• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

James Cameron's "Avatar" (grading and discussion)

Grade "Avatar"

  • Excellent

    Votes: 166 50.0%

  • Above Average

    Votes: 85 25.6%

  • Average

    Votes: 51 15.4%

  • Below Average

    Votes: 11 3.3%

  • Terrible

    Votes: 19 5.7%
  • Total voters
    332
Honestly, I was underwhelmed. Impressive visually, sure, but the story was just dull, predictable and full of cliches common in most other sci-fi movies. It was pretty much, "here's a generic plot, let's show off our cool new technology with it."

I suppose Colonel Badass was a cool guy, even if his badassitude was ridiculous. Twice he's exposed to the planet's toxic atmosphere with no effect. Is he just that good at holding his breath? It takes two huge ass alien spears to the chest to take him down. Really, being impaled by one spear which takes up half your chest should take anyone down instantly. But this guy doesn't die until a couple of minutes after being impaled by the second one. That is one tough dude.

The ending makes no sense to me.
So the humans are defeated and sent back to Earth. What's to stop them from returning and this time bombarding the planet from orbit? The aliens have no means of defending against an orbital assault.
But whatever. It's not the worse movie I've seen, but it is by no means a masterpiece.
 
T'Baio said:
I thought the film was a masterpiece. All the complaints about bad story and dialogue are bitter bunk from people who are unable to lose themselves in the majesty of cinema.

I wanna write a review, but I have so much to say and I'm so lazy...
Click to expand...

I LOVE to lose myself in the majesty of cinema...BUT...I don't want to have to check my brains at the door.

I want to be swept away, and I most certainly can be (seeing 2001 back in the day was one of the transformative experiences of my life). Heck, after seeing Avatar I want to go to Pandora. The world building is GORGEOUS. Immersive. I hate 3D and I even forgot about it within 5-10 minutes after the start.

However...that's not enough.

If only Cameron were as good at story, dialogue and character as he is at visuals what a fabulous movie this would have been. As it is, the dialogue, story development, acting etc are nowhere near as sophisticated as the visuals.

It's soooo frustrating. I have no problem if a filmmaker works with familiar dramatic tropes - how many new stories are there? But it's what a director does with them (or what Cameron doesn't do in this instance) that makes Avatar so frustrating. So many of the dramatic ideas are just lame, the dialogue is clumsy...it just makes me cringe. And enough with those one-note military baddies already - the villains in Avatar make Nero look like Richard III.

I found this review by Stephanie Zacharek at Salon a couple days after I saw Avatar. I specifically avoided reviews before I saw the movie. This review pretty well sums up my thoughts on the film:

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/index.html?story=/ent/movies/review/2009/12/17/avatar

Sorry, I want more from my SF than this.

PS: Edit after I read above post...I agree. It's a hollow victory. The corporation will not give up with such a valuable commodity at stake. The natives may have won this battle but they will lose the war, as the indigenous peoples of North America did in the 19th century. We want it - we'll come back and take it.
 
Excellent. I went in knowing the flaws (pedestrian story) and actually found it better than I expected. Visually, it was awesome. The 3D effect is worth seeing--definitely the best 3D system I've seen. It's been described as giving you a "window" into the scene, and I very much agree with that description.

As for the story, there was an arc, it fit together, whatever. It was well-told and I was highly entertained. I don't go to James Cameron movies for high art, I go for amazing spectacle, and it easily blew away everything else I've seen this year--and for the past several years, for that matter.
 
I liked the movie, more than I expected to even. The story was engaging enough, though I have a few major issues in the area of character motivation. The one thing that I absolutely loathed about the movie was the main villain. I'm not sure how it all went so wrong, whether the acting or the writing was more to blame, but the character as presented was such a snarling, over-the-top cartoon stereotype that he ruined nearly every scene that featured him. Unfortunately, his scenes accounted for a large chunk of the running time.
 
DarthPipes said:
Twice he's exposed to the planet's toxic atmosphere with no effect.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that bothered me too.
Click to expand...

He held his breath. "Toxic" can mean a lot of things. It doesn't have to mean instant death or even lasting damage. It could be something as simple as it having a high argon content. Not gonna hurt you in and of itself, except for the fact that it displaces the oxygen you need when you're breathing.

It was clearly not a matter of the atmosphere being at extreme temperatures or having corrosive effects. It just wasn't breathable.
 
I actually liked the Colonel's character better than Nero. He actually had more of a motivation than "Go back in time and Kill Spock".
 
Rackon said:
PS: Edit after I read above post...I agree. It's a hollow victory. The corporation will not give up with such a valuable commodity at stake. The natives may have won this battle but they will lose the war, as the indigenous peoples of North America did in the 19th century. We want it - we'll come back and take it.
Click to expand...

Yes, which is why I don't get why someone said the ending made no sense to him. Whoever says in the movie "And they lived happily ever after"? I shall now make the prophecy that in the year 2015 (because that's how long it takes James Cameron on average to make a new movie) there will be a sequel.
 
