characters you see onscreen. Our friend had heard such glowing reports of it that perhaps he expected too much. He said he'd seen better facial expression animation in other films. But the rest of us thought it worked well and looked great. Perhaps it's that none of the actors were showing a lot of nuance--whether that's the acting, or the direction, or the limits of facial expression animation today, I don't know. But the animated characters definitely looked like the live actors.In some ways it's like a cross between a traditional fantasy movie and a traditional science fiction movie, with a hint of sci-fi explanations for the sorts of things that are normally explained magically.The forest scenes on the alien planet reminded me of the forest scenes in Hayao Miyazaki's great (non-computer) animated film "Princess Mononoke." If you haven't seen this film, I'd strongly recommend seeing it after you see Avatar.The military scenes reminded me--less so--of "Starship Troopers." That, too, would be interesting to see after "Avatar."I'm an educated layman when it comes to military technology, biology, exobiology, cinema, and Cameron's films--I've seen "Abyss," "Aliens," "T1," "T2" & "Titanic." And enjoyed them all. I know what to expect from Cameron. Unfortunately, I know enough about those subjects to know when Cameron was going for an onscreen effect and defying logic and what we know about those subjects. I'm also a veteran scuba diver, and I saw where he borrowed from underwater scenes I'm familiar with. Only sometimes the transplant needed anti-rejection drugs so I'd stop thinking about how he was borrowing cool images without thinking through what kind of sense they might be making. Still, Cameron's better than George Lucas and many others in terms of borrowing images more than real ideas.Yeah, I know I'm a voice in the wilderness on this subject.My biggest complaint is the same one I have about most Hollywood sci-fi--more fi than sci, and not always understanding that a whisper can sometimes be more powerful than a shout. Cameron puts all the money onscreen.And speaking of screens--we saw it in a big Imax theater, on the far side, about halfway back. This was because we got there half an hour before showtime. Mistake. It wasn't awful to see it to the side like that, but it was definitely suboptimal. You'd see this best in an Imax theater from the back row as near to the center as you can get. Everyone in the audience who wasn't near that spot got less for their money.The 3D was very, very good. This was, as I recall, "RealD" or some such. It used inexpensive 3D glasses with what looked like mylar lenses. I had some annoying reflections from the bottoms of the big lenses, though they didn't directly interfere with the screen image.Later I want to see it once more in 3D on a non-Imax screen. Again, not necessarily because it's better than lots of other films with more intelligent screenplays, more nuanced acting, etc.; but because I want to see this cutting edge cinematic technology at work on a wide screen in 3D--and with me sitting in the exact middle and pretty far back.So did the animation look real, or did it still look like animation--especially in the scenese that combined animation with live action?Close. Not quite. Not yet. But we're getting close.You can read dozens of reviews of Avatar that tell a lot more about the story and whatnot than I did here. Avoid em until you've seen it. You'll enjoy this film more if its surprises actually surprise you.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I just saw "Avatar" for the second time, under very different circumstances--nearly empty theater, on a conventional big screen instead of IMAX, using the Real3D system and glasses.The theater being nearly empty, we got to sit it the right place this time. Huge difference being able to sit smack in the middle of the theater.But also--I think I liked it better on a conventional wide screen than on IMAX. I can't say this for sure, since our seating was so crappy for the IMAX showing. We've seen other IMAX films, and always found that we only enjoyed the viewing if we were sitting in the back row in the middle, or nearby. This is a hard one to universalize, though. You may prefer the IMAX version. I will say they make for a distinctly different viewing experience, so you shouldn't just flip a coin. You'll probably prefer one over the other. Think it through.As for Avatar itself--my spouse and I enjoyed it the second time around. The visuals are so spectacular, from the very first shot to the last, and so real-seeming, that they