Avatar Review (12-19-09)

Sorry for the multiple posts, Internet Explorer and Vista :/

To me this whole movie was just really dull. They seemed to pride themselves in all this CGI yet they didn't seem to really do much with it. There was no real point to the wild creatures until the very end, they were just shown in nature. Even if they were actual things and not CGI I'd be bored with them.

Nothing seems quite so magnificent when it's computer generated. The entire time the focus was just on the environment all I could think was "Ok, impressive CGI skills, but it's not real". I could never really share in the wonderment that was meant to be had by the characters just because I knew that it was fake.

As for the dullness, most of it just came from the simple plot and how generic everything seemed. Yes, things were taken from a ton of other movies (the sounds of every animal were stolen from Jurassic Park), but I figure if you can make it interesting and unique in some way it's redeemable, and this wasn't. The plot was the classic "Good vs. Evil, the protagonist sees the error of his ways, he tries to redeem himself", there were no real traits of its own. It's basically taking a narrow and shallow plot and making it pretty.

As for the problems some people have with the characters, they just aren't believable. With the Colonel (or whatever rank he was), he had that hint of insanity, which some people like because it gives him his own flair, but some people want characters that seem realistic and believable. It's just a matter of preference. There were also some horribly blatant archetypes and stereotypes that shined through (the classic environmentalist and the rednecks waiting to shoot some injuns) which, to me at least, killed the idea of complex character traits.

My opinion in short: shallow movie with some glitter thrown on.

To me this whole movie was just really dull. They seemed to pride themselves in all this CGI yet they didn't seem to really do much with it. There was no real point to the wild creatures until the very end, they were just shown in nature. Even if they were actual things and not CGI I'd be bored with them.

Nothing seems quite so magnificent when it's computer generated. The entire time the focus was just on the environment all I could think was "Ok, impressive CGI skills, but it's not real". I could never really share in the wonderment that was meant to be had by the characters just because I knew that it was fake.

As for the dullness, most of it just came from the simple plot and how generic everything seemed. Yes, things were taken from a ton of other movies (the sounds of every animal were stolen from Jurassic Park), but I figure if you can make it interesting and unique in some way it's redeemable, and this wasn't. The plot was the classic "Good vs. Evil, the protagonist sees the error of his ways, he tries to redeem himself", there were no real traits of its own. It's basically taking a narrow and shallow plot and making it pretty.

As for the problems some people have with the characters, they just aren't believable. With the Colonel (or whatever rank he was), he had that hint of insanity, which some people like because it gives him his own flair, but some people want characters that seem realistic and believable. It's just a matter of preference. There were also some horribly blatant archetypes and stereotypes that shined through (the classic environmentalist and the rednecks waiting to shoot some injuns) which, to me at least, killed the idea of complex character traits.

My opinion in short: shallow movie with some glitter thrown on.

To me this whole movie was just really dull. They seemed to pride themselves in all this CGI yet they didn't seem to really do much with it. There was no real point to the wild creatures until the very end, they were just shown in nature. Even if they were actual things and not CGI I'd be bored with them.

Nothing seems quite so magnificent when it's computer generated. The entire time the focus was just on the environment all I could think was "Ok, impressive CGI skills, but it's not real". I could never really share in the wonderment that was meant to be had by the characters just because I knew that it was fake.

As for the dullness, most of it just came from the simple plot and how generic everything seemed. Yes, things were taken from a ton of other movies (the sounds of every animal were stolen from Jurassic Park), but I figure if you can make it interesting and unique in some way it's redeemable, and this wasn't. The plot was the classic "Good vs. Evil, the protagonist sees the error of his ways, he tries to redeem himself", there were no real traits of its own. It's basically taking a narrow and shallow plot and making it pretty.

As for the problems some people have with the characters, they just aren't believable. With the Colonel (or whatever rank he was), he had that hint of insanity, which some people like because it gives him his own flair, but some people want characters that seem realistic and believable. It's just a matter of preference. There were also some horribly blatant archetypes and stereotypes that shined through (the classic environmentalist and the rednecks waiting to shoot some injuns) which, to me at least, killed the idea of complex character traits.

My opinion in short: shallow movie with some glitter thrown on.

Is the headboard of your bed a steering wheel? O.o

When this movie was finally announced and I heard the story I actually called it "Fern Gully 3D", Avatar is so damn derivative but like Spoony says even despite that the story was so boring, poorly paced and with such bad dialogue I don't recall a single line from the film, once you get over the visuals this was a terrible, terrible movie. This movie is nothing more than a special effects flash in the pan, bright and colorful but with no lasting power. We still look back at the original Star Wars trilogy as one of the high points of science fiction because of the amazing story, the only thing Avatar will be remembered as is an over hyped, overly long technical display.

