Avatar (12A)

Film

Fantasy films

Avatar 2.jpg

Time Out rating:

<strong>Rating: </strong>2/5

User ratings:

<strong>Rating: </strong>3/5
Rate this  

Time Out says

Tue Dec 15 2009

There’s a line from ‘Jurassic Park’ that echoed hauntingly through this critic’s head as ‘Avatar’ unfolded: ‘Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.’ James Cameron is one of those scientists: so in love with the technology, with the possibilities, that he never pauses to reflect upon the practicalities of cinema, of storytelling, of connecting with an audience.

That quote is doubly relevant when one considers the cultural similarities between these two blockbusters, both of which justified massive expense by promising a quantum leap forward in visual effects. But where Spielberg utilised technology in the service of a tight, witty script, Cameron is simply out to astound. There are moments when you almost expect Sam Worthington’s moody, ever-present voiceover to be replaced by the self-styled king of the world yelling at his audience: ‘Are you awestruck now? How about now? Now?’

When his scientist brother is killed a week before shipping out to the distant planet Pandora, wheelchair-bound US Marine Jake Sully (Worthington) is offered the chance to go in his place. On Pandora, Jake meets his avatar, a remote-controlled host body generated from his brother’s DNA and designed to blend in among the native Na’vi, a race of nine-foot blue hunter-gatherers living in peaceful harmony with their homeworld, Native American style.

Or rather, Native Californian: Na’vi civilisation is a mishmash of half-formed Hollywood ideas about the supposed superiority of ‘primitive’ cultures, tossing around buzzwords like ‘spirit’ and ‘energy’ without ever approaching a cohesive set of beliefs. But ‘all this tree-hugging shit’, as Jake describes it, is only the most obvious defect in Cameron’s dire, cliché-ridden script. From the bluntly expositional nature of the early scenes to the gung-ho, sub-‘Aliens’ banter of Jake’s fellow soldiers, this is screenwriting on autopilot, cobbling together unripe ideas without a scrap of originality or emotional resonance.

It’s hard to fault ‘Avatar’ as an immersive visual experience. Pandora and its luridly coloured inhabitants are beautifully designed, though none of this ever feels remotely real. But this was supposed to be the movie that changed the face of filmmaking forever. Ultimately, Cameron’s signature achievement may have been to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the oldest of all Hollywood maxims: all the money in the world is no subsitute for fresh ideas and a solid script.
99+

Comments

Add +

Release details

Rated:

12A

UK release:

Thu Dec 17 2009

Duration:

161 mins

Share your thoughts
  1. * mandatory fields

Comments & ratings

Rated as: 3/5 (355 ratings)
  • OH dear Wayne (nice name)and still the fools go on..well said scotty.....This film IS the best film since starwars(which had its knockers,believe me) and look at the phenomenon it turned out to be.Glad wayne still climbs out from his matress in his bedsit to post up...Helps remind us all how much higher up the evolutionary movie chain james cameron has climbed with us..bye bye wayne s..your opinions will be forgotten...................and if people dont want to pay the entrance fee then do not enter,its not like we are held at gunpoint. this is movie heaven.

    anth Tue Jan 12 2010
    Report
  • Great Movie. Really enjoyed it. Terrific effects. Cant believe some of the other review Five star all the way.

    mervyn Sun Jan 10 2010
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • I can't believe you're all still going on about Cameron's big, shiny toy. Are the visuals impressive? Of course. Is it fun in 3D? Like a joy ride. But is it a great movie? Certainly not. Cameron needs to study the great films to see that they are story-driven before they can be anything else or they don't resonate through time and film history. This has been a dismal year for good cinema which leaves us hungry for anything to distract us. "Avatar" is a spinning colour wheel; it will grab our attention briefly and then we will move on, still looking for substance, for depth of meaning, for characters that resonate, and for a film ("Inglourious Basterds" came close to this.) that takes us to that place where form meets art in clear and Truthful vision. This film, basically false in in's depiction of human nature and true religion, leaves us hollow and, well I was going to say disappointed, but then I knew from the trailer just what I was in for. Cameron, the man who turned "A Night to Remember" into THUD! "Titanic' will continue to numb us with mediocrity.

    Wayne S Sun Jan 10 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • I was surprised at this film from Cameron. It seems like he's gone FX loopy. However, for what it's worth, I found the film decent fare for the near-three hours. The storyline was simplistic and you could see the ending a mile away. I also don't know how well this will translate to the home unless you have an amazing home cinema system. To summaries - simple good vs evil storyline where the battle lines are drawn almost immediately. I enjoyed the lush settings and superb 3D effects. I didn't enjoy the lack of £25 in my wallet afterwards.

    Isaac Sun Jan 10 2010
    Rated as: 3/5
    Report
  • Typical, one idiotic critic takes a dislike to a great movie and the general public all agree. This movie was not made for the majority of cinema goers in the UK, because the majority have no idea about what makes a good film or passes as entertainment (take for example the popularity of New Moon). Said critic also gave Planet 51 a higher rating! Which goes to show he has no idea and shouldn't be allowed an opinion when it comes to film. So, if you're an idiotic sheep like member of the general public... avoid this film! If you have read more than ten books (autobiographies not included) and have a reasonable education, then go see the film, you will love this visceral masterpiece.

    mikeyhncc1701d Sun Jan 10 2010
    Report
  • visually beautiful. the world created on screen is a paradise, and the viewer is lead through at a meandering pace. lush,but do we have to have the "gung ho.kill the baddies,get the girl "ending that is so boringly prevailant in hollywood flicks. ho hum! lead through. comment you type in this box will appear on the site

    davewill Sun Jan 10 2010
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • Terrible story line just an excuse for 3D special effects. My brother agrees. I want my money back.

    Tania Sun Jan 10 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • I can personally vouch for scotty that he works very near a 15-screen multiplex. I am the manager of that multiplex, and scotty works IN it: he's our assistant popcorn machine attendant. Now quit annoying people on this thread, scotty, and get back to popping popcorn or YOU'RE FIRED!!!!

    Multiplex Manager Sat Jan 9 2010
    Report
  • 'Fanboy Screeching Dissuades Undecided Potential Viewer From Seeing New Blockbuster' Bearing in mind the hysterical ad hominem attacks that seem to greet anyone denying that this film is the cinematic equivalent of the Second Coming, I am now not going to see this movie. I'll put my District 9 DVD on instead, or Moon, or for that matter anything with more heart than hype.

    Phil Space Sat Jan 9 2010
    Report
  • Uh, Scotty, what kind of sound byte was that? I repeat: Tripe for the masses!

    Wayne S Sat Jan 9 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
  16. 16
  17. 17
  18. 18
  19. 19
  20. 20
  21. 21
  22. 22
  23. 23
  24. 24
  25. 25
  26. 26
  27. 27
  28. 28
  29. 29
  30. 30
  31. 31
  32. 32
  33. 33
  34. 34
  35. 35
  36. 36
  37. 37
  38. 38
  39. 39
  40. 40
  41. 41
  42. 42
  43. 43
  44. 44
  45. 45
  46. 46
  47. 47
  48. 48
  49. 49
  50. 50
  • Hotwise
  • Cool brands
  • Star