Agreed!
The human characters were one dimensional, the alien characters were two dimensional, and the visuals were three dimensional.

Damn. I was hoping to chuckle but I really do appriciate the reveiw.

I got into a long argument with the people I went to see this with. They thought it was great, I thought it sucked. The visuals are nifty, but that's about it. I wanted more. How much cooler could this have been if Jake had to make a real moral choice on which side to fight for. What if the mineral was a cure for an epidemic on Earth and all humanity would die if we didn't kill the fuzzies and take it. What would he decide to do then? What if America wasn't just repeating its past (I say America because I didn't get the sense of any other culture among the humans) and really tried to negotiate first but was unable to move someone from not only a holy relic but a part of their symbiotic relationship with the planet?

That being said, the ponytail/brain feeler things are completely stupid and go against the planetary evolution. Nearly every other creature hides it's feelers in a tentacle the extends from its brain area. Why not just give the fuzzies a tentacle for crying out loud. What happens when they need a hair gut or get holy tree sap in their hair? Besides, then we could look forward to freaky fuzzy tentacle fan fiction friday mental nightmares.

Thank god someone else out there saw the emperor has no clothes. The movie was just alright at best. The effects didn't even seem that extraordinary since it still seemed like a virtual world. While the movie had some okay parts overall I would say it is easily forgettable. I can't imagine sequels. That will just be a cash grab. I agree with you that Zoe Saldana was the only bright spot in the movie. Her motion captured performance definitely stood out. I have no problem comparing her to Andy Serkis as Gollum. Please people quit going to see this movie. It will just promote more crap movies like this. Go rent the exceptional Hurt Locker if you didn't catch it in theaters this year.

If Avatar's story possessed an ounce of District 9's poignancy, we would have had a "great movie." Instead we have a cool popcorn flick with stunning visuals. Meh.

Im not gonna debate the movie here (liked it for the record)

But I cannot agree more about the hair tendril thing. Its gross.

And If I was jake sully, Id totally be against stickin' my hair-nerve-tendrils into ANYTHING especially Nav'i women.

"Did you just your hair-tendril-nerve thing up that rhino-monsters ass?"

"yep"

"uhh...about that mating thing? No."

Thanks for finally seeing it Rob, and giving a somewhat balanced review. I retract and apologise for the unpleasant things I said about you.

So Avatar is just as "AWESOME" as Transformers 2?

Story sucked, characters sucked, dialogue sucked = GO SEE IT!!!

Pretty colors, expensive CGI, loud noises, explosions, robots, catpeople, dumb story, dull characters, cheesy dialogue = billion dollar Oscar worthy epic masterpiece??????????

Avatar is shit... the 3D that doesn't poke you in face in not game-changing and 400 million dollars and 4 years worth of CGI is not revolutionary

DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE

Man, everyone says the 3D is awesome, but it didn't do anything for me. I think the subtlety of it was well done(i.e. arrows and spears were not hurled at my face), but it still just fucked with my eyes and my head and made me never want to watch a movie in 3D again. I'm wondering if I need to see it in IMAX 3D not just normal 3D, but I'm not seven-dollars-an-hour-curious enough to find out.

One thing I'll mention, which someone else pointed out yesterday, is that Unobtanium is a term that's been around in Sci-Fi and Engineering for a long time. However, it's usually used as a theoretical term for something impossible to find or make. Cameron is the only tard blatant enough to actually make it into a mineral.

Oh and on the point of Na'vi and Creature design...I thought the creatures of Pandora were awesome and fairly original. Everything having six legs and crazy breathing holes. Likewise, the Na'vi do not fit in their own envrionment. They have two legs, breath through their mouths and are essentially big eyed lanky blue humans. Serious design fail.

Hey, in the anthromorphic simple combat/flying/trading/awesome radio conversations game Skyrates, we can buy Unobtanium.

Yeah, don't got a point.

Rob makes an excellent point in the sixth paragraph. Take "The Jazz Singer," which everybody remembers is the first movie to include diegetic sound in 1927.

What they forget is that "THE JAZZ SINGER" FUCKING SUCKS.

"Avatar" may be groundbreaking, but that's all people will remember about it. Audiences 50 years from now may respect it for ushering in a new technological age, but they won't actually watch the fucking thing outside of film classes ... which is precisely the case with "The Jazz Singer."

I personally felt that Avatar's story was really nothing more than a futuristic re-telling of FernGully

I actually liked it. Sorry. I don't really need a plot to be revolutionary for it fun.

Plus, it basically played into everything I have ever wanted since the age of 5.

Riding a dragon? Check.
Looking like a cat? Check.
Deeper connection to nature? Check.
Being able to plug yourself into the internet? Well, kinda check.
Being a kickass warrior instead of a slob? Check.
Black and white morality instead of having to think? Check.
Awesome new alien planet to explore? Check.
Being an eco-terrorist? Check.
Explosions? Check.
Living in a tree house? Check.

I was way too distracted wishing I could live there to nitpick.

Zoe Saldana was fucking annoying as hell. With every "grunt, wail, hiss and snarl," made me want to punch her in her Gungan face. I think it was the mix of said Gungan-esq and the pseudo native American/dances with wolves accent, made every scene with the Na'Vi fucking unbearable.

visually yeah, its a homerun. Thats one thing. The Abyss was a good story. So we know James Cameron can write and tell a decent story...this lack of imagination called a movie is just screen saver with dialog and explosions.

I think im the only one who thinks this movie would have made a great SyFy Channel movie

Check out the below article on Chud... If even one thing from Cameron's Project 880 spec script was included in Avatar, it would have elevated the film to "worthy" (rather than "worthington") from "boring."

The opening on Earth, the spaz that committed Avatar suicide, or the "humans as a virus" angle would have upped major ante.

