Avatar

→ in
Tools    





Welcome to the human race...
AVATAR
(James Cameron, 2009)

Well, here it is.

James Cameron's project has been hyped to within an inch of its proverbial life over the years, what with the epic budget, alleged re-inventing of special effects and some admittedly underwhelming trailers full of conspicuously computer-generated blue elves. The question that's burning in everybody's mind leading up to its release this week is: Is it really that great?

The answer: pretty much, yeah. But more on that in a bit.

For those of you who haven't heard the story, the plot revolves around paraplegic marine Sully (Sam Worthington), who's offered a second chance at life on the lush alien planet of Pandora. The humans on the planet are engaged in a war with the native population, blue humanoid warriors known as the Na'vi, over extremely valuable natural resources. To this end, a handful of scientists (led by a delightfully taciturn Sigourney Weaver) have created an "avatar" project where people control cloned Na'vi in order to get close to the tribes and work something out. Through a cruel twist of fate, Sully ends up controlling one such avatar and from there the story well and truly begins.

Now, where do I start with Avatar? The film's a lot of things, but it's obviously not perfect, and I'm not sure whether to address its flaws or good points first. Something tells me I'll go with the flaws first. It's hard to judge them too objectively - it all depends on just how tolerant you can be. I'd probably say the film's worst flaw also plays a huge part in defining just how good (or bad) the film is. I refer of course to the film's copious use of CGI characters. This is a problem that I think will depend on the viewer. Either you're going to find it horribly distracting the whole way through or get used to it after about five minutes. I reckon this is something that is up to every viewer to decide. Myself - I fall into the latter camp. Just as well, because that could very well be the major deciding point in how to judge the film, if only because Avatar is saturated with CGI. Not like that's a bad thing, as a lot of the CGI looks very flash. Avatar's look is pretty damned impressive, all things considered. Between the lush locations, slick gadgetry and veritable cornucopia of action available, I can hardly see how the film's abundance of CGI is a problem. It definitely aims high and hits its mark a lot.

With that main issue out of the way, the rest of the film manages to be considerably strong a lot of the time. Once the story gets going, it stays riveting for much of its lengthy runtime. It's well-written, even if one of the central metaphors seems a little too obvious (powerful corporation attacking harmless natives over valuable resources - not exactly subtle) and it managed to keep reasonably surprising all the way to the end. The acting was by and large good; Worthington doesn't exactly shine as the hero, but he performs reasonably well. The highlight is probably Weaver, although there's something to be said for Stephen Lang's battle-scarred colonel, who makes up for a general lack of character dimension with relative ease.

The real question remains as to just how great Avatar is. It's definitely an amazing epic in spite of its few flaws and relative lack of originality, so it's admittedly far from perfect. It remains by and large a visual extravaganza if nothing else, and should deserve consideration for one of the better blockbusters of the year (if not necessarily one of the best films). Depending on your expectations, it either wasn't quite as great as it could have been or it was far superior. If you had mixed expectations like I did, it's probably a mix of both. Avatar remains a technically great piece, a bit lightweight in parts, but overall pretty damned good. I'll definitely be checking this out in 3-D, anyway.

__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
I'm seeing it in IMAX 3-D, so I will **** in my pants...hopefully.
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



Great review, thanks Iro.

Got my tickets for a midnight showing tomorrow; IMAX, 3-D, etc. Actually, I think it's one of those semi-IMAX monstrosities, but it's the best we can do conveniently, sadly.

Bit nervous about the 3-D aspect. It's been lame in every single form I've ever seen it in, and I tend to get tiny headaches and the like from it. Cameron's been insisting that this is better and not as gimmicky with the technology, and I hope he's right. The reviews I've said so far indicate that it's fine, but not really necessary, either, which sounds about right. We'll see soon enough.

Thanks again for the early review. Cool stuff. Seems like the consensus is really overwhelming: great visuals, decent story, lame overall premise, but cool enough that most of us won't care. It's actually rather stunning how many different reviewers have agreed on all three of these points.



Thank you for sharing, Iro. It's good to hear positive feedback from someone whose opinion I respect. Really looking forward to seeing this film.
__________________
I was recently in an independent comedy-drama about post-high school indecision. It's called Generation Why.

See the trailer here:




I'm seein this Saturday. I usually don't pay attention to them, but this has gotten rave reviews by just about everyone. The first screening in London even got a standing ovation. When Steven Spielberg saw this he stood up as well and threw his fist up in the air yelling praises for the film.



Movie Forums Extra
Saw the movie yesterday with a couple friends and we were all blown away by the visuals. I forgot I was watching CG within the first 5 minutes or so, its truly that convincing in my opinion, with Neytiri being a particular standout amongst the nav'i. The movie does so many things so well that it does make the flaws stand out a bit more, but they're easily dismissed and forgivable all things considered. The movie is without question, a must see, particularly in 3D. Will definitely be seeing it a few more times!