quite overcome the formulaic plot. As my Russian friend said, you could always tell what was coming.,I told her that this isn't always bad, though. Some films are more like rituals, where unpredictability isn't what people are looking for. This is one of those films.So don't let smartypants friends dissuade you from seeing it because they have objections to the screenplay. They're probably right, but if they weren't noticing what they were seeing in order to criticize the uncreative narrative--then they've got a real problem.Some people regard works of art for what's missing. Someone wants said music lovers listen to music, while audiophiles listen to problems in microphone placement."Avatar" has strengths and weaknesses. Most of the complaints about its weaknesses are probably true, but the strengths are so off-the-hook strong that they make it not just worthwhile but necessary to see the film, and see it in a theater, in 3D.Speaking of which we saw it this time with the Real3D glasses. I wear eyeglasses, and these fit over them comfortably. I was happy with the 3D experience they provided.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What follows are some further comments that you should probably wait to read until you've seen the film, though it doesn't have plot spoilers.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here are the storytelling risks Avatar could have taken:None.Unless Bill Gates whips out his checkbook, a $300M film must be a blockbuster to make a profit for all involved.That's impossible for a film that just shows domestically. It has to be a world blockbuster. It has to be PG-13 for all those conservative countries, and it has to have an easy to follow good guys/bad guys plot for all those lower middle class moviegoers in Lahore and Belo Horizonte and, and, and.Of course Princess Mononoke was vastly deeper. It could make a profit on domestic Japanese sales alone. Ditto various Japanese anime series.Ditto, for example, the scariest, most morally complex vampire film ever, the Swedish shocker "Let the right one in." Which had virtually no special effects and no name stars...and which, I'm sure, could make a profit from domestic Swedish sales alone.And ditto another film you could compare Avatar with, the Finnish/Russian collaboration "Cuckoo."OTOH making the Na'vi look/act so much like us might have shown a lack of imagination or simply needing to make the film fly in the world market, but it made sense biologically. Actually I objected (on scientific grounds) to the Na'vi being as different from us as they were: erect bipedal hominids aren't going to have tails. Nor blue skin. And the huge yellow eyes--you'd see that in a nocturnal animal, while the Na'vi were diurnal. The hairy USB port thing was magic with a sci-fi gloss.I say this because sci-fi fans generally suffer from what I call the "Star Wars Cantina Syndrome." They assume aliens will look/act alien unless proven otherwise, as in Arthur C. Clarke's Rendezvous with Rama, where everything to do with the aliens was at all times inexplicable.But science has a great rule of thumb principle called the Assumption of Mediocrity: we assume what we see and know is par for the course unless proven otherwise.Moreover, you can see the convergent evolutionary forces throughout nature--and I've seen nature at its wildest, most diverse and fanciful, because I'm a veteran scuba diver who has dived from Indonesia to Canada to the Caribbean. It all seems like a hurricane of life forms at first, but later you discover there's a reason for everything.And erect bipedal hominid is the ticket for a dominant tool using terrestrial lifeform.The hexapedal animals, pollen sucking horse equivalents and other stuff was a lot less likely. Didn't interfere with repaying that $300M investment, but it lessened my own buy-in. One of most powerful evolutionary forces we've seen is the one forcing down the leg count on terrestrial animals above the scale of one with an exoskeleton.If you want to see a fairly recent sci-fi film with an actually interesting plot/characterizations/moral complexity, see "Serenity."There's no use to watching Avatar and thinking about how it should have been adapted to the viewing desires of an educated minority. As others have said, just wait for the technology Cameron pioneered to become available at a lower cost.Then it will get very exciting. But for now and forever, the most cutting edge huge-budget films will always be lowest common denominator crowd pleasers.Except, of course, for "2001." I'm still amazed Kubrick was able to get that financed.