The entire film continues his obsession with marine life. Only one creature - the spiral flying toad thing - was creative. Otherwise the entire film could have taken place in the Abyss alongside the Titanic.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/21969/1/PROJECT-880-THE-AVATAR-THAT-ALMOST-WAS/Page1.html

it's a bit sad when person comes out of the experience like avatar, then sits down to write something about it, and this is what the person comes up with. it is sad because that person is lacking that little, special part of human mind, the part that takes u on a journey to different planets and lets your mind expand to hallucinogenic drugs inducing delights. the person that is able to write down that avatars story is not very good, is definitely a person i do not want to have afternoon coffee. avatar is jakes first running in his new body, avatar is neytiri, avatar is colors, avatar is experience. not the fucking story. when u take lsd, what do you do on it? probably sit on your ass for an hour staring into the fire. not much story there. and yet, your mind is soaring beyond comprehension. i love topless robot, but this... "review"... it kind of strips away the "cool nerd" vibe of the whole thing and just gives it the "calculating, boring, over analizing nerd without imagination beauty inside" vibe... "I can't imagine any one wanting toys from this movie" Jesus H. Christ

This is a good movie, and it work also in 2D. The story is good, classic, without useless twists or complicated dialogues, but it's a good story and a good script (nothing to do with Transformers 2 which makes no sense at all).

The story is as classic as Star Wars or Lord of the Ring can be, cause it's a Myth! It's Oedipus in the New World.

Well, I'm not gonna bother watching this until Mclyve steals it off the internet. If I wanna watch blue people that aren't real, I'll watch the smurfs.

Kebabyuchenko xxx

I have been refusing to call the movie by it's given title, and by one that truly describes it. "Pocahontas IN SPACE! AND 3D" and then I do magic wavey fingers.

Yes... It looks pretty cool but the story and the setting is a mess. At some point I wasn't distracted by the pretty 3D and started groaning at the stupid dialogue and the story beats that could be seen for 20 minutes in advance.

I really hoped Cameron would have had the balls to make this a bit darker and more original.

Finally! I agree with pretty much everything you've said, Rob, and I like that fact that your review is unafraid to just say out loud the problems that are rife in Avatar. Most critics are just screaming their heads off about it like it's the coolest thing since sliced bread.

This movie was way oversold. I liked it well enough while it was going on (in digital 3D, mind you) but I can't imagine watching it again. I just don't see how another special effects spectacle is any kind of revolution in movies, any more than the Matrix movies were, or Lord of the Rings. Both of which, I would like to point out, had a lot more story to them. Even the Matrix sequels.

I had no problem with the story being obvious, most stories are. Yes, it's Dances with Wolves with blue kitties. For the record, I liked Dances with Wolves, maybe that's why I had no problem with the story.

And comparing this to Transformers 2 is ridiculous. The tendrils may be gross, but they don't reach the level of Devastator testicles.

Yes - these are all fine notes - but what was the gameplay like? How was Avatar's multiplayer? What kind of computer do you need to play Avatar, and is it coming out for Xbox Live or Playstation network?

Yeah I never did and still have no intention of seeing this steaming pile of shit. Give me Terry Gilliam's next film!!!!

@allagnar

Really? Avatar is good because it's like being on LSD? That's really what you're going to go with?

Save your hippy BS; I'd rather have a good story.

Another thing...

When I walked out of the theater after seeing Avatar, I thought about how I would rather watch another "adventure film" that "created its own world" when I got home, than ever see Avatar again. The film? The first Pirates of the Caribbean movie. And that was based on a theme park ride.

(Actually, the film was The Matrix. But I'd still watch the Black Pearl 100x before seeing Avatar twice.)

So the sequels will be as essential as Matrix 2 and 3?

James Cameron is such a tool. I refuse to see this mess just based on the fact that Cameron did an interview talking about how Avatar's underlying theme is about America is evil and destroying blah blah blah suck it you haven't done anything worthwhile since Terminator 2 you jackhole.

I still have NO desire to see this movie. I WANT to, but I just totally lack the interest. Oh well.

THANK YOU for restoring my realistic hopes for this film. After hearing so much about how great it is, I was starting to expect wonderful things. I guess I didn't realize that the positive reactions likely have more to do with the spectacle than the story; this is the same country, after all, that made Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen a mega-hit. My biggest problem is that due to my fucked up eyes, I CAN'T SEE 3-D. I have 20/20 vision, but 3-D just looks blurry to me.

Meh, I knew it going in that Avatar would be nothing spectacular, and even with the dumbness all around I still like it. Lighten up and enjoy expensive empty entertainment. (Ooh, my alliteration for the day.

I'm rooting for this suckfest to fail, and fail hard.

The plot is retarded, indeed. I agree with your review overall, but I believe the whole 3d thing is overhyped. Some 3d scenes were awesome, others were annoying and felt like an unecessary distraction. I think this new 3d tecnology is cool, but it won't change filmmaking. We've been creating 2d representations of reality for 50 thousand years or so, and eventually people will see 3d movies for it's actual eye-candy value, and the movie industry will realize there's no need of 3Dfying every single film.

One thing I've noticed the last few days is how emotional some people get when Avatar pops up in a conversation. I've been witnessing fiery, passionated statements from some people gloryfing every single aspect of the movie, and claiming being surrounded by heartless, uncreative, faux-intelectual jackasses.

so was I the only one who spent the entire movie trying to see if Zoe Saldana's nipples were visible?

If one compares this movie to dropping acid, then he has probably never dropped acid and only seen the "affect" in a movie.

THANK YOU!

If it weren't for you and the AV Club I would start to think that I was the only person in the world who didn't like Avatar.

Say what you will about the quality of the story. I found that the story and the world were very engrossing. Fact is, I cared about home tree being destroyed. I felt like a part of the Natives when watching the story, I felt bad for characters that don't exist. I can't ask more from a story than that.

Additionally unobtanium is a real term, look it up. Is it stupid? Yes. But Cameron did not make it up, he used a technical term which fit the object appropriately. As for its purpose, I would assume it was some type of source of energy as the film was a veiled criticism of American efforts in the Middle East. Does it really need to be spoon fed to the viewers in order to get it? Secondly, why does it matter? If it is selling for a tremendous amount of money, why would you care about why people were buying it? Fact is this information would not add or detract from the story at all.

Well I loved this movie. Obviously you feel different, but I can't help but feel like you were predetermined to hate this movie based on some of your previous posts.

I will NEVER watch this movie,just because they pro-AVATAR crowd has been so annoying. Pure spite will keep me from ever seeing this,and I honestly dont mind or care. Have fun masturbating to your 3-D ThunderSmurfs....

look at the bright side - you'll never run out of FFF material.

god what a load of crap.

