Anubis2005X

I've caught Avatar twice so far and might have to catch it again. Absolutely love this movie...

Draven

A big one would have been for Jake to NOT end up an Avatar. He could have accepted his fate or something. I said before that my wife called that would happen without seeing the movie.

The point is it's not up to me to write the movie. I just wish as much attention had been paid to the scripting as the color of the flowers.

Solid Snake

Yeah, I totally saw that coming too. Kinda wished somehow he couldn't end up the way he wanted.

Also...Stephen Lang was an ultimate Badass. Everything he did to keep on kicking ass was just awesome. He was my favorite part of the 3rd act.

RD1973

Also, wasn't ILM one of the effects houses that worked on the movie? That would make Lucas partially responsible for Avatar's revolutionary effects (not to mention that he profitted from it too). So I really don't get the cartoon.

Giantrobo

To some folks it's just cool to take swings at George Lucas. It's all the rage in the Hipster crowd.

Blu Man

Um, no. Nothing else that is coming out now or in the next six months has CGI as good as AVATAR. Most movies do not have the budgets to afford CGI like in AVATAR, movies will be countinued to be made with Alvin and the Chipmonks type of CGI for years to come. And considering how long it took them to do the CG on AVATAR I doubt we will get a movie with as good of effects as AVATAR in the next two years.

RD1973

I finally got to see Avatar in IMAX 3D today at 11:30 AM (and it seemed to be filled to capacity). Basically, I loved it: 4.5 out of 5 stars.

I can't give it a perfect score for two reasons. First, there were a few minor eye-rolling moments ("jujubes" and a helicopter carrying a huge object quite a long distance). Secondly, while the Navi design has grown on me, I'm not 100% into them. Grace's avatar looks the most cartoony. Maybe because it retains a human nose, making her look like a blue human, instead of a Navi.

Having said that, I love absolutely everything else about the movie. The characters, the military vehicles/equipment, the flora and fauna of Pandora, the music, the effects, the 3D (I never caught them pointing anything in my face). Its great to have a James Cameron movie on the big screen again. The movie is wondrous and pretty much a complete success. I was engrossed from the very beginning to the end. It never dragged for me. And eventhough the movie is 2:40 long, the audience seemed to be enthralled the whole time. There were lots of oohs and ahs, and even applause in two different spots.

I think overall, my favorite movie of 2009 remains District 9. But Avatar in 3D is definitely the best cinematic experience of the year. I went in kind of doubtful because of all the comparisons to Delgo, Thundercats, etc. But I never should have doubted Cameron. He's never let me down. I know some people did not like the movie, but they are clearly in the minority. Many others are eating crow after saying it would suck and wouldn't make a penny. The movie is a real crowdpleaser and a hit with critics. And it has a shot at being the #1 movie of the year at the box office (which would be great since the #1 movie is currently that turd, Transformers 2).

Two criticisms that keep coming up are that the movie is too simple and that its predictable. First of all, I've noticed that more often than not, simple is better. E.T. and Jaws are as simple as it gets and yet they're brilliant. Whereas the Matrix sequels and the Pirates of the Carribean sequels get lost in their own convoluted bullshit. Secondly, when a movie is executed this brilliantly, originality can take a backseat. I mean all event movies have basically the same plot, right? Good guys versus bad guys, a damsel in distress, and a last second victory overall evil. And just for the record, I thought the "biological internet" was pretty original. Watchmen is a movie that I can say has a truly original ending. The villain wins and the heroes shrug and go home. But I was pretty much disgusted with it. So eventhough its unlikely that the Navi would win, it just feels right.

By the way, was it me or were there some references to Jurassic Park and Aliens? The Thanator roar is exactly like the T-Rex roar. And the horses make the same "cough" sound as the raptors. Also, the cockpits on the military vehicles look identical to the dropship from Aliens. I also noticed a couple of musical ques that were identical to ques from Aliens.

mgbfan

Saw the movie today with the wife. Lots of good and some bad as well.

THE GOOD
Obviously, the visuals were fantastic. Really brilliant, engaging atmosphere, and they did a great job of taking the viewer to another world. Some of the alien geography and biology was a bit over the top, but it's a movie and not really a distraction at all.

The CGI was great. Seems a little weird to say, but ... that blue chick was kinda hot. Not sure I've ever said that about a CGI before. (actually, I am sure. I haven't). Good back-and-forth between the avatar world and the "real" world. Very different motifs, colors, everything.

Story, on the whole, was okay. Not fantastic, but watchable. There was enough there that you genuinely cared about the characters, and were invested in the outcome (at least I was). Ultimately, that's what matters.

THE BAD
Good movie, but ... some folks need to dial it back. It has its problems. The first and foremost of which is that it is COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE. No real plot twists to speak of. Not a surprise in the bunch. You knew most of the way how it was going to play out.

The message was seriously heavy-handed. Yeah, we get it. They're native Americans, the humans are white European settlers. Message received. Very subtle, Cameron. You really snuck that message in there.