tmac9311 (2012-05-25 16:39)

Very blah

First of all, this movie should not of been 3 hours. I fell asleep foran hour and thought 2 hours was too much, I can't imagine three.I found this movie incredibly unoriginal, The fact that I fell asleepfor 1/3rd of the movie, and watched it as if I missed nothing speaks onhow inventive this movie was.I'm the type of person that enjoys movies for the plot, and this wasnot one of the movies for me. This movie was all about effects andgetting lost in an alternate reality. If you are not set and ready toexperience that, then prepare for a huge waste of time. I would notrecommend this movie to anyone, and I thought it was the worst movie Isaw in 2009.

cracker (2012-05-22 19:48)

So This is what Ewoks grow up to be!

As I sat groaning with boredom at the tired "indigenous population"theme hacked up all afresh for the new decade, I pondered on manypossibilities concerning these particular "not so little" indians:Wonder what their life expectancy is? infant mortality rate? death ratefrom barbaric maturity rituals? etc., all typically left out of thedeification of the indigenous population theme in every Hollywoodtreatment of such... wonder why? Next time we go back, lets be sure totake more beads, firewater and smallpox laden blankets. Maybe that'supcoming in AvaTwo, "Big-Little Horn." Oh, and let's not forget theIdyllic ecosystem, where every entity is quite literally "plugged in."Intellectually and politically dishonest tripe with no characterdevelopment (I want my legs back! I am an evil military man! I am athoughtless corporate wonk! I am the fiery, independent femalien! I amthe crusty and arrogant scientist with a heart of gold!).Finally, Giovanni Ribisi is miscast more thoroughly than in any of thethousands of roles in any of the thousands of movies I've ever seen.A perfect movie for the WalMart masses.4 stars for good 3D.

mdada (2012-05-22 10:16)

Movie will inspire many movie makers for some years to Come.

I was expecting a lot and I did get a lot in the movie. So much so thatVatican felt threatened and made a statement on nature worship andNeoPaganism as they have monopoly on any GOD about some themes in themovie. Graphics is best in class and actually I had motion sickness,personally I may not see more 3D movies because I cannot take it. Letyour self roll with the movie and wander where the movie want to takeyou. Race is shown little bit but usually very abstract themes don'tdrive home a major point without some simple analogy and analogies arelogically related in the sense not in totality, hence futility ofpeople finding race question here. There are some scenes of hangingrocks and holographic screens which I think are for entertainmentpurpose vs enlightenment of young minds and are truly quite originalthough journey to the center of earth did introduce the concept.Na'vi's speaking English makes me wonder what point we are making therebut let us not hang on that theme because you will loose the effortspent in getting Na' vian language up to speed. Na'vi people are not sorealistic but just think that movie is a super hit without that becauseMadagascar has a better eye coordination with mode and dialogues. Onemore point, Avatar is an Indian word meaning reincarnated self ofusually God or superhuman being and quite well chosen like Yoda(another Indian word meaning warrior from Star Wars). All in all buckleup and get ready for pretty fantastic future like Wall.E, it may be amatter of choice in future to have or not have and struggle.

TheBkMogul (2012-05-21 21:45)

A visual feast, but the script lacks neutrality

Fantastic for what it truly is, a visual spectacle. I give Cameroncredit for showing us wonderful imagery and lifelike humanoid beings.What I don't give him credit for is the lousy and heavy-handed scriptand dialogue that seems to pound you over the head repeatedly with it's"evil big-wig" message. We get it, we're bad, they're good. This is allpunctuated by one annoying character so I had to cringe whenever theytalked. Regardless, it's simply a masterpiece for imagery in terms ofthe scope and grandeur. But I hope Cameron tones down his "message" forthe sequel and just focus on the internal Pandora conflict, which willmake for fantastic story-telling.

Chris Lehman (2012-05-21 04:33)

The Best

Absolutely the very best movie ever made or that will ever be made. Itwill never be topped in the past, this or any other century. Bureaucrats at the UN Climate Summit in Durban have outlined plans forthe most draconian, harebrained and madcap climate change treaty everproduced, under which the west would be mandated to respect "the rightsof Mother Earth" by paying a "climate debt" which would act as a slushfund for bankrolling an all-powerful world government. Even as thetattered shreds of whatever credibility global warming alarmists hadleft evaporate in the aftermath of Climategate 2.0, the monstrousbureaucracy behind ManBearPig continues to lurch forward.Lord Christopher Monckton's extensive report breaks down the keyaspects of the current draft text.