:off to film ESNOVELOTORIS AMATEURIS in 3D!:

I remember Unobtanium mostly from that movie "The Core." Wasn't that what the super ship bound for the Earth's core was made out of?

I kind of figured this would be much like a porn...great visuals and little to no plot, to get in the way. That said I am still planning on seeing Avatar, maybe this weekend.

look at the bright side Rob you now will no longer have to be bugged and hounded to see Avatar or review it. the door is now closed mission done

I'm on the fence about seeing this.

I am curious, but the fact that we're back in "Turn Off Your Brain" territory automatically turns me off.

Actually, let me rephrase. I almost wish that Cameron just made a cinematic tour of this world (At a shorter running time), rather than add a collection of hackneed plot parts that will distract more than serve the movie.

I have no problem with a film that is style over substance, but when a truly shitty plot keeps pulling me out of the experience, than it's a bad film.

Spot on. I went to see it over Xmas and enjoyed it. Then I went to see Sherlock Holmes and enjoyed it equally. Not a horrible movie but not a great one.

The unobtainium and terror and end song stuff I had heard about ahead of time and was ready for the suck, but all that is like 30 seconds of a 3 hour movie (if you flee quickly enough when the credits start, which was no problem after a movie sized Diet Coke and sitting for that long). I was impressed with the pacing, most long movies either drag or go the Transformers "super hyperkinetic" route; I thought it kept a good pace throughout. And the future tech is nice, it looks like the universe of Aliens 20 years later (in other words, keeping pace with our timelime!).

So in the end, I liked it. The "IT SHOULD BE NOMINATED FOR BEST PICTURE" people are smoking crack, but "Dances with Wolves improved by crossing it with Aliens" is a decent value prop for me...

F**k this s**t, talk toys!

I think you might be wrong, Rob, if kids have anything at all like normal play patterns they're buying up the Human vehicles for their GI Joes.

That transport? The 'Huey' surrogate (it's the 'Nam part, see)? 100% awesome and we should have those for real.

To me, Avatar really is the "Rise of the Robots" of the movie world.
Remember that game? It was the first of it's kind to use (somewhat) realistic 3D graphics in what was still a 16Bit world as far as home entertainment was concerned.
It was the state-of-the-art one-on-one fighting game that you HAD to have. I remember in my neighborhood that you felt dumb if you DIDN'T own it.... but y'know what? It was a fucking splattery shitmess of a game.
You could only play as one character, the controls were beyond clunky and I'm pretty sure "jumpman" had more moves than most of the characters in the game.
And even though Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter 2 were out at the same time, ROTR still cleaned up because it was in 3D!!! WOW!
The point is, as Richard Gere famously sang in Chicago (or on a lesser known extent, Joel Grey on The Muppet Show, season 1 Ep 3), "Give 'em an act with lots of flash in it
And the reaction will be passionate... Long as you keep 'em way off balance
How can they spot you got no talents?"
Humans aren't that great. That is all.

So I'm in the NERD minority for liking this movie, a lot? I thought it was one of the best science fiction movies of the decade, and not directly like Pocahontas or Dances with Wolves. This was a movie that showed these things in a new light I had never seen before - I mean come on, it was a Sci-Fi Western of the magnitude that we've never seen!

I'm probably yelling into the dark here, but saying it's formulaic is like says Star Wars is - which, holy crap, it is. Most awesome movies are the same recycled formulas told with different set dressings, whether it's "good vs evil," "revenge," "redemption."

Besides what I thought was a fun story, the effects were top notch, and the score is very enjoyable.

Is there anything that Rob likes that isn't a crappy Japanese movie?

this movie will be the Tron of the future.

"ZOMG LOOK AT THOSE GRAFIX"

I saw Avatar with no real expectations, and came away with very similar feelings to you.

It DID look great, and I was particularly impressed with the facial expressions and mannerisms of the Na'vi, but I'm all about story. Spectacle can enhance a good story, but if there's nothing there to begin with, I find it hard to remain enthused. For me, Avatar is to films what Modern Warfare 2 is to video games: it broke financial records, it's technically slick, and everyone should go through it once just to see the highlights, but the lack of anything engaging beyond the spectacle stops me from really getting immersed.

As a writer working hard to improve myself, most of the dialogue in Avatar really made me cringe, particularly anything said by the pathetically evil commander. There wasn't a single event in the plot that wasn't obvious from a mile away. When Neytiri's father died, I literally said aloud to my friend, "She'll use his bow to get the killing blow on the bad guy." Sure enough, it happens about 20 minutes later.

I've given people the same recommendation that you have. See it for the graphics if you're into that kind of thing, but don't bother for the story. The film may have been in the making for 15 years, but I doubt the script took that many weeks.

The kicker is, the 3D glasses I was given when I saw it were dirty and scratched, so I spent most of the film squinting and unable to see much of anything clearly. Next week, I think I'll go to a musical wearing a pair of earmuffs.

I thought I liked you Rob. And then I read this. Now I think I love you. Excellent review and spot on!

Three words: Better than Bayformers.

so how much is cameron paying you to suck his dick?

3D is so unbelievably over rated its ridiculous

Oh my god thank you! I was the only one of my friends who hated the movie, and not because it's absolutely terrible. It's because I can't understand why anybody gave it a four-star review. There are so many things about this movie that are done wrong, and the things that are done right aren't really all that amazing I thought. I mean we saw this kind of film making technology with Beowulf, so it's not like it's new, and it's not really much better. It seemed like James Cameron has turned into Michael Bay in his 12 years off, and just distracted everybody from all the flaws in the movie with pretty colors and explosions.

I have one point that you forgot to make in your article. There's very little oxygen on Pandora, this was stated in the first five minutes and we see many people suffocate throughout the movie, yet when Jake Sully first gets lost, he makes a torch and lights it with a match! How is that possible? Not to mention before he lights it he dips it in some random goo he finds. He doesn't know what that goo is! This is his first time out of the compound! How was he supposed to know it would work like lighter fluid and not simply soak his torch and make it inflammable?

...Let's face it, kids: All Avatar is when you get down to it, is Pocahontas' Smurfy Adventure more than it is Dances with Smurfs. The good news is that I will live long enough to see Rob's prediction that Avatar will be remembered as a total shit film. The bad news is that with my luck, that won't take too long to come to pass.

So much NERDRAGE!!!

I did happen to like the movie. Not the greatest, but not the worst by a long shot (I have seen Transformers 2 after all).
It was beautiful though and if Cameron has a knack for anything, it's awesome visuals and he delivers in spades.
A few points-
The unobtainium bothered me too until I thought about the actual elements. Have you actually seen the periodic table? Take a look at numbers 95 and on.. Americium? Einsteinium? Or my personal favorite, Califonium. Scientists are obviously not above giving shit goofy names, so I'll let this take a pass.
The cat people thing. Is this really an
issue for people or is just an outlet for their hatred of furries? They didn't even have fur. It was blue flesh. Didn't really bother me one way or the other. I've seen worse aliens.
Avatar actually makes me think a lot of Star Wars: A New Hope. Very obvious good guys and bad guys. Not the greatest acting or writing. Visuals that, at the time, blew your fucking mind.

As much as you guys continue to complain, I thought it was a solid movie. Nothing groundbreaking, but not as bad as I thought it would be.

I was expecting an entertaining movie and I got it. I need not analyze further than that. But if the sequels are more or less the same, then there'd be something to complain about. Sequels are about improving, not rehashing. But as far as this is concerned, it was worth my money. Seriously, I wasn't expecting The Matrix or anything like that.

"Avatar" will become the modern day equivalent of "Mr. Watson. Come Here. I need you."

Great review Rob. Helped me make up my mind if I will see this or not. That's all I want from reviews.

I think this movie deserves a F.A.Q. It is very entertaining, but incredibly stupid, perhaps even stupider than Transformers 2--at least, that movie was pro-technology. A rough draft:

* Why would someone use top-of-the-line technology to complain about technology?
** James Cameron does not understand irony, and cannot spell hypocrisy.

* Na'vis do, despite what our host says, respond to the first human attack. They fire hundreds of arrows at the helicopters, but barely scratch the armor. Their arrows, later, become superpowerful, as every one is, easily, able to penetrate through the shields and fuck with the helicopters in the final battle. Why is this so inconsistent?
** James Cameron could not properly express his neophobia if his movie were consistent.

* Jake Sully's Avatar is, directly, tied to his nervous system. He, however, is a cripple, meaning that the nerves in his legs and waist do not properly transmit signals to his brain or spinal cord. How, then, is his Avatar fully mobile?
** James Cameron does not understand the concept of a nervous system.

* Na'vi ride birds that cannot weigh more than a few hundred pounds. How are these birds able to lift and throw helicopters that weigh hundreds of tons?
** Birds can destroy airplanes by flying into their engines, so this make perfect sense!

* Humans are able to surpass the Na'vis' magical abilities with their technology--they, for example, have a 100% success rate at transferring minds, whereas the Na'vis are, only, 50% successful. Why, then, are we expected to believe that the Na'vis' magic is superior to man's technology?
**James Cameron believes that all technology, no matter how useful, is evil.

This is a crude superfluous version, but it is a rough draft.

Nail - Head - Collision

Yeeeah, "unobtainium" is actually a real word.

Cameron didn't just make that up for the movie.

Titanic had Kate Winslet naked, unless Avatar has Kate Winslet naked in 3D, it will never be as good as Titanic. ;-)

Can I just say that this is the best film review I've seen in forever?
I've been trying to explain the same plot to my friends for weeks, now! Avatar really is just Pocahontas and all of those other "save the tree/rainforest" movies!
Thank you for this review! ;D

Well, I have to agree with you Rob, it was a lot of sound and fury that ultimately meant jack squat. On the one hand, I can say that I saw it when it comes time to discuss, but on the other...I saw it. Ah well. Life goes on.

everyone was saying he stole his story line from other sci fi books an movies and now it practically reads like Pocahontas?

Yeah I literally JUST saw the movie and MY GOD was it preachy I was seriously expecting their military plan was going to be to throw blankets full of small pox on them at one point.

More for the F.A.Q:

* Unobtainium was the element in The Core!
** James Cameron is pedantic.

* Why did the movie end with a fistfight between two Marines?
** Every neophobic movie ends this way.

* Technophiles are supposed to be the bad guys, but the evil commander opposes excessive technology, and prefers his instincts. Why is he evil?
** He uses a giant robot at the end, and according to Cameron, anyone who uses any technology, except himself, is evil.

* Were the Na'vis Indian stereotypes?
** Yes, but they were, also, African stereotypes.

* Why were neophobic stereotypes supposed to be the sympathetic characters?
** Marines were unambiguously generically evil archetypes.

Thank you Rob for your review and your courage to go against the very comformist herd! So all my aprehensions about Avatar were confirmed and I don't have any intention in watching "Pocahontas'Blue Furry Fantasy in Space". Here in Chile, cinema ticket prices are veeeery expensive, thank you for save me a lot of much needed bucks.

A shame Cameron didn't give Zoe Zaldaña the chance to sing "Colors of the Wind" though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkV-of_eN2w

Rob, it's a pretty fair review, but honestly I don't think the story was AS bad as you're making it out to be nor was the acting as shitty as you were saying. Yes, it was cliche, but as I personally believe, every story this earth has been seen has been done to death with different variations. And they managed to make it interesting and engrossing - which is enough to qualify it as good.

I can't believe there's a reasonable review. I'm glad I had a movie pass. Not only was the story terribly predictable, but the dialogue was standard fare. Every word was known before it was said. We knew who would die when and how. Eh.

He followed formula. Lots of folks do it. That doesn't make it a bad movie either.

At least it was a pretty formula.

“…the valuable mineral -- whose worth is never explained…”

Perhaps I can explain the worth of this mineral more. Unobtanium is a very unique form of salt which is primarily used in food preparation and makes popcorn even more incredibly yummy. It may seem strange that people would go to such extremes to obtain this unique salt but the people in the future really really enjoy their popcorn.