Honestly, it was too long. I don't mind the length in and of itself, but the pacing through the early-middle was slow. Also, the time spent on the dead brother early on never paid off. It seemed nothing more than a plot device, when it could have been a lot more.

FINALLY
I saw this as Dances With Wolves meets Braveheart meets Return of the Jedi (the second half). All in all, entertaining, but with more warts than some would have you believe.

(note: I wrote this before having read any other reviews, so any resemblance to anyone else's reviews are ... because we saw the same movie!)

riley_dude

You hit the nail on the head. I couldn't have said it better myself.

mgbfan

A pity. What little performance he gave was quite good. You could see a subtle shift in his attitude toward the Na'vi near the end, and it would have been cool to see that explored more.

Giantrobo

Uhm...District 9's CGI was seamless, non-cartoony, and very realistic. As awesome as Pandora's jungles and mountains looked, the Navi still had "issues" in both their design and in some scenes movement.

Supermallet

Mod Note: Personal attacks are not allowed. One more outburst from anyone will result in immediate suspensions.

Labor

ILM mostly worked on finishing Vehicle effects in the final battle

All the character, background, motion capture CG is Weta

As far as CG goes...there is Avatar and then there is everything else. I can't agree with any argument stating otherwise. Yeah District 9 has some nice looking Shrimp men, but the scale in Avatar is on a whole other league. Its comparing a Watermelon to a peanut.

Frankly I dont expect Avatar to be topped by anything until either Avatar 2 or Camerons next CGI heavy flick (Battle Angel) and IMO it will age a lot better than any of the Star Wars Prequels or LOTR films (Which have already badly aged in some areas)

RD1973

I agree. I was just commenting on that lame cartoon a few pages back. ILM remains a top effects house and Avatar isn't anymore complex than the prequels. So I don't know what the point of the cartoon was.

Burnt Thru

this is the problem with the dances with wolves analogies: any ending will seem like a copy of it's multiple choices. Jake not being part of the tribe would have been very similar to Dunbar leaving. it is also very similar to the "it was all a dream" classic particularly considering he had to go to sleep each time he wanted to inhabit the avatar.

i don't disagree that more could have been done to nuance the movie. i'm just not sure other movies are as unpredictable as many people imagine. perhaps they just hide their predictability somewhat better. a little less foreshadowing might have helped..

Solid Snake

I think the point of it is for the comic is to show a film of simple action/adventure type plot with massive SFX has now been taken over by Cameron. Whereas...usually..it was pretty much associated with Lucas. I chuckled.

Cremedelacalvin

Lets see, where do i begin...

I try to not waste my time scouring for information for a certain film before it hits theaters. I don't like outside influence on my own opinions, be it from hype or bad press or what have you. So going into the midnight showing of Avatar i had little knowledge of what to expect, besides being James Cameron's return to film, which included the guy from that shitty Terminator revamp, and a blue cat person.

Going into the film i had seen a few screen shots at most, and i didn't have that high of an expectation that it was going to a "game changer". Many doubts and concerns sprouted up in my mind as i was purchasing my tickets. Would the movie, heavily incorporating CGI, be believable? What is this movie even about? Holy shit does this movie really come with a 160 min run time? Do i want to sit through a movie for 160 minutes? Most importantly would it be an engaging, enjoyable experience?

Before i get on topic, i would like to say that i consider myself an avid film fan. Having seen most of the cliche lauded notables, ranging from Citizen Kane, South by Southwest, Bonnie & Clyde, Chinatown, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Goodfellas, City of God, Requiem For A Dream, No Country for Old men, Let the Right One In, The Dark Knight, and everything in between. Welles, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Kurosawa, Scorsese. I could go on and on, as there is too many a film, director, or genre to name. My point is i try to take it all in. Cinema has a vast history to tap into and enjoy. I digress.

Now having said that, I've got to say that no other film has ever fully captured my imagination, immersing me into said world. Even secretly wishing, somehow that it would be possible for this fictional place to be real. This film blew me away. There are many films that have superior scripts, acting, but a film is a sum of all parts, not just this or that. The RealD i saw at the midnight opening really added to my film going experience, immersing me into the film.

I'm not going to go into a plot summary as many a post has already covered that. Nor am i going into detail about how the 3D is put to use. Rest assured, it works perfectly.

Right from the get go my first two concerns were put to rest. The CGI environment, and characters, blending of CGI and live action, when put into the context of the movie, and not a clip from your laptop, looked breath taking. Resulting in a legitimacy in regards to the generated locations and characters, like a good musical score, the notion of this being CGI and 3D went to the back recesses of your mind.

The story elements, plot, and characters were laid out within the first quarter of the movie. The Neytiri intro scene didn't feel forced and was interesting. I was impressed with the emotive faces of the Na'vi, as well as surprised by how well the actors translated into the Avatars and indigenous. Props to Peter Jackson's WETA team, somehow making a 10foot tall feline lady oddly attractive. Now that i think of it, that was in part of Jim Cameron's genius, making the CGI characters relate able enough to the audience. I love Jim Cameron's signature attention to detail. As no one else could have pulled off bringing a whole world(moon technically) and everything that comes with that to life. I think with another person at the helm, this movie could have been an abomination, reminiscent of the recent Christmas Carol movie. No uncanny valley effect here.