There was some critic who said something along the lines of, "avatar has been called breathtaking and beautiful, well I have one more 'b' for them: boring." That was pretty much how I felt, it had some entertaining moments but there were points where I was bored, and my mind wandered, because it was just too long. 3D didn't add much to it, and it got to a point where it didn't even matter. Me and my friend both recognized Kocoum, from Pocahontas, being in there, and the connection to nature seeming like something out of Ghost in the shell. It's like Cameron had this original rip-off idea, and added onto it over the years from various popular things. On top of it all, not only did he have a hissy fit over "The Last Airbender" not being called Avatar, but he STOLE THEIR FONT, that's the real kick in the balls. I didn't know anything about avatar for awhile, so when James Cameron was talking about the game at E3, with no footage, I thought they meant the movie game for what is now "The Last Airbender," and I wouldn't be surprised if his intention actually was to fool people like me (Although that seems unlikely, however the Avatar font background was all I had to go on).

i saw it in 3-D, come to think of it, id rather see termanator...

Cameron + Sigourney Weaver + Space marines = good movie,
and yeah, it was

saw it in 3d. liked it a lot.

Dances with Ferngully. 'Nuff said.

After Seeing Reviews, your reviews, and your opinion on most movies, I had a felling you weren't going to like this movie that much.

I was right apparently.

I've already commented on this, but I just wanted to add something:

Some people have suggested that it's only Americans who object to the film's preachiness. Not so– I'm not American, and I wasn't keen on that aspect either. I thought the "message" about colonialism and environmentalism (not to mention "humans suck") was delivered in such a way that it made the film *more* safe and bland. After all, so much "improving" kiddie fiction has covered the same themes with about the same depth.

Also, it seems everyone who criticises this movie gets told, "Yes, but you have to watch it in 3-D to judge it". The point is, you *shouldn't* have to.

Not that I think "Avatar" is a terrible film, at all, just that– leaving aside the special effects– it's pretty unremarkable. Worth seeing once, but maybe not twice.

I thought that the subplot of his disability was fascinating and very, very well executed; his physical and mental unravelling as he delves further into this fantasy world is tastefully and believably shot and portrayed. Honestly, I would have loved to see that fleshed out some more... A lot of the stuff on Pandora I could give or take, honestly.

I agree completley with spoonys problems save for the CGI. I guess being a gamer I can accept this 3d dominance. Hell in 99% of all games I own they use nothing but 3D so hey, I can still think its cool to look at. That being said.

But the rest of Spoony's comments: spot on.

It was Ok. Nothing more.

This was: Pocahontas meets Dances with wolves: IN SPAAACE!

Oh, and its one thing to talk about how its similar and how the movie is stealing. For instance the name "Unobtanium" is taken straight from The Core. Nitpicking but still. call it whatever but don't re-use original names. I mean come on! You even went through the trouble to make a slightly credible language and you STILL stole that name? Why? Cheap. Same can be said about the entire plotline. But it was nice to look at. Nothing more.

Another grand slam review from the Spoony One

You want an example of breaking susspension of disbelief?
What about the planet, in about a 10,000 mile orbit from Pandora's stratosphere, in a jupiter to earth ratio. Chances are, the big planet would eclipse pandora, and it would die.
And also apparently it's always 60 degrees, plantlife everywhere, the entire planet is a rainforest with no rain, and I know this, because if it did rain, they wouldn't sleep outside in their little treehouse, because there's a little thing called hypertension.

Also every single indigenous tribe was mixed with the na'vi. You had loin cloths, spears, everyone sitting in a circle singing their version of Kumbayah, having them stress the whole "Ancestors" thing, they'd have hunters & gatherers, like it was the stone ages, one guy had a bone through his nose, and my absolute favorite, sometimes durring battle, they'd yell "ALALALALALALALAH!"

Exactly how I felt. Now when people ask me what I thought of the movie I can point to your Vlog. Thanks!

I saw Avatar last week, so it was pretty late until I saw it, partly because of this review. I also saw it in 3D.
I have to say it was one of the greatest movie-going-experience I have had so far.
The visuals were stunning and I just knew that there had been put so much love in them. Still, I have to quote the Cinema Snob on this one "....I do not like CG that anyone does, I like CG that people like James Cameron do...".
This movie does not just put some FFVII-Advent Children-ish CG there, on the contrary, the love to every single detail is stunning, I really enjoyed the design of the N'avi, the Ideas of the Plants and animals in the Forest and also the whole technical stuff in the base.

This was the first time I had seen a movie in 3D and I was simply stunned, all the more so because I knew your arguments against it and had pretty much established these as my own (lazy me), they just sounded extremely reasonable.
It guess I will go 3D more often, but only CG-movies.