I also have it on good authority that the plot in Avatar 2 will revolve around the fact that right before the humans were expelled from the planet one of the exploration groups found fields of luxurious blue popcorn that can only grow on Pandora, it seams that the popcorn is pollinated by the Na'Vi’s hair tentacles.

Somewhere in Hollywood, James Cameron is giving it to Michael Bay in the ass while they both moan about "KEWL GRAFIX".

When TF came out, it was just the other way around. TF2 was just the addition of the reach-around.

I really liked Avatar, I think it's a visual masterpiece. But I do agree with most of what you said. My biggest peeve was anti-human/American/military/Capitalist/technology message. I mean, seriously? I have to believe that we as a species will not behave that way by the time we make it to space (and have been continually shocked by how many people disagree with me). The whole story would have been improved by a huge margin had he simply evened out the good and evil on both sides.

But I haven't been surprised by a story for quite some time. I think the trend today with movies is style over substance. World-building overshadows everything else.

That's fortunate for me, because I personally like big worlds (like, I really enjoy all the Star Wars movies because I like that universe, not because I have any illusions about the brilliance of Jar Jar Binks), so I went to be transported and was.

I think Avatar will be remembered for the era it helped usher in, more than for its story, but I did enjoy it, and think that what Cameron did well, he did damn well.

As per his twitter, I am glad to see one yo mama comment from rob. I agree with the review. It's pretty. but only if you see it in IMAX with 3d, otherwise, the dances with wolves plot is unbearable. Also, i hope the natives have some kind of tentacle condom. they be sticking that shit in animals and plants and the ground and apparently each other in the deleted dvd scene. Historically Europe got syphilis from the Caribbean, is all i'm sayin.

Hmm, about the only thing I really agree with is about Avatar's length. The movie's too damn long. In the beginning, I found it enthralling as the sci-fi technology was introduced, but after the marines destroyed the big tree, I thought it dragged. Had the movie ended immediately after the tribe had booted Sully out (about forty or fifty minutes before the actual end), I would have viewed Avatar as a great film.

But James Cameron had to drag things out and have a giant, protracted showdown and so I merely thought it was a good movie. That the movie is formulaic doesn't bother me; virtually all movies are, to some extent, ripping off some other movie/ story. What matters to me is how the movie pulls off the formula, and I thought Avatar handled its natives versus colonist story fairly well. I was entertained, which is what really counts. It's no Star Wars, but it was fun.

I'm gonna start my comment by eating some much-deserved crow. There were a few "Avatar" discussions on this site prior to the flick's release in which I said that there was no way in Hell that the picture would turn a profit sufficient to justify further Cameron craziness down the line. I may even have said it would lose money.

I was wrong. Colossally wrong. This movie is raking it in hand over fist. Crow eaten. Now hopefully Cameron can make that "Battle Angel Alita" film he's been wanting to do for years.

That said, I have to agree with Rob's review on both fronts. It's a bad movie with a hackneyed story and a piss-poor script. But the 3-D spectacle. Oh God the 3-D spectacle. This is quite possibly the "Birth of a Nation" of mainstream digital 3-D. Of course, Griffith's love letter to the KKK still sort of holds up as a film if you can get over its reactionary politics and use of Wagner in an overtly racist context prior to the rise of Nazism. Time likely won't be so kind to "Avatar."

Despite seeing this bitch in IMAX 3-D, the script kept breaking the immersion for me. Every time someone said "unobtainium" I wanted to throw my arms up and say "oh what the fuck?!" And I actually lost my moviegoing composure when the Na'Vi priestess talked about "saving" Sigourney Weaver's consciousness in her avatar body. The use of the term "save" was so glaringly terrible coming from the mouth of a stone-age character referring to the transfer of information to an organic storage medium that the history of the line was instantly obvious:

Cameron hires a hack to write a script based on the original idea the former probably stole from a book he read as a kid. The hack puts that shit off until his deadline was deadly close. He writes the line thinking "I'll go back and fix the wording on the next draft." Oops, he forgets and the line ends up in the near final draft.

Cameron hands the screenplay to a script doctor and says "do your thing, pencilneck." Now here's where things get stupid. Cameron is notoriously contrary, confrontational, and hard to work with. He obviously doesn't give a shit about the script, but I bet he pretends to when some nobody tries to change something in it. He probably hires script doctors just to have people to drag into arguments. So the hapless dialogue polisher tries to change clunkers like "unobtanium" and "save" but eventually gives up in impotent frustration. Cameron gets the cheap victory he paid for and the movie's script stays dumb as Hell.

Well, thanks for making an attempt at a balanced review. However, I do think you are grading it a little harshly in some areas.

The plot was definitely disappointingly familiar. It bothered me throughout the movie. But I think it was executed smoothly. I still found myself caring about the characters and what happened to them. It did manage to reach me on an emotional level (at least a little -- I certainly wasn't all choked up like I was during the first 20 mins of Up). Sam Worthington's acting wasn't remarkable, but I think you are being unfair to call it terrible.

My other issue is that I feel you and many others are under-selling it visually. It isn't just a leap forward in the behind-the scenes tech, it was remarkable executed from a design standpoint. That world was incredibly immersive, despite the problems with biology, physics, etc. It displayed true artistry in its construction and it deserves respect in that regard.

A couple final thoughts about the movie's reception here. First, how many people were surprised by the plot of the original Star Wars trilogy? Why do you overlook the significant problems with the plot, characters, and science of those movies, but not here?

Second, how many people think District 9 wasn't also a very familiar plot with a masterful presentation? Why are the Prawns more acceptable from a design perspective than the Na'vi?

Now, I'm not trying to claim Avatar is better than Star Wars or District 9. I could watch those movies again and again (and have), while I'm not sure how many times I'll be able to sit down for Avatar in the years to come. I'm just thinking there's been a lot of loss of perspective in the rush to dislike this movie, and and I'm not sure why.

Anyway, TL;DR, I'm sure, but those are my thoughts.

I don't think there's anything wrong with a stereotypical plot, as long as that story is told well.

The fact that one knows how a story will end does not necessarily mean it's unenjoyable.

For example, everyone knows that Shrek and Fiona will end up living happily ever after, but no one resents the movie for it.

I'd agree with you on every point. Spot on. It truly IS a must-see, for the visual spectacle/3-D breakthroughs, but as all other movies advance to this level of cinematography, Avatar will be just a mediocre flick.

Great review, Bricken! I like being in agreement with others -- makes the world smooth.

I dunno if the plot or characters were bad per se. It's just that we'd seen them a billion times before. They're just dressed up and set in space. Then again, someone somewhere said that the same thing could be said of the original Star Wars films when they came out.

Plus Sigorney interestingly was reprising not Ripley, but Jane Goodall with cat people refugees.

Meanwhile, despite the cliche plot and characters, I really enjoyed the flora and fauna of the alien planet. It was almost as if Cameron was still doing nature documentaries, which honestly I kinda enjoy anyway. To me the story of scientists studying the alien ecosystem was interesting enough by itself.

you've hit the nail right on the head and i give you mad kudos for telling it like it is and not sucking james cameron's cock like all the critics out there.

i'm shocked you say one bad thing about avatar and you have 20+ fanboys trying to tell you that you are not human.

this film is nothing but a giant visual masterpiece and nothing else, i've seen it twice and i still don't see why people are saying its the next real big thing when it doesn't tell a real story, it's like the new star wars films, all style and no substance

As One Who Has Not (And May Not) see the film-

in response to the "turn off your brain" argument:
There is a difference between 'Suspension of Disbelief' and not bothering to think about anything but the shiny stuff in front of your face.

As One Who Works In The Film Industry (as an actor, production manager, sfx artist, makeup artist, propmaster etc.) In A Variety Of Roles-
in response to the Plot v. Pretty To Look at argument:
The visual element will be the only reason I see this film (if at all). Sometimes, we need to look at the pretty pictures and recognize the innovation required to create them. Especially if we are inclined to make pretty pictures of our own.
Even when the story is not worthy of the pictures.
But, goddammit sometimes it is beyond frustrating to observe incredible visual creations that are made less stunning, are bogged down, etc; by a lack of regard for storytelling.
Especially when there is clearly no lack of funding.

Really? You spend a godzillion dollars to make a film that may or may not (the point is that the possibility exists because you have the cash) revolutionize the way films are made...
and you can't throw down a few more bones to make the story worth hearing?

i dont knw about trilogy , but eps3 pretty much made me think of the Dark Lord in a heroic light , remember Frank" Punisher " Castle did the same thing [ took vengeance / tried to save / tried to avenge his loved ones]

Damn that is right up there with wolvie and the cause of his eternal (and rightly so) Grudge with ole silversamurai .

so you guys better get ur facts straight , Anakin CANT BE EVIL someone who does all that to save their beloved IS NOT A BADDIE . if they were then you would have to toss old Chromedome Silver Surfer as a VILLAN forever as well .

BTW : TR i have to say this is the biggest backlash i have ever seen since i have been on this site O_o

Bookmark to Topless Robot removed.

In regards to everything you've said in your review, you are probably right. But I'll share my little observations: I brought my girlfriend whos never wants to see sci-fi because english is her second language, and she loved it and was moved by it, saying it was like a fairy-tale to her. She got it, and could appreciate it. Saw it again with my family because they were interested. They are still talking about how much they enjoyed it emotionally and how immersive it was. For once, I didnt have to spend an hour trying to explain the plot of the movie in a futile attempt to justify why they should enjoy it and why I brought them at all... and with more "interesting" sci-fi movies, I almost always end up doing that without fail. I got some people who are normally biased against sci-fi and fantasy to go see it and they enjoyed it. What if the movie gets them to have a new appreciation for sci-fi? I wont argue with that.

To us nerds who can enjoy the pleasures of some really deep and interesting sci-fi, this movie is boring no doubt. But, in a way, I've lived vicariously through those Ive seen it with. I knew what was going to happen, I knew what the characters would do; but I still was drawn into the movie and cared for the characters in it. Maybe I'm not as 'cultured' as the others reading this, but I enjoyed the hell out of it along with apparently most other people in the theater.

Do you have to be elitist to have a valid opinion about it? Not at all. It's not always about getting all the mental gears turning: its about getting the right gears turning. The characters are likable, you get drawn into their beautiful world, you empathize the shock, sorrow, and determination of the Navi in face of the enemy which are necessarily exaggerated (honestly, it would detract from the purpose of where the movie is directing your emotions if you had a more ambiguous enemy). Its a simple forumla, and doesnt require alot of analysis (someone said "turn your brain off") but its palpable and if you drink what its offering you can actually feel with the movie and enjoy it.

And on last thing: so what if it is Pocahontas? Ive never watched Pocahontas. I know plenty of people who wouldn't go randomly watch a Disney movie. I know the story of course but seriously... Its not like its a plot Ive sat to watch time and time again. Can't speak for anyone else though.

Wow. Did Cameron offer you as much money as he paid the producers of the 'Bones' episode 'King of Kong' for you to run an advert for his new movie?

I just figured out why I hate (That's right, HATE) this movie. It is because they actually thought they were making a really good, well thought out movie. If Cameron had embraced the badness of this script and how bad his actors were it could have been fun. But no. He thought this movie would make people really think about themselves. IMO.

Treasure of the Four Crowns was the greatest 3D movie of all time, yo. Call me when that shit gets a re-mastered blu-ray release.

Forewarning, I forgo reading the 100+ comments left before me due to time constraints this morning... Thereby, I am just going to leave my two cents worth and make a hasty retreat.

The 3D visuals were spectacular (especially in IMAX). Cameron put tons of thought into his angles and colors used for the use of this tech. My only gripe is that for the love scene that the background was in 3D... Not Zoe's and Sam's characters. I only say this due to the many under 10 kids that I saw in the theater.

Storyline actually had the same overall "moral" as Ferngully... Take care of our planet before it dies off. Only this time it had a hint of capitalism in it as well. But, presented in a more futuristic fashion with really bad voice acting by Sam Worthington.

The running time... Meh. In agreement with Rob, it could have been cut back by at least 20 minutes. I had to sit through it several times with my husband. I would like my life back after the 2nd time due to seeing it in IMAX and the full frontal view of furry crotches.