savannah conroy (2012-05-19 21:04)

Nothing special

Everyone is saying that Avatar was the most amazing film of the year,but I disagree. This film was not even close to being the best film ofthe year. It was nothing special. I'm not saying that it was a horriblefilm because it wasn't. There were some good things about it...wellonly really one. Which was the CGI. If it had to win an award for thatit would most likely win. When it comes to the story it was sopredictable and nothing really interesting. I love science fictionmovies but this one was not for me. I am a huge fan of good stories andgreat plots, but again it was not any good when it came to the story.You knew what was going to happen at the very beginning. You knew thatJake was going to fall in love with Neytiri and that he was going towant to stay with the people of Pandora. I don't want to bash the filmbut I guess I am anyway. I did not like it...just another typical lovestory/science fiction movie.

rox-rakesh (2012-05-19 08:35)

The world u've never seen before

This is another masterpiece from this connoisseur, James Cameroon. Inthis 162 mins of movie you are just transported to a new planet. (+)tives- You will never find which is real, CG, animation . . .what so ever.All looks the same - Amazing BGM(-)tives rather letdowns- Story / Plot a little simple, predictable and no twists unlike T2 /Titanic - Action is also less when compared to other Cameroon's films.MSG TO ALL FOLKS- This is a must watch movie in theaters and I give it 8.5/10 - Don'texpect too much which will let you down - Recommend you to watch inIMax or 3D at least

(2012-05-18 18:01)

Is Amazon making a huge mistake?

I kept reading 1 star reviews hating on this release because you had to flip the disc in the middle of the movie. I had watched the extended version of the film and was never asked to flip the disc. I finally figured out that Amazon is including the DVD reviews (mostly 1 star) along with the Blu-Ray reviews (usually 4 or 5 stars). This seems like a bad mistake, as it drags down the overall rating on the Blu-Ray release.As far as the release itself? It's pretty amazing. It's nearly everything the original release should have been. I'm docking a star, because the studio clearly held back on including James Cameron's commentary track and on a 3-D version of the film. So, if you CAN wait another 8 or 9 months, I'd recommend doing so to get the definitive edition of this movie. It bugs me that they kept Cameron's commentary off as further incentive to buy a THIRD version of this Blu-Ray.Anyway, I ended up buying this version. I guess I'll just have to miss Cameron's commentary, because I'm not buying this again. I'm happy, overall, with the release. There ARE a LOT of extras included. I've only gotten through about half of them. I also think the extended edition of the film is an improvement, as it adds quite a bit to Sigourney Weaver's character arc. And it gives you more of an idea of the polluted conditions on earth (right down to people having to wear oxygen masks to breathe properly). Long story short? If you're okay with only owning the 2-D version of the movie and not having Cameron's commentary, this version fits the bill. If you'll end up unable to resist the next release, why not just wait and rent the movie until then? Hopefully, at that point, Amazon won't still be including DVD reviews in the Blu-Ray section.

Charles Herold (2012-05-17 23:37)

King Kong meets Dances With Wolves

Avatar isn't by any means a great movie, but it is a stunninglybeautiful one. The design of the alien creatures and alien landscape issuperb, a fully realized world of great beauty.Take away that stunning beauty and you've got an okay but unexceptionalaction flick. The story is by-the-numbers, a clichéd noble-savage vs.evil empire script that is well-intentioned but unoriginal. Still, themovie moves quickly, the action is engaging and the experience isultimately shallow but satisfying.I'm not sure how I feel about the 3D aspect. Sure, it's the best I'veseen in terms of 3D technology (I haven't seen a 3D movie in manyyears), but I'm not sold on 3D yet. I kind of feel this movie would bejust as pretty flat, and that often the 3D effect was a littledistracting. But it may just be something I'm not used to.

(2012-05-16 18:42)

big question????????

do i understand this right? the second disc is a continuation of the first? in other words, only half the movie is on the first disc and then you have to go to disc 2 to finish it? can someone explain??

brett holmes (2012-05-16 02:45)

over-hyped!!!