Giovanni Ribisi doesn’t look like he is given much to work with here. I hate to see great actors wasted. For those who have seen the film, does he have much of a part? and is it more than the sterile and generic part I see in the clips?

I am tempted to go see this film to see Stephen Lang at work on the big screen. Again, like Ribisi, his part looks small. Lang can make the smallest part shine, so I know it will be good – but how much film time does he have?

I love future science concept artists. They are among my favorite artists – but how much of this film is acting and how much of it is animated action?

Also, just curious; if Stephen Lang is running around in a mechanized exo-skeleton, why is the hero in a 19th century technology (and I do mean 1800’s) wheel chair? Oh, wait … he’s a Marine. They always get the old gear, I forgot. So there is realism in this film (though rather well hidden).


__________________
R.I.P.



This is the first time in a while, that I have been really pumped to see a movie in the theaters.

Can't wait.



In the Beginning...
Thanks for the review, Iro.

I have to admit, until I saw the film sitting at 87% on Rotten Tomatoes, I had no plans to see this. But now I'm pretty sure I'll be making the trip this weekend.

My tolerance of big-budget, blockbuster CGI extravaganzas is slim to none these days, if only because CGI never trumps even a competent story. I'm glad to hear that James Cameron has taken note and steered Avatar away from the banality of most others of its type.

Still, I'm nervous about the large contingent of CG characters in this film. For all the technical care and consideration that goes into creating them, when it comes to seeming real, everything is against them. It comes down to the performance driving the polygons, so we'll see.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
It comes down to the performance driving the polygons, so we'll see.
You mean driving the "avatars", correct?
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



Making a difference
nice review. nice!
__________________
ALL WE DO OUR CHILDREN WOULD LIVE AFTER TOMORROW. IT IS OUR RESPONSIBLITY AND MANDATE AS ASPIRING AND PROFESSIONAL FILMMAKERS TO SET A HIGH PACE SO IT GETS HIGHER LATER.



Employee of the Month
I don`t like media-hypes in general, but after reading some good reviews like this, I`m really looking forward to see it. It will be my first three-dimensional movie.



Saw Avatar in quasi-IMAX and 3-D last night. I don't know if I'd exactly recommend it, but I wouldn't not recommend it, either. It kind of has to be seen, regardless.

Avatar



Avatars like a knock off sculpture slathered in brilliant paint. No matter how eye-catching or creative the design on top is, it cannot alter the shape of what's beneath it, or the fact that we've seen it before. ...READ MORE

Thought a fair bit about whether or not to bump the rating up to
, which would be just about as accurate as what I gave it. I'll have a better idea after a second viewing (I'm pretty sure they'll be one). I'd eagerly invite a bit of friendly back-and-forth about its merits, by the by, though I think this is one of those films where both its admirerers and its critics probably agree on both what's right with it, and what's wrong with it, and vary only as a matter of degree.



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Avatar (James Cameron)



It's Gorgeous, It's Entertaining, It's A Visual Orgasm.

I must say that before I saw Avatar, in IMAX 3-D no less, I made an effort to avoid every trailer, every TV spots and anything regarding the plot. It was difficult because everything on the internet and in the media was AVATAR for the months leading up to it. But I managed to pull it off, knowing that knowing nothing about it would probably heighten my experience. It did. Was I expecting to be blown away? I was, did I? For the most part. The film, from a visual and technical stand point is marvelous. Is it the next step in film-making? It looks like it, but it feels more like a first step and not the giant leap people have been waiting for.

I enjoyed it, I enjoyed the IMAX 3-D experience, it really enhanced the feel of the film. I understand the gripes people have with it, but I have to disagree with Yoda when he claimed the 3-D was gimmicky, out of all the 3-d films I've seen, this one was the only one that didn't use it in that effect.



I actually didn't feel the 3-D was especially gimmicky, I just think that it was gimmicky a couple of times, and the times that it wasn't, it was unnecessary. I didn't phrase that well, I suppose; the emphasis was definitely intended to be on the latter.

That said, there were definitely two or three of those "we're going to have something fly right at the camera so it looks like it's coming at you" deals which have become the hallmark of all 3-D films so far. Not many, thankfully, so I'll give Avatar some credit for that. It was probably the most subtle use of the technology I've seen, even if that isn't saying much.

I wish I'd remembered to mention (though I don't know where I'd put it) the narration. The narration was bad. Really, really bad. It was full of modern colloquialisms ("numb nuts"? "Take it to the next level"?), it was strangely sporadic, and it didn't serve much purpose, either. I don't know if it's worse than the cardboard cutout bad guys, or the uber-predictable storyline (I even lazily predicted the last shot of the film 30 minutes before it happened), but it's close.



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
I was working on a review, but it seems that you all are basically saying all of the same things that I was thinking.

Overall, I found it to be wanting. I really wanted to like it, but sadly didn't.

__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg