___AVATAR Review Thread___

300 million worldwide in 5 days.......

3rd biggest Tuesday ever in the States - bearing in mind most of the east coast is snowed in.......pretty impressive.
 
It was pretty much the aspect ratio for IMAX (4:3 ish, although am sure someone will correct me on that :)) However when we saw it (the one that broke), it didn't actually fill the screen, it seemed to have been zoomed in slightly, so there was a border all around the picture.

Not sure why this was, whether it lessened the dizzyness inducing of it, or whether its because of the 3D projection system (but am pretty sure when I saw Christmas Carol, it stretched the entire width of the screen)...dunno if someone else could comment, if its the same at all showings?
 
I thought it was a phenomenal, near flawless film and I am not easily impressed by films.

The visuals were beyond incredible, a quantum leap for cinema. The 3D was in no way gimmicky or distracting but helped immerse you further in the world. The planet looked so, so real and absolutely beautiful. The scope of Cameron's imagination is laid bare for all to see and it's stunning. I had to pinch myself several times, dumfounded at the reality that the majority of the film is CGI:eek: The colours, the creatures, the Na'vi - just superb.

The attention to detail is phenomenal - from the Na'vi rituals/language/culture to the visual detail of every tree, every blade of grass and so on. Not one thing struck me as looking fake. It looked like David Attenborough had shot scenes on a distant planet somewhere. Cameron left no stone unturned in his quest to create a whole new world, like nothing we've seen before. Some of the lanRABcapes and colours used are breathtaking.

Some critics have criticised the storyline for being too formulaic but I found it compelling. It was engaging enough for me; I genuinely cared about Pandora's fate - and the fates of Jake and Netreyi(?). Some of the characters could be seen as a tad one-dimensional, particularly the bad guys (perhaps the hardcore military man was a little too heartless), but let's be honest - a lot had to be squeezed into the film and I think they struck a perfect balance. I might add the acting was superb throughout, at not one point did I think to myself "wooden!" about anyone.

The slightly underdeveloped characterisation is a minute flaw in what was certainly the best cinematic experience of my life - I went with a group of 10 and all of us were bowled away by it, some of us shaking with it all! You come out wanting to tell everyone how insane it is.

It is a wholly immersive film that, despite nearly being 3 hours long does not drag. You find yourself not wanting it to end and much of it takes your breath away. I fully expect it to surpass Titanic's performance worldwide.

A mindblowingly stunning film, something you have to see to believe; IMO it will take cinema about 3-5 years to catch up with this.

9/10
 
no need, sam worthington is a decent enough actor, he convinced me :)

seriously, how many paraplegic leading men are there in hollywood?

ps - in the scene when he is wheeling around in just shorts, did anybody notice how wasted away his legs looked? i imagine that was done using CGI
 
Is this just a typical American yeehaw let's shoot things blockbuster or is there a decent story behind it? I'm not impressed by the trailers so far, the characters all look like cliches.
 
Not entirely but is it wrong to ask for a bit of originality from a medium you love?
Especially when a director recycles their own work and passes it off as 'game changing'. Story always matters over technology.
 
Prior to seeing this film Id heard GREAT reviews, crap reviews and people say there were racist/imperialist overtones to it...

Having seen this movie now I think I can sum up my feelings in one sucinct phrase:



MEH!!!:mad:


.... sorry, but the 3D effects did not blow me away! At all!
Ive seen a few films in 3D before (and I wonder if some of the viewers of avatar have seen them before) and whilst I think the 3D was undoubtedly BETTER than we've seen up to now, I wouldnt describe it as earth shatteringly amazing.

Its good, but not spectacular IMO.

For me there was not the OMFG "WOW":eek::eek::eek:
the first time I saw the opening scene of Star Wars as a kid (and in fact the entire film still looks impressive despite the fact that it is now 33 years old). Or the jaw dropping moment you first saw dinosaurs in Jurassic Park (and indeed the entire film, that movies was such a leap-and-bounRAB CGI film, and it had a good story too!!) Or even the many delights of the LOTR trilogy (Im particularly thinking of the Gollum character, or the incredible fight scenes in LOTR3).

I was chatting to someone recently and they said to rejig these classic films into 3D- now that would be something else (esp Jurassic Park and LOTR):p:p
 
I was gonna mention that about his legs. Once again, if it was CGI, not some sort of starvation diet, legs only :D, it was certainly very realistic, just like the rest of the film.
 
I agree, I felt the same after watching too. It is visually stunning and left me feeling high for the whole weekend. My only regret is not watching it in the Imax, the small screen I saw it on didnt do it any justice.
 
Film itself - 10/10, honestly, one of the best films I've ever seen.

IMAX experience - 1/10, I had a headache from the mishaped screen, my 9 year old brother actually puked from it... and the que to get in the IMAX was dreadful, it was like a riot when the doors opened.
 
Nah, i loved it.

It's not an amazingly original story, but it's well told. The people who perceive it as having a weak story are mostly just the people who were intent on hating it from the outset and it's the only thing they can complain about. I'm sure i'll get some flack for writing that, but.....i couldn't care less tbh. They're entitled to their opinion, as are we that loved it.
 
Ha! That is a WEAK defense. "Everything has been done so the trick is to make it look new." Rubbish.

This was a tired old storyline with tired old characters. It took a morally ambiguous and complex debate on mining and industrialization and simplified it to a Hollywood classic good vs. evil. Anyone who thinks this must be a psychopathic militarist, and anyone who thinks this are rational scientists. Perhaps the political agenda would have felt less rammed down my throat if it wasn't, like WALL*E, such a contradiction. The sheer amount of energy that film would have needed to create, produce and distribute would be astronomical. Bit rich to take such a high ground then. It wouldn't have mattered so much if it had anything profound to say, but it didn't.

The characters. The main character had NOTHING about him to make him interesting, and his "undercover but then realizes his prejudice was misguided blah blah blah" has been done over and over and there was nothing new here. The female character got extremely boring, and there was no depth to her beyong babbling on about nature and the connections etc. the whole way through. The colonel was equally uninteresting, being the same template character used dozens of times in films like District 9. The enemy is a way of thinking, a culture, but they need a human face, so they give it to him. Lazy.

The casting, equally uninspiring. Worthington was bland, Weaver was lazy casting (i am sure there is more than one 'tough gal' actress out there. Its like a producer thinking "hmm, we need a wise old sorcerer. How about Ian McKellen?".

Visually stunning there is no getting away from that. But too much of everything else was sacrificed to make us go ooo and ahhhh. If all one can say about a film is that its technologically impressive and it still wins oscars and gets critical praise, we're in a sad state of affairs. A real let down.
 
Back
Top