Pasidon's Critic(al) Review- Avatar
#1
Posted 18 December 2009 - 09:29 AM
Let's begin... ... TRASH! 3 hours of boldly predictable outcomes, corned dialog, stereotypical plot designs, and we can't forget 2-dimensional antagonists. This movie is the most over-rated piece of trash since Jurassic Park 2. And maybe I would of shed a tear if I cared for all the characters dieing. But all the main characters are rude / stupid. The natives are just clueless the whole time, so no sympathy for the Blue Man Group civilization. Whenever something seems insignificant, a nice little surrounding benefactor adding to the magic of the film, they force it to become significant and make the whole thing seem... well... predictable. Wildlife is cool. Just that they only bring them up to contribute to the final conflict in the movie. You know who's going to prevale... I know you know. I mentioned stereotypical plot design, right? The focus point ALWAYS prevails... Don't act surprised.
Yes... the animation was good. But can it be given credit as making the movie worth while? They spent like 5 years working on the CGI. Nicely done... if you like seeing 50,000,000 dollars burnt on fake scenery and blue people. I loved the scenery actually. If only the story could be written by a guy who doesn't take 15 years to write 'unimaginative imagination'. And take 5 years to make animation that can be done in a few months in these days. Get a grip Cameron.
And the main character... boy. What a moron. He's fine in real life. But from the first minute he gets into his avatar, he turns moronic. The blue people suited him perfectly with the nickname, "moron". He struts around like he's not in mortal danger and disregards what is actually happening around him, at first. He gets smarter as the story goes on, but it was just to late for me. ... Just couldn't like him.
The main 'bad guy'. The military guy with the scars. Now that guy was awesome. I was rooting for him and the marines all the way. And the action scenes were pretty cool. Mainly can be described as stereotypical... but I enjoyed them, I guess. And here's a hot tip: there's a knife fight! I was gitty for that one and only awesome moment.
If you want to see blue people, get on YouTube or go to Kentucky... don't get rip-offed by Cameron and his 15 year breakthrough of the same old, same-old.
#2
Posted 18 December 2009 - 11:28 AM
And bam, there goes all the credibility of this review.Let's begin... ... TRASH!
Well, he isn't in mortal danger, just his avatar is.He struts around like he's not in mortal danger
I thought the movie was great. It really takes you to another world for a few hours. I think you just had the wrong expectations.
Einstein: "We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
#3
Posted 18 December 2009 - 11:46 AM
#4
Posted 18 December 2009 - 02:11 PM
#5
Posted 18 December 2009 - 02:28 PM
#6
Posted 18 December 2009 - 06:23 PM
JP2 is a good film. It has aspects which I like better than the first such as it feels natural, instead of just dinos out to kill you. In fact, you're saving the dinos in 2. The bad thing is no Alan Grant and maybe its slightly diluted.This movie is the most over-rated piece of trash since Jurassic Park 2.
#7
Posted 18 December 2009 - 09:02 PM
The scenery was absolutely epic. Incredible CGI and beautifully-constructed world and society, though the Na'vi do draw heavily from Native American, Mongol and central African cultures. But everything has to come from somewhere, so I guess that's okay.
#8
Posted 18 December 2009 - 09:46 PM
#9
Posted 18 December 2009 - 10:00 PM
#10
Posted 18 December 2009 - 11:36 PM
So... great films in need of buying this year: Let the Right One In, Triangle, Where the Wild Things Are and Avatar.
Edited by OmegaBolt, 18 December 2009 - 11:37 PM.
#11
Posted 18 December 2009 - 11:39 PM
I'd agree that the end was a bit disappointing, actually, but that's Hollywood for you. They ruined the end of I Am Legend too, an otherwise awesome film.
#12
Posted 19 December 2009 - 02:51 AM
Careful. This link is DANGEROUS. Do NOT click it. This one, however, is fine.
I had the meaning of life in my signature, but it exceeded the character limit.
#15
Posted 20 December 2009 - 02:27 AM
I knew from the beginning how things would end up, but seeing movies like these are more about the characters interacting and the amount of fiction weaved into the world. And the world is certainly a well embroidered one.
If there is one thing Cameron is picky about then it has to be that the world makes sense. There were no logical holes as far as i can see, beyond the lack of information on the avatar-technology wireless connection . People call the first hour a biology documentary, and that works for me, because a 3hour action-movie would have been extremely dull and damn hard to fill with wonders.
But this is a movie you go to see because of the graphics, and the graphics are near flawless. I never really had any trouble with the uncanny valley on any of the navi, which is a miracle in itself. That mocap system Cameron used on this movie is going to give us some very fascinating movies in the future. the amount of nature is incredible, i have no idea what programs they used to build it, but it was not paint-effects from maya.
Now the only thing I'm hoping for is that James does not use 10-15 years getting Battle Angel done, OR censoring the blood and brainsplatter down.
"I give you private information on corporations for free and I'm a villain. Mark Zuckerberg gives your private information to corporations for money and he's 'Man of the Year.'" - Assange
#16
Posted 20 December 2009 - 03:19 AM
The film was complete and utter tosh, to be fair. I concur with Pasidon pretty much wholeheartedly. Apocalypto meets The Last Samurai. Fifteen years, and this was the best he could come up with? Please. The film and a couple of cool points, but that doesn't detract from the blandness and general disinterest and dislike of the characters. I could tell it was going to suck just by seeing the advertising poster, and by God was I proven right.
Graphically excellent, to be sure, but the plot and delivery were awful throughout. Give me a movie solely depicting Pandora's ecosystem and Na'vi culture, that'd rule. But Avatar as it was presented was tosh.
#17
Posted 20 December 2009 - 04:47 AM
My favourite quote was when he was talking about the biggest predator in the sky and he said "If you are the biggest cat in the sky, why look up. At least that was the theory."
Thought it sucked there was no scene on how he subdued the beast, I guess it could be argued as unnecessary though.
#18
Posted 20 December 2009 - 06:14 AM
Excellent question. I debated this with myself. It's worth seeing on the big screen once, I guess. And I say it is in 3-D. But movies put stuff in because they know it's going to be 3-D. 5 Years ago, maybe they didn't plan on it, but I caught a few moments were some 'I meant it to be cool in 3-D' moments. It's an extra few smacks in most places for the stupid 3-D glasses (buy a ticket to the 2-D and bring your own 3-D glasses. I did it) but it makes the visuals all the more better. ... I actually forget it's in 3-D sometimes and never notice the popping. Oh well. Still worth the visuals.Should I see this movie in 2D or 3D?
#19
Posted 20 December 2009 - 04:28 PM
Henry Miller, Tropic of Cancer
#20
Posted 22 December 2009 - 07:03 AM
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users