Soundtrack, I hate the end theme. Love the actual score for the movie.

Rob, if it hasn't been said previously... The worth of the ore that the company was going after was mentioned. It was when the corp guy was holding it up to Weaver's character in human form. I think it was something in the 1k's mark.

I'm surprised at how controversial this movie has turned out to be. People either love it or hate it, no in between. I saw it in IMAX 3D and I have to agree that, while it was absolutely beautiful, the plot was a bit tiresome. It had a lot of cool elements though, enough to keep me entertained --- although not for the entire 2 hours and 42 minutes of the film.

I wish there had been a better look at the Na'Vi. I thought it was kind of interesting that they plug into a network that has somehow evolved into a planet but it leaves a lot unanswered and untold.

I'm not sure what Cameron was going for other than trying to make another HUGE! EPIC! MOVIE!

"The planet is called "Pandora" and the valuable mineral -- whose worth is never explained -- is called "unobtanium." There is no way James Cameron didn't write this shit in the fourth grade".

Rob, you still reek of Cameron hate.

This is directly from the Wikipedia entry for Unobtainium, a word that has existed since the 50's. Also the link is below:

Unobtainium is a humorous name for any extremely rare, costly, or physically impossible material needed to fulfill a given design for a given application, usually in fiction or thought experiments. The properties of any particular unobtainium depend on the intended use. For example, a pulley made of unobtainium might be massless and frictionless. However, if used in a nuclear rocket, unobtainium would be light, strong at high temperatures, and resistant to radiation damage.
The word unobtainium is a portmanteau derived from unobtainable + -ium (the suffix for a number of chemical elements). Other variations include unobtanium and unattainium with the same meaning. Another largely synonymous term is wishalloy,[1] although the sense is often subtly different in that a wishalloy usually doesn't exist at all, whereas unobtainium may merely be unavailable. The term handwavium can also be used to indicate a material that probably cannot even in principle be real. The name unobtainium also closely resembles the systematic element name for undiscovered elements that have an atomic number of 100–199. Like unobtainium, these all have 5 syllable names beginning with "un" and ending in "ium". The term was, however, in use long before the IUPAC systematic names.

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

Unobtanium is also a MacGuffin. Who knows what's so important about the Maltese Falcon? What's in the silver briefcase in Ronin?

Rob, all true on Avatar. And also beside the point. Avatar is a proof of concept. Terminator was stunning cinema in its day. Now, it's hokey, we realize Ahnuld can't act, the special effects suck, and the plot has so many holes and loopholes...

In the end, Avatar will earn more money than God, and will not stand the test of time. What James Cameron movie has (besides Aliens perhaps)?

I think people are disappointed that Avatar doesn't measure up to the standards of his previous efforts. I am only a little disappointed, because it sure doesn't. Cameron certainly is not as strong a writer as he is a director. But the only wheel he was trying to reinvent was movie technology, and he certainly succeeded there.

Christ, everyone acts as if they never enjoyed a mindless summer blockbuster before.

I like Avatar, but I can't argue that, without it's special effects, it would be a very substandard movie.

I guess I disagree with you, Rob Bricken.

I'm a little new to this...am I supposed to tell you to screw off because we have different opinions? Or should I try to come up with some more personal insults? I think I'm supposed to stop coming to this site now that we don't see eye to eye on something, but...I dunno, I kinda WANT to keep coming here. Is that OK?

I will admit to not having seen avatar yet so everyone can bash my opinion as they see fit but i have always been consistant in what i look for in a movie. Without stepping into the theater i gather everyone here agrees that it is mostly for the visuals that you should see this for. Should i plan on bringing a "book on tape" on my ipod and "watch". The movie and enjoy a real story at the same time? I also. Cant get past the preachy part that everyone seems to be talking about. In the past 10 years i cant think of a movie that pissed me off more than happy feet. I did not expect an ultra left wing capitolism is bad ooooooh watch out the penguin plight is the fault of the evil global companies when i took my kids to see it. Not only did it piss me off that it was global warming crqp and anti industry stuff in a kids movie (i dont think they belong together) but at the end the happy penguin it dancing along with a fucking tracking device packpak surgically implanted on him. Wtf?! My 11 yr old son wanted to see avatar so i let him go with friends. He said it was ok, not as stupid as crystal skull but cooler to look at. All i can think as i read these comments is, whata a sad day we live in where story really doesnt matter anymore. Up was visually beautiful and the story was even better. Wall-e had no dialog for part of the film and was enchanting. Inglorious basterds had me laughing my ass off. There are still great storytellers...and great stories to be told. But, in this day of reality shows where scripts and acting are no longer a worthwile commodity we accept shit and find ways to make it palatable. Stock up on the ketchup people because as long as you accept salsbury steak and treat it like filet, thats all youre going to get. Remember, 2001 changed sci fi movies forever and there were no computer effects at all. BTW i will apologize for typos etc in advance before the vultures decend. This was from my blackberry as i sit in traffic

"Unobtanium?" SERIOUSLY? My friends and I have been using that name derisively for years for anything fictional that's supposed to be indestructible. It's like adamantium, only lamer.

I haven't seen this yet, and I think now I don't really want to. Argh the moral dilemma of rewarding twaddle so I can see eye-candy.

Crap.

Pretty much summed up my feelings about the movie there.

@everyone who talks about the HYPE ,

think about this : we waited 10 years for Freddy vs Jason
13 years for Aliens versus Predator
21 years for GIjoe
and 11 years for TF

two of them ended up being cheaply made (fvj, avp) ; under 2 hrs with the worst writing imaginable .

TF was legos on steroids
JOE was a flat chested girl playing a hotty and complaining that she had to wear prostetics *look it up*

but both of them were worth the wait (to the general public), giving u more bang for your buck and living up to the hype (2h 30m with no potty break )

so what if u say it was 30 minz to long , compared to normal films that have 1H45 and plot holes galore and then said film beats a movie the REAL PUBLIC fell in love with in awards , really says something about class and taste in Cinema .

JAMES SHOULD HAVE HAD THE FORESIGHT TO TOSS IN AN INTERMISSION for us who were holding out for damn near 3hrs .