This movie 'avatar' is possibly the best selling movie of all time.the plot is brilliant and it is well written but it was adisappointment.i thought it was just TERRIBLE the CGI is amazing but it is just notfor me i guess. lots of people were telling me to watch it and aftermonths of holding it off i decided to give it a go.but i just don'tunderstand why so many people like this......I also feel that the movie dragged on a bit too long 'james cameron'was brilliant in making the classic titanic which is much better but ifeel he has lost his touch since then it is a sci-fi Adventure type movie so if you like those kind of moviesthen go for it but if not then stay away from 'Avatar'.if you are a fan of james cameron the get a look at 'sanctum'

Manohla Dargis (2012-05-15 09:55)

James Cameron has turned one man's dream of the movies into a trippy joy ride about the end of life -- our moviegoing life included -- as we know it.

Kefka_8203 (2012-05-14 21:17)

Avatar; Cameron's new

Sometimes, you are lucky when you go to the cinema. You find a moviewhich entertains you, or which you find surprisingly good. Maybe it's amovie which you heard was bad, maybe it's a movie you hoped was good.In the end it'll be your opinion that matters. When I heard aboutAvatar a few years back I wrote it off, as it had Signourey Weaver andMichelle Rodriguez in it, neither of which I hold very warm feelingsfor these days. And into my "I'll rent it or something like that in afew years"-binge it went. Then I saw the trailer on the TV; and BANG itgot my curiosity up. I stayed away from any online review or forumregarding it, as I wanted to see it with an open mind.(Open as inbeyond; "Wow this looks cool.")And let me tell you, I am happy I did see it!Avatar is James Cameron's latest movie, a man who seems content withreleasing movies that are at the very least good(True Lies) tomind-boggingly awesome(Terminator 2, the Abyss). Avatar squarely entersthe latter category and then jumps up a notch.To summarize the plot; Mankind has spread out into the universe, and onthe planet Pandora they have found a mineral that supposedly is quitevaluable. The valuable resources on Pandora looks up for grabs if notfor the annoying natives, the Na'vi, or "The People" in their ownlanguage. These blue-skinned tribals seem to disagree with a massivecorporate resource-grab of their world. The main character is themarine Jake, wheelchair bound and sent to Pandora as a replacement forhis murdered brother who was to take part in the Avatar-project, thelast peaceful means to get the Na'Vi to move out of the way of theCorporate forces. From Jake's first steps(literally speaking) onPandora to to the last minutes of the movie it's a beautiful image thatis painted in front of your eyes, and the story and characters aregripping and well-crafted in the way few but Cameron can deliver.Jake's journey from a gung-ho marine mercenary to a leader of the Na'Viwill quite literally suck your breath away, as even with somepredictability the movie contains that special something to keep youglued to your seat.Now, let me repeat myself here; this movie is a masterpiece. Thevisuals are outstanding, the soundtrack much more enjoyable than I'dexpect and the characters are either likable or completely fitting intheir villainous role. Even Rodriguez' character comes across aswell-acted. The romantic subplot is, strangely enough, good. It seemsthat Cameron knows how to add that as well into a movie without itfeeling forced. I am not sure where the hatred comes from, but I'd dareto guess it's from online critics and certain sub-par satiricalcartoons which makes a name for themselves to go against themainstream, even if it means that they're wrong.In the end, the best way to make up your mind; See it. If you thendon't like it then at least you've been honest enough to give it a tryrather than listening to a sad bunch of people that just ant you tofollow their every wor.

abdallah-abdulhalim (2012-05-13 23:38)

Besy Movie Experience Ever

I saw this movie yesterday in the IMAX theater and it was really agreat experience. There was a huge attention to every detail and it all seemed very real,the Pandora characters were even more real than the real people.The story is also very touching with a beautiful imagination about therelation between nature and people living in it. Makes you wonder howmuch destined we became in our everyday life from nature and wither allthese new gadgets (TV, PHONES, CARS, ETC..) that we have have given usa better life at all.If you have not seen this movie yet then you are missing the best movieever. I suggest that you try to go for the 3D version

The_Amazing_Spy_Rises (2012-05-13 05:40)

I was on another planet. Cameron's just showing off at this point.