Starbreaker said:
I actually liked the Colonel's character better than Nero. He actually had more of a motivation than "Go back in time and Kill Spock".
Click to expand...

I actually think "Star Trek" is a really good comparison. Both films have criticisms leveled against them, that, intellectually speaking, are valid, generally about the contrived nature of certain plots, etc, but somehow it didn't bother me at all.
 
I just got back from seeing the movie and thought it was very well done. Although the plot was rather predictable and not so original, the cinematography (visuals, sounds) was excellent, and Sam Worthington's performance (even if it was mostly voice-over) was superb. I'm just surprised the marketing/publicity has been almost non-existent until recently, especially a film of epic scope that's done by James Cameron. Without a doubt, it will take its place among Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean, if not the more epic Harry Potter series or Lord of the Rings.

Overall Rating: A-

Are we going to be treated to a sequel?
 
Cameron says he hays two sequels planned if this one is a box office success... I guess it's going to make at least $600 million, so I'm sure we'll see some sequels. It could possibly take a long time, though.
 
$600M worldwide? Sounds about right. In terms of North American box office, I'm guessing (purely speculatively, of course) that the film will track relatively closely to LOTR: ROTK, meaning it ought to end up in the $350M range, give or take.
 
T'Baio said:
I thought the film was a masterpiece. All the complaints about bad story and dialogue are bitter bunk from people who are unable to lose themselves in the majesty of cinema.

I wanna write a review, but I have so much to say and I'm so lazy...
Click to expand...

One word: HYPOCRITE

Its true for so many of you in this thread.

So complaining about the plot is now suddenly a lame excuse for some?!
I got two more words for you: TERMINATOR SALVATION

Its plot was no more full of nitpicks or cliches but you and many decided it was fair game. Its why I can't take you seriously on your opinions.

The Majesty of Cinema my ass. It was pretty but the mantra around here so often is substance that now when a picture is "just pretty" its suddenly ok to overlook its other jarring flaws. :lol::lol:

CAMERON COCK SUCKERS.

Michael Bay has delivered tighter stories with 'kewl effects'. :p
 
^ To play Devil's Advocate, the film was certainly "majestic" ... at least visually (and, to some extent, in terms of the soundtrack). And the story was epic in its implications and structure.

But that doesn't mean that the whole production was "majestic" -- not when you count the derivative, by-the-numbers plot, a few cookie-cutter characters (the Colonel, for example) and silly dialogue.

In the end, it's a good movie. But not one that ought to be considered on par with the best cinema has had to offer over the years.
 
You got what I was saying Sam.
You just fleshed it out a bit more in your second paragraph.
One or two elements doesn't make the whole movie 'majestic' as T'Baio would like to infer with the wool he's trying to pull over us.

You and I are in agreement, except I rate it a C.
They trippy light show can't make up for its other flaws, which are many.

I'm not surprised by its opening.
I'll be more impressed on how it holds in the coming weeks.
Wolverine Origins opened great and fizzled.
Superman Returns did as well.
Just opening great isn't enough to get it done in the end.
 
Part of me wonders if the film would have been better served as a "silent film" -- letting the visuals, and the score, tell the story. The lack of specificity with respect to the story would allow audience members to fill in the blanks of motivations and actions and interactions of the characters on their own, creating a truly immersive experience.

EDIT:
I think, in terms of box office, Avatar will do just fine. There's already some very good word-of-mouth, and when you factor in the uniqueness of the 3D experience, I think that'll be enough to draw in viewers who might have otherwise stayed at home waiting for the Blu-Ray DVD, or downloaded a pirated copy.
 
I'm interested in seeing this. Until the other day, I was confused by the two separate "Avatar" movies coming out, thinking they were the same thing. I'd only paid attention peripherally, since I thought it was based on that cartoon. I mean, for fuck's sake, the logos even use the same font.
But then I saw James Cameron promoting his movie on some talk show, and I was intrigued. I may even check out the Airbender movie as well, for that matter, even though I've never seen the cartoon and have no desire to.
 
Nerdius Maximus said:
I mean, for fuck's sake, the logos even use the same font.
Click to expand...
You know ... that's something that has really hit an odd nerve with me: the fact that Avatar, this cutting-edge visual film, is using what is, essentially, the Papyrus font. It's a nitpick, for sure, but couldn't they have found a font a bit more, I dunno, cutting-edge? :p
 
Rackon said:
PS: Edit after I read above post...I agree. It's a hollow victory. The corporation will not give up with such a valuable commodity at stake. The natives may have won this battle but they will lose the war, as the indigenous peoples of North America did in the 19th century. We want it - we'll come back and take it.
Click to expand...

Sequels. ;)

The aliens allowed some of the humans to stay behind, it's possible the reamaining humans will help the natives to use the surviving human technology to defend themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top