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)
  • I disagree with the author who clearly thinks that words “unoriginalâ€� and “poorâ€� mean the same. Similar story line worked very well for “Dances with the Wolvesâ€� and “The Last Samuraiâ€�. And works very well here, not distracting from the main treat: VISUAL BRILLIANCE. This movie is visually so spellbinding that it sucks you in and takes you for a journey that nobody prior to Cameron could create. You can relax and enjoy it or try your best to find faults in it. I see absolutely no point in comparing this movie to Kubrick, Polanski and other character-driven drama masters. There's just no place for them in this movie. It’s absolutely fantastic without them.

    Serge Tue Jan 5 2010
    Report
  • Seriously though.....what are you intellectuals thinking???? I remember how I felt the fist time I saw spartacus.I remember how I felt the first time I saw star wars, or ZULU ,The birds,dances with wolves,the matrix,ben hur,aliens...AVATAR. beautiful films with beautiful imagery...the cinema is an escape you fools,its meant to stimulate our senses,yes,sure some films like 12 angry men or glengarry glen ross for example can stimulate our minds.Did you really go to see Avatar expecting that?? star wars won no awards for its script peolple,,but it changed cinema forever. because of its visuals if you want a great script ,well acted. go the theatr you snobs!!!..go back to your old fellinni and bergman vhs copies and leave the future to us!!!! to all who enjoyed this film,relax guys, you are in the majority who actually enjoyed this flick for what it is..It is(in the words of GEORGE MCFLY) our destiny!!!! A spectacular BLOCKBUSTER!!!!!

    scotty Tue Jan 5 2010
    Report
  • I certainly think that who admires this film has seriosly no idea about cinema and the film industry! i 100% agree with the review. the director must think more about the storyline instead of wasting all that money on the visual effects. a typical disappointing american blockbuster!

    alex Tue Jan 5 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • Completely agree with the review. Total waste of time and money (mine and theirs).

    Sana Tue Jan 5 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • Blah blah blah.

    DV Mon Jan 4 2010
    Report
  • A fair review. Avatar despite the dire, lazy story that we should not forgive, does have an appeal. I have sat through the 4D Shrek experiences inUniversal studios, IMAX and older 3D, and AVatar does offer hope 3D can be offered more readily, in les gimmicky style, in far better films in the future. For me it is more like a 6.5 / 10 a 2.1 (just) a B.

    Richard O Mon Jan 4 2010
    Report
  • Good critic, though if - like me - you do not have any a priori to blocbusters from hollywood and are not especially keen on b&w kazakh movies from the 60's, you'll see it twice and simply let the movie take you to another word.

    Jerome Mon Jan 4 2010
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • Hey alex dont you think its more of a take on Miyazaki themes...hardly as good storywise......it was like a visit to an awesome aquarium.nothing much more

    christian Mon Jan 4 2010
    Report
  • I agree with Lobster and Valentin. This film should not be discussed as a movie. Alex friend, go buy DVDs and action figures.

    Gnarla Mon Jan 4 2010
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • Damn people this is not a movie. This is an American test of how simpleminded the audience actually is. Great comment Valentin and I would add that it places Cameron closer to Bill Gates more than placing him besides humble geniuses such as Kubrick. I feel really sorry for the critics too. I guess it morally hurt like hell when they gave the film 100% and thrown all their education down the toilet. Bravo Tom for the honesty.

    Lobster Mon Jan 4 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