The ground shook, and the crowd cheered. They wept. They gasped. Theylaughed. And finally, they applauded. What they experienced wassomething only a master can make, an adventure so spellbinding, somemorable, and so exhilarating that it's worth holding your bladder foralmost 3 hours to sit through. It's worth tearing up behind 3D glasses.It's worth admitting that to your friends later. Finally, it's worthtelling people that you saw this movie. I'm lucky to say I was a partof that group.Can anyone possibly set the bar higher than James Cameron? I think theonly one who can set the bar higher is Cameron himself. He described itas his masterpiece, and that it is. Make no mistake: when seeingAvatar, know that you're witnessing cinematic history. Somethingdirectors like Peter Jackson only flirted with, Cameron mastered. Notonly is Cameron's creation of a character astounding, but what trulysets Cameron apart from the rest is his ability to create a whole newworld, where you can escape to, learn from, and bond to. At first,you'll be asking a lot of questions. "Who's he?", "What was that?!","Is that real, or CGI?". But soon after...I can't say at what point,because I imagine it being different for each viewer, you'll becomeimmersed in Cameron's beautiful Pandora, as he opens the box andreveals a beautiful new world to us as viewers.There are two kinds of Visual Effects, in my opinion. The first kind isthe "Transformers" kind. These effects are the kind that wow you withtheir showy exterior, but are just there for entertainment. The secondkind is the kind that enhances the background, works within a setting,and improves the overall viewing experience. Cameron did it withAliens. He did it with Terminator 2. He did it for Titanic. And nowhe's done it again. At this point, he's just showing off. Cameron'sincredible immersion into the world of Pandora is what makes it work.Without it, this is just some other alien movie. Cameron's impeccableattention to detail, such as whenever our characters are roamingthrough a forest, or flying on a winged beast...this is what gives themovie its life, its energy...which is what the entire theme and pointof the movie is. Life is connected through us all, and Cameron'sincredible work will bond every viewer through their love of movies andthe very escapism Cameron provides.You'll notice that I've spared you a plot description. I believe thismovie is best viewed with little or no knowledge. It helps with theimmersion. Don't watch a trailer. Don't read a synopsis. I will say,however, that the true stars of the film are Zoe Saldana and StephenLang, who will undoubtedly go down as two actors who played theirclassic-in-the-making characters to perfection. Yeah, the screenplay isnot a truly original product, and the film does play out in asemi-formulaic fashion...but this doesn't matter. It's the experienceof Avatar that will move you, by what you're seeing, what you'rehearing...and what you're experiencing. A beautiful score makes thisseamlessly edited film flow even better, while the colors of the movie,so bright and vibrant, assure the viewer that they're about to have themost unique movie-going experience of their lives.I can't really recommend an experience like this more than I alreadyhave. I was on another planet for almost 3 hours. This is truly a movieto experience, a movie that makes us glad that we live in these times.It's the best motion picture of 2009, and one of the mostrevolutionary, immersing, and incredible movies ever made. I can saythis without a doubt. Do not miss this.

(2012-05-06 18:51)

Great package

This review is from: Avatar (Three-Disc Extended Collector's Edition) (DVD) If you own the original single disc I'd advise you to pass it along and order the new release. Either the original theatrical, slightly extended or further extended versions are worthwhile...all a matter of taste and expectations, with the background development and process presentation, in and of it'self, being worth the price.

rbfowler79 (2012-05-06 00:46)

Great graphics lame story

I'll give it more than a one rating just because it raises the bar inspecial effects. However, the story was pathetic and clichéd. Okay, anevil corporation comes in destroying the environment of the nativepeople that just want to live in harmony so they have to fight back.Wow. How many times have we heard that before... Same story with adifferent look. If he would have not made the movie so preachy andpolitical I think it would have gotten a much higher rating overall. Ialso must comment on the creatures. Okay, so he just re-skinned horses,wolves and a rhino. Great job James! Very imaginative! James Cameron, Iwish you success on the latest installment of Ferngully. MaybeGreenpeace will use it as a propaganda film.