I think any decent geek would shit his pants at Avatar's special effects, and those that bash the movie on the merit of its story just doesn't see the point.

After a skim through of these comments, I'm glad to see that a great deal of the nerd race does not rate Avatar in terms of its poor storytelling. However, I'm surprised that no-one picked up on this (taken from my full avatar rant):
The helicopter/plane thingy pilot. Now, we are led to believe that the humans (both the coporate lot and the military) are both firmly under the impressions that the Na'vi are savages, no better than animals, and therefore relatively unimportant (well, important enough to create avatars to co-operate with them, but you get my point). All the humans are under this impression, apart from the sciency lot who feel compassion with the Na'vi because well, they become them from time to time. The pilot has fuck all to do with them; she just takes them place to place. But as if their opinions are fucking contagious, our woman on the inside develops a conscience, just as they're blowing up the sacred tree. She has absolutely no reason to cease her assualt and all reason dictates that she should be in the same mindset as the rest of the blood-thirsty humans. Then, when she does fuck off, no-one seems to notice, not even her own gun crew! There were five of those plane things firing at the tree; we're led to believe that either a) no-one noticed or b) punishment for disobiedience in the military just doesn't happen in the future. We see her later serving hot drinks and light refreshments to a guard and, judging by his response, this is a regular occurance...for a FUCKING PILOT. I couldn't have been happier when she blew the fuck up.

I see the point of watching something just because of its visual merits. What bothers me is that hollywood acts as though that is enough. If they give you an amazing effect it negates the need for dialog. I know there are firefly bashers out there (or maybe its the other projects they dont like). But can you imagine if serenity was done with that kind of budget... In 3D? What if you could take toy story (or which ever pixar was your favorite) and reduce the animation to hand drawn. Nothing different than the movies that disney put out for decades. The story would still captivate. I just simply hate lowering my standards to where it seems you get either story or effects. It seems sadly fitting that south park reaired the china episode last night. When they show the stormtrooper at the end getting raped i finally felt as though revenge for jar jar had been taken

Once again, Rob proves TR can't outgrow it's fanboy immaturity.

/sad!

My cousin (and this one's provisional on him not messing with me) informed me that the mineral is acutally a room temp superconductor with a hideously long name, and so the trope of unobtanium was shorthand that the company director was simply using it to disparage all that stupid science stuff. Take that as you will.

Think of the Na'Vi as a geneticly engineered race and the hair as USB slots and it works out much better. Trust me.

Also you missed that Weaver possibly carried the entire film by simply outacting the rest of the cast. Who knew she was still good?

I believe what needs to happen is that some of the people here need to look at the definition of opinion. I will kindly post it here for all to see:
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

NOBODY'S opinion is fact, trying to push it as that on others is ridiculous and pointless. If your opinion lines up with a fact, such as Earth rotating around the Sun, something known to be true, then it is an objective opinion, and thus a factual statement. If you believe the Sun revolves around the Earth, that would be an opinion.

Sharing an opinion is fine, encouraged even, but telling someone their opinion is wrong is outrageous when the topic at hand is subjective, not objective: "not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased."

To one person, the story can be atrocious and horrible, not worth watching for even one minute; to another it can be wonderful and amazing, worth watching multiple times.

Most stories have been done hundreds of times, if not thousands. To enjoy it one movie/book/etc in a particular setting and not another is ones right, but to say that another is wrong for doing the same is illogical.

If you can only enjoy a particular story one time, OK, if not, OK. Do not tell the other that he or she is wrong for doing so.

To say someone is a simpleton for enjoying a similar plot is ridiculous, it does not mean they are a simpleton, it means they enjoy the plot. The person who slandered the other, by definition, is the simpleton for being ignorant and foolish to think that others opinions on subjective matter is incorrect but theirs is.

Saw the movie last night and here´s my two cents:

The film was, indeed, breathtakingly beautiful technically speaking. Mr. Cameron made this movie exactly when it had to be made. The characters, the scenery, the effect, everything is top notch. Plotwise, it was merely OK. It was entertaining and I never got bored, but the plot twists were as predictable as I thought, the message was REALLY heavyhanded and the whole story was developed in the cheesiest way possible. the score was top notch, but Leona´s credit song was just harmless, forgettable pop.

Overall, an entertaining movie, but not special or with any lasting appeal whatsoever.

My two cents on Avatar:
1. Midway through Jake Sully's romp in the forest of the tall blue cat people, I went to the men's room (something I rarely do as I can usually manage to hold it in at the movies). When I came back, I found I hadn't missed anything.
2. When the Yankee soldiers got attacked by the hammerhead rhinoceri, I found myself flashing back to those Saturday afternoons sitting in front of the TV when Tarzan would call the elephants in to stomp the evil white hunters.
Just sayin', thass all.

My future "Avatar" defnition submission to UrbanDictionary:

Avatar is the layman's term for James Cameron's epic "Dances with Wolves.....IN SPAAAAAACE!!!!!!"

"Dances with Wolves....IN SPAAAAAACE!!!!!!" serves a tech demo reel of the future of visual effects to smart people, and as the best thing since sliced bread to not so smart people. It also shows that chicks can act as GC characters.

what a bunch of nerds

i haven't seen it yet, and everyone who has has told me they loved it. look we've all had a few movies in our lives that we defend because we had some sort of connection with them. but when you think about the amount of money involved with avatar and how much was spent on FX, you gotta wonder....was it worth it. that's what i'll try and figure out. but my gut is telling me that i'll perfer dances with wolves.

also i heard that the evil marines were actually mercenaries.

also rob doesn't just like anime and doctor who OKAY! he likes zombies and he-man and atari and monkeys and star wars and badly written erotica. and goddammit so do i!

I agree with most of the review with one glaring omission -- a big fat heaping helping of steaming crow.

After so many posts about how Cameron had misjudged the market and how Avatar was going to be a financial black hole of epic proportions, four number 1 weekends and $400 million+ domestic should warrant at least a "my bad." Suck it up and take yer medicine, man.

(Also, before you write off all of the humans as baddies, there's Joel Moore, Sigourney Weaver and (most importantly as an Avatar-free ass-kicker) Michelle Rodriguez. Give the girl her props for stepping up when it counted.)