well, as i was one of the few people left on Earth not to have seen this Avatar movie i decided to give it a go at the weekend. there are many, many people out there who consider this film to be "the greatest of all time". if you are one of them then please stop reading now and move onto something else that you might agree with.
i tried watching the film on DVD on one of those huge LCD screen things. the short version is that it was switched off after 90 minutes as the whole thing just gave me one big headache.
if ever there was a case of smoke and mirrors being used to convince the masses to the greatest extent possible then it must be in how the world at large appears to have accepted that Avatar features "groundbreaking visual effects". it does not. the CGI effects on display here range from average to poor. the backgrounds and creatures finish a poor second to previous CGI festivals on film - Disney's Dinosaur, for instance, made some ten years ago ("when the technology did not exist" in the words of Mr James Cameron) has a far superior look and feel.
as for these "avatar" creatures themselves, dear me! the ones for the lead actors look like rought draft animation things - the one for Sigourney Weaver in particular is annoying to watch. her "blue avatar" thingie has a grin permanently plastered to her face, as if she is doing a bizarre tribute to Karen Allen's awful performance in Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull.
plot and story-wise, well, not watching the whole thing i can't comment for sure, but the whole thing struck me as going absolutely nowhere fast. if by 90 minutes the film has not got any points of interest worth following then it is unlikely to do so. considering this is a film from the man who gave us Terminator and Aliens - two films that were compelling viewing even if they had no fancy special effects - it's perhaps the most disappointing part of the whole thing.
the main character - Jake, i think his name is? - is very badly presented and developed. more than once, for no apparent reason in the context of the onscreen story development, you seem to cut from him being an avatar back to him making some sort of "video diary". there is no flow nor rhythm to the story at all.
i can give credit to James Cameron for one thing, beyond making a mint off this tripe - it seems that, from watching the 2D version, it's clear that the 3D version has been done with the emphasis on giving depth to the viewing, rather than having things "pop out" at the audience as some sort of gimmick.
i appreciate that i seem to be in a minority in regards of Avatar, but i remain baffled as to just how over-excited so many people have got about this film. i may not always like things that are flavour of the month, yet i can usually at least understand why they have gained popularity. and yes, this whole Twilight business does come to mind here.
oh well, as absolutely everyone has seen it there's not a great deal of point in me telling anyone to either see it or not, i suppose! if you enjoyed the experience of Avatar more than i did, well, lucky you!
be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!