RalphDamiani

On the subject of the Na'vi being humanoid, I think it's pretty clear their design was deliberately constructed in order to make the audiences relate to them on an emotional level. They have big eyes, the same expression ranges and body language we have. Notice how they seem to kiss, just like humans, in order to bond, while they could employ a far more logical way to connect, since they developed an specialized organ for that. There was no attempt there to be realistic whatsoever, just a cosmetic concern to make them outworldly beautiful, but still fairly human.

Keep in mind most of the audience will not question the suspension of disbelief to that extent. It worked for Star Trek and Star Wars, and a number of other fantasy universes. On the other hand, you can't have a love story gone unquestioned if your romantic interest looks like a far more believable alien, such as Giger's Alien or perhaps the arachnids from Starship Troopers.

You could also argue the film didn't need romance to work, and I would love if the general audience hadn't been conditioned, in decades of filmmaking, to expect this formula. But that's how Hollywood works and has always worked. Most successful scripts are different versions of the Hero's Journey, with a fair share of romance, one or two plot twists and the triumph of good over evil. You can't blame Cameron for that.

By the way, for the sci-fi geeks, Ain't it Cool has a very interesting (and well written) article about the science of Pandora: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/43440

I'm sick of anti-white/anti-west propaganda trash films thinly veiled as "fantasy films" such as this that Hollywood keeps spewing out.

Oh, the big bad EVIL AMERICANS killing the Natives...gee...typical.

The analogy is so blatant.

Err, you do realise this is an american movie made by an american director? I believe you're missing his point. It's surely an anti-war movie, very in touch with everything that is happening around the world. And all the "good" human characters are still americans who have come to realise mass slaughter is not the answer to settle any ideological conflict. Some don't even undergo this change of character, being "good" from the time they appear on screen. I think Cameron did a good job at showing different points of view despite of racial boundaries.

If anything, this is a very pro-west movie, in the sense marines are portrayed like terrorists, killing civilians and destroying their homeland in order to make a statement. And what actually moves the plot forward is how these terrorists are disrupting the balance of Pandora.

There are though, some Bush era references (terror against terror). They're anti-west, if you sympathize with authorities waging wars for profit (oil - unobtanium), which is also another form of terrorism, as implied by the script.

By the way, if you require proof of Cameron's skills as director, notice how every single element of Pandora that is introduced in Jake's journey in the first act is later used somehow to enhance the story. Nothing is inserted just for the sake of "looking cool", from the technology to the biology he comes across. Compare this to directors like Michael Bay and McG and their poor attempts of "epicness" by making things louder and bigger and you'll notice how things are tied together far more professionally.

If it's "good" or "bad" is a matter of personal taste. Now, a movie can be technically outstanding -and- substancial, and yet not reach you on any emotional level. If you're a fan of action movies, Avatar is no Terminator. If you like comedy, there's almost no moment of laughter, it's certainly no True Lies. If you like blockbusters, it's no Transformers, there's nothing there just for the sake of grandness. If you like romance, it's certainly no Titanic. In that sense, it's very unique and requires you to go watch it with an open mind.

This is a movie that requires you to feel immersed, like any good fantasy movie. If there's nothing in your personal life experience that makes you step into Jake's Avatar shoes (or lack thereof), you'll probably find it dull and uninteresting. However, it is not bad filmmaking and it is not morally irrelevant. It's just difficult for you to relate to it. Regardless, even if you dislike the adventure, it still carries very contemporary political and ecological messages, which makes it worthwhile for the general audience.

PS: Oh, yes, you can sign me in as a fan if sequels are made. They're well deserved.

I couldn't disagree more with the OP. Sure you could watch this for the outstanding CG, but that's completely beyond the point of this movie. It wasn't made to be just eyecandy. James Cameron is one of the few directors these days employing special effects to actually tell a story. It's not Transformers or 2012, and 20 minutes into the movie I completely forgot Pandora isn't a real world, or that those Avatars weren't people in blue makeup, or that nothing in there actually existed. I was so involved with the characters and the Na'vi's culture, with Jake's journey of discovery, that Avatar could have been a classic Pixar animation, and I would still have liked it.

Yes, Jake -does- act like a moron, or like a child and a great chunk of the movie -has- to be spent on his personal growth as both himself and the audience are gradually exposed to Pandora and its marvels. That's character development, the whole drama that adds conflict to the plot, something that would be sorely missing, if, say, Dr. Grace was the protagonist.

Now, one could argue that nothing in that script is original, and I think even James Cameron would have to agree. He admitted most of it was based in every single sci-fi story he read as a child, and it does borrow from many classic movies and westerns. However, that is also beyond the point! One must judge the story for how well it works onscreen and the relevance of its messages. And boy, is it relevant these days. It is actually disturbing how someone can "side" with the marines after watching them taking down the natives gigantic home tree (a clear analogy to the World Trade Center), how you can sympthatize with their racial slurs, and sheer ignorance for anything other than their greedy purposes and hormone driven military attitude. How can you push for characters that are indifferent to all the destruction they cause in a land that is not theirs? Doesn't it all sound so modern and familiar?

If you go watch this movie and leave the screening without being touched by at least one of its many contemporary anti-imperialism, pacifist and ecological warnings, you're probably missing the whole purpose of this movie. Another sad outcome of the Bush "terror against terror" era, as implied in the movie itself.

Oh yes, you are correct! I should have said "fountain" probably. The general ideal remains though! A fountain with the above themes would seem more suitable than a bowl of water. I keep picturing all those parched elves sneaking past Galadriel to drink from her precious mirror despite of the "Don't touch the water!" warning.