It is interesting to see that many people are complaining about character development. Since when Archetypes bad? Archetypes have been present in folklore and literature for thousands of years. Archetypes are important to both ancient mythology and modern narratives The use of archetypes to illuminate personality, resulting in recognizable and typical patterns of behavior with certain probable outcomes.

So obviously, the plot would be predictable. Also what is this needing of a "twist"? To put it bluntly, i would not want to watch a 160 minute episode of Lost.

I'm not going to lie, i loved the subversive subtext, the allegories if you will, throughout the film. America's relationships with native Americans, similar racial policies in Asia. The use of gas to root out the Navi away from lands where the resource is located mirrors the use of similar weapons in Colombia to displace nearly 3 million people. The obvious Blackwater in space concept. Being in a place we are unwelcome in also echoing the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. The uncanny resemblance of Hometree falling to the twin towers, and the incendiaries to Vietnam.

Right after the opening dream walking scene, the movie starts off with closeup cut of Jake Sully opening his eyes, the last scene of the movie ends with Jake Sully, the Na'vi, opening his eyes. I loved the concept of the greeting of "I see you", seeing into someone, and the relation of that with the natural world. It's a great message. I understand the complaints that it has been, "done before", but never executed this well.

Honestly, I feel like Jim Cameron went with the right direction. Putting a familiar story in an unfamiliar world. A crazy abstract story with twists and turns along with a crazy world of flora and fauna would become a jumbled mess. Avatar is fluid. The 160 minutes blew by without myself realizing it. I hoping that the scenes that were cut will be on the Blu-ray.

Now onto the score, whether you like it or hate him James Horner and Jim Cameron have a good thing going. They last worked on Titanic together and their latest collaboration fit nicely. Every knows that Horner loves to reuse his own work, and there are some notes in some of the scores that are a testament to that.

Theatrically, it is solidly shot. Great framing and use of fade to blacks, i would also like to mention for a movie that has so much in it (action/adventure,love story, sci-fi), it is really tight and put together, great editing as well. Unlike Transformers, the action is not entangled and clearly visible.

After reading the posts in this forum i feel like some posters fit the stereotypical, "fan boy forum nerd" Archetype that so many people mock. I feel, that if you are stuck in a certain routine, be it forum posting daily, or logging into a virtual game daily, it tends to incubate more of a mob mentality, and that a person's perspective becomes lost.


I've found Avatar really watchable, with the simple plot, so much so that as i am writing this I've ended up seeing the film 6 different times, in all available formats, with various friends and family. This hearkens back to Cameron's attention to detail, every shot is filled with detail. Each time i saw Avatar, i found something new in most of the shots that i didn't notice prior. I have to admit, I've never watched a movie more than twice in theaters until now, I haven't posted on a specific niche community forum until now either.

When it comes down to it, what is the goal of film making? Of cinema? It is to evoke emotion, to tell stories. When you add everything together, everything is in service to tell a story, and that is what Avatar does. Avatar feels natural, it flows, it feels right. The CGI and live action acting, 3D, musical score, plot, and small details, makes Avatar the most engaging, enjoyable experience on celluloid to date.

Anubis2005X

Regarding the story, who really cares about twists? Most movies don't feel the need to use them and work just fine. Plus, they can come across as a bit gimmicky at times (Shyamalan...)

Patman

Yeah, thank goodness Shyamalan has his own Avatar movie to spin twist after stupid (predictable) twist in that movie next year.

Patman

Pandora is a low gravity moon, so the helicopter carrying the trailer long distances wasn't all far-fetched, if you accept the other conditions of Pandora established through previous dialogue and action (Quaritch working out and commenting on the low gravity).

Grace's avatar was probably first generation avatar, so they got the human/na'vi mix too weighted towards human (her avatar's rack seems a bit larger than regular na'vi women, too). I thought it was a nice touch to show how more developed Tommy/Jake's avatar looks in their present day as newer avatars were grown in the Avatar project through the years.

Blu Man

Your kidding right? District 9's CGI was good, but it was not seamless. It looked like CGI. Not even in the same league as AVATAR, and I'm sure Blomkamp would agree, as he has stated how amazing AVATAR's CGI was. The detail on the Navi was incredible, and the environment was just as good. The water, sticks, grass, to someone who went into AVATAR with no previous knowledge of the film they might mistake it for real life.

Burnt Thru

the most clunky moment for me was "unobtanium". could nobody think of a better mineral name than that?

Patman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainium

fumanstan

Shenanigans!

fumanstan

Pandora and the Na'vi looked and moved completely like CGI to me. I wouldn't call D9 seamless, but there were many points where I wondered if the aliens were completely CG or part puppetry as they looked amazing to me. Obviously the two are different since we're talking individual characters versus an entire world, but I agree with Robo.