About the plot I have to say I was not bothered by the fact that it is not as original as other movies supposedly are
I saw Ferngully and Pocahontas about 10 years ago so I do not remember them as much and Dances-With-Wolves was also a long time ago too.
By the time the movie had gone for 10 minutes I had totally forgotten about the similarities in plot.

Yes, Avatar took parts of the story off of these movies, but in my opinion Avatar did not suck, they did.
The only good one of these three is Dances-With-Wolves, but Avatar is just better in every single aspect I can think of.

First of all, Avatar is about 100 minutes shorter than dances with wolves, and I think it makes far better use of the time.
Where Dances-With-Wolves was just Kevin Costner being alone for about 2 hours, in Avatar there is a moving plot and there are characters that develop in every single scene.

The whole thing about there only being two sides, black and white, the pure and the evil... you are right, but I see nothing wrong with that.
In Dances-With-Wolves there was the same kind of distinction where the Indians are the good and the Soldiers are the evil ones, in Aliens there are the poor guys who built their little base on that planet and the evil Imperialistic Scientists from Weyland-Yutani, same goes for any Alien-movie btw and for oh-so-many other movies.
What I am trying to say is that it is fairly normal for the distinction between good and evil in a movie to be obvious, I see nothing wrong with that whatsoever.
That small corporate-guy (the golfer) was no longer an asshole when he saw what he had done btw.

About it being preachy...
It is interesting how different your opinion can be towards preachiness Spoony,
I just happened to stumble over an older review of yours about the comic "Black Summer",
wich obviously criticised the Bush-administration and the System which allows such a person to be in control.
You liked that one.

I did not notice the preachiness, most of all because I do not like to watch and analyze a movie at the same time, I do that afterwards because it hinders me getting engulfed in the story and me identifying myself with the characters.

Edit:
After Reading a few of the posts on preachiness and the movie supposedly being supposed to make me feel bad I have to disagree once more.
When I left the cinema my mood was better than it had been for weeks.
(Maybe it i because I am not American). When I hear Americans rant about the preachiness of this movie and how they are annoyed by it I ask myself how I, as a german btw, should watch Schindler's List.
Anyway I had fun watching this movie, many movies are about some people living in a paradise-like state until someone comes and destroys everything, that doesnt make me feel bad, it makes me root for the N'avi.
And about the "fight Terror with Terror"-thing I once again have to agree to the Cinema Snob,
Camerons military-dialogue is just awesome, it is not preachy but rather something that shows the insanity of that military dude, which is a character-trait.
If that guy had not said stuff like that he would not have seemed so extremely insane, which would have made the chracter just boring.


Edit2:
By the way can anyone tell me about movies that did not have borrowed elements like the mech-suits in Avatar, that like Spoony mentioned are originally from the Matrix (although they already appear in Aliens)?
And if you have made a nice little list to whow me (seriously, I can not think of any), you delete those movies from the list that are based on novels.

I saw Avatar in 3D and quite frankly the 3D was annoying. If you didn't hold your head just right, it blurred. 3D was not worth it. The story was meh, but it was definitely a pretty movie.

I wholeheartedly agree with you here Spoony. Especially on the preachy stuff, amen.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/21969/1/PROJE...

This is the original Avatar script, the one that James Cameron made after he finished Titanic.

Obviously, he had to have cut out a whole lot of stuff to make Avatar less than 3 hours, let alone less than 5, which would be required to include all the marvelous things that he had imagined.

Avatar is obviously lacking in some parts, but completely blows the roof off in others.

Cameron has hinted onto sequels, which may include some of this "originality" crap everyone demands these days, and may include some of the bits and pieces that he left out in Avatar.

All in all, great movie. Seen it 3 times and still cried.

I saw this movie yesterday in 3D. Went in expecting great visuals and a mediocre story and wasn't disappointed. I had no problem in suspending my beliefs because I'm almost always able to fully focus on and get immersed in movies. It was a very black and white Disney-style story but I enjoyed myself.

Perhaps because I'm not American, I did not see the preachiness as white guilt (which is a totally new term for me anyway), but more concerning the state of humanity as a whole. I dunno, maybe it's my misanthropy talking, but I can perfectly see our species sucking a planet or two dry. Sure, the hostility and greed while at it were exaggerated a lot in the movie but I felt a connection to that theme.