Badfellah (2012-05-04 19:30)

Great special effects and visuals... and then what?

Are looks all that matters? I did not expect very much from Avatar. There was no fear of the hypeletting me down in other words. I knew there would be special effect,CGI and all in all an amazing world created. And the visuals weregreat, there is no question about it. But the film simply failed tocapture me! And it is simply because... well what else is there in thisfilm? It is not original or at least creative. The acting is at best average,not one single actor delivers anything close to a good/greatperformance. The involved characters are also very one-dimensional,uninteresting and completely lacked complexity. The dialogues are noteven trying to be remotely good. Was it all just written in a hurry?The story is very thin and unoriginal. Blue Indians living in space,getting pillaged by man. This isn't even close to being something new.The plot is very thin. I also found it quite uninteresting.The film was furthermore unnecessarily long, it could easily have beenshortened. It did bore me, and I did not expect that to happen. Asmentioned already, I did not have high expectations. All in all, takeaway the good looks, and the film really is poor. I do not expect verymuch from films of this type or pure action movies, but there has to besome quality in acting, the script, story, dialogue, complexity,depth... This film has nothing except for the visuals! The moral andstory has been done way better is numerous film titles. Except, thepeople will not be blue or made with CGI.Very disappointing, unless looks are the only thing counting for you!Hollywood we know has this view. But it is scary to see that soextremely many share it.6 stars - and as you have understood by now, it is almost purely basedon the effects and visuals.

followthesiren (2012-05-04 12:28)

We would SO do that.

We were given proof that James Cameron knows a thing or two about themovies in 1986 when we were horrified by "Aliens" and again in 1997when we relived the tragedy of the "Titanic". This year, he's raisingthe bar with his new 3-D adventure into a different world, not sounlike our own.This world is a feast to the human eye, delivered using the very bestand most up-to-date animation of our time. Bright glowing plants andfloating islands with inexplicably beautiful waterfalls captivate you.For the first hour of the movie, I found myself physically flinching,convinced repeatedly for a second that I was actually there. But alongwith the beauty, there are powerful and mighty beasts, decorated withdeadly teeth and claws, and boasting near-perfect physics. Every moveis calculated; from the way everyone jumps and runs, to the slightestquivers in one's lip, Cameron dares film makers to keep up.Animation and other visuals aside, this movie carries a message allAmericans, if not people around the world, can relate to. This world ispure and untouched, but the Americans, ever Gung-ho, want nothing morethan to gain it's treasure, using whatever means necessary. Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington (Terminator: Salvation), is a USMarine appointed to gain the Native species' trust. Once all the gearsare are in place, we take what we want. That's the plan. But Jake's newsplit life starts to make him see things with a much neededappreciation and respect for the world we are so inconceivably lucky toinhabit.It's not uncommon that we're reminded metaphorically by the media ofour society's negative impact on our environment, and on our world as awhole. Cameron shows us a reality that if we do not address, we arebound to face. Fret not, for it's not in a way that has you headinghome feeling bad for leaving your heat on or driving a pick-up truck.Instead you walk out feeling a renewed affection for our mother natureand her own (somewhat less astounding) beauty. Unfortunately, allCameron can do is deliver the message, and he does so with remarkablestory-telling and character development.It follows his pattern of an extensive duration, with the featurelength reaching upwards of three hours, so get there early to find aseat, because I sat all the way up top on the floor with a bar coveringa large percentage of the bottom left screen. My fault, though, I know.All this considered, however, there was still no point during thefeature that I thought to myself "Gosh this is taking too long!". Insummary, you could tell each small plot development was lendingmeasurable significance to the very suspenseful, very explosive climax.