The slow parts felt close to the style of nature documentaries to me and while they dragged on a bit too much, the CG flora and fauna were very appealing to the eyes. The only thing that annoyed me were the horse-creatures because they didn't fit in with the jungle surroundings. That the plains tribe has them, I can go with, but I fail to see their use in the thick underbrush. Hah, they made the final battle very LotR-ish to me :P

Anyway, it's always nice to hear other people's opinions. I believe I'm a bit more easily entertained than others when I'm not prejudiced against a movie, so it's a good thing Spoony is the critic and people like me are not :D More interesting that way.

Agree with your brother the most, but of course, you always have some very good points. What bugged me the most was the stupid stupid STUPID indian tribal sounds and music. I think I would have been less irritated if they had just made everything a bit more subtle and..removed the stupid tribal sound effects. But no, it could never have been a good movie with this plot.
Visually yes, fun...but no 3D didn't help anything. It's just a minor + to an ok movie.

Spoony...Spooneeyh...Ssookieeeh,,,damn...people should start pronouncing Spooney like Sookie in True Blood. For some reason me and my gf find very funny. "oh really?!"
..yes..mm..!

Hey Spoony, Mr_Cyberpunk here, I think you're totally right about the Fern Gully reference lol. Have you heard of a game called Albion? its almost IDENTICAL to Avatar in every way, just minus the whole turning into one of them.. but the entire story is identical, the style is almost identical. Its a great classic RPG. I'd suggest you review it in the future.

Thanks.

-Mr_Cyberpunk

I'm with Mile's on this one, and I do think that this movie does influence the way digital acting, compositing, CG effects, lighting, and animation are dealt with. The overall visual quality of this movies was truly amazing, most specifically the compositing.

Even though the acting was ridiculous, the story was derivative, the world as a whole was in over abundance, the simple fact remains that the film was extremely marvelous to look at, from the explosions to animals to the facial expressions. Sometimes that is enough to make the film fun to watch.

Like Miles I do agree that the overall movie can only be considered "good" since it's weaknesses were so apparent in other areas. The important factor however was the films weaknesses it's story and acting didn't bother my overall ability to enjoy the spectacle of Avatar.

One last mention, and probably the main reason why Avatar is visually astounding is the camera composition. It's solid camera work from beginning to end, and at no point in the film was I ever confused, lost, or wondering what I was looking at. There were tons of areas in that film that lesser directors and editors would have mucked up, but this film read so well because of solid camera work.

I dunno guys, I really loved this one. I didn't see any of this preachy stuff and the word "america" didn't pop into my head even once. Maybe you were expecting it when you went into the movie? I dunno, but I have to say that this is the best movie I've seen whole year. And It's gonna take me a while to forget this one. And I watched your review before I even went in there, I saw the flying mountains, I saw their USB-hair and they didn't bother me at all. I liked the badass marine too, quandritch I think his name was. Like your reviews, but here I seriously disagree with you man.

Really didnt like the movie. Plot heavily derivative and the allegory was hamfisted. Dont care for CG without a solid plot because it appeals to the same reflex that u felt when a parent jingled their keys above u as a child, it's mindless and i feel like im being talked down to.

My instant impression after seeing it was that it is a modern Ferngully. I've been hoping someone would make a video showing the direct comparisons. The guy being saved by the girl. The guy using fire during his first encounter with her. The girl showing him the forest. The girl being the daughter of the mother-of-the-forest figure. The "Tree of Life." and so on.. bulldozers.. and so forth. There are moments where the dialog is the same. There are even moments where the scene and even camera angle are exactly the same. Such as when they're swimming under the water side by side and the camera is directly above.

Would make a funny video.

That all being said, I think the movie was still very enjoyable. Aside from the um.. "GET SOME!"

I should start off by saying thanks, Spoony for all of the years of free entertainment.
Okay, so dropping the hammer so hard on Avatar has had a pretty polarizing effect on your fan base judging from this forum. I really think that you ran the risk of alienating yourself from a lot of your fans, many of whom are probably sci-fi junkies (if I'm not presuming too much). While I agree with you when you say that CGI shouldn't sell tickets, I do not believe that the narrative is the only importance here.
Someone who says "storyline is what matters" while simultaneously posting WWE laden videos runs the risk of coming across as a little bit of a hypocrite. All I'm saying is that you DO value a little spectacle here and there. You critique movies, games, etc.; you find things to dislike about them. That's your shtick. I get it.
What Avatar DID do well with its visual smorgasbord was make many of the status quos of sci-fi (e.g., the experience of flying, an alien race, and fantasy environments) seem novel again. I agree with you, if Avatar was made 15 years ago without the George Lucas-esque "they're not SPECIAL effects if they're in every scene", the story would have been a heck-of-a-lot less compelling. But should we condemn it to Battlefield Earth or Aragon-level movie badness? No.
I'm sorry that you were not able to experience this in 3-D. Hope your foot feels better. :D