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 just returned from a private screening of Avatar 2: Return of the Alien and let me tell you, if you liked Avatar 1 you will absolutely love the sequel! Having just sent them packing for home, the Navi discover that those nasty humans had been conducting breeding experiments on Alien facehuggers. When one escapes, infects a Pterodactyl thingy and produces a winged Alien hybrid well, folks, the 3D mayhem kicks into high gear! I sat transfixed, weeping grateful tears of joy, as flying Aliens burst out of blue Navi chests, silently mouthing to myself over and over: 'This is why they invented 3D!' Dramatic tension builds when a crack team of marines hears the news but can't figure out whether, given the circumstances, they ought to play good guys or bad guys. The moral dilemma is finally clarified when one of the marines suddenly develops breasts and a Hispanic last name, shouting: 'Let's get those Alien bitches!' A visual masterpiece! Cameron proves once again why the words 'genius' and 'mindless entertainment' belong in the same sentence. But not one to rest on his laurels, Mr. Cameron is already hard at work on the climactic finale to his Avatar trilogy: Wherein the marines, Navi and Aliens settle their differences, form a coalition and set off to have a go at Sparta. -cut to trailer- Sully: "This! This is our land!" Leonidas: "No, you dumbass. This is Sparta!"

    Charlie the Critic Thu Dec 31 2009
    Report
  • Its fantastic, I loved it, & I am certainly not a moron.....

    jelly Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • I am an action movie fan, that's all I watch. I don't watch those European artsy-intellectual boring movies but this time I agree really, really with the "intellectual' critics. This movie is as stupid as a pile of bird turd. If it wasn't for the 3D (which will be obsolete in a year or two) I'd give it 1 star. I adore lame movies but this lame I dare not venture.

    ActionFreak Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • I agree. Waste of money. You folks that don't need an actual story and are in need of more pumping nonsense action, go watch Avatar 20 times. Give Mr. Cameron your money. He was actually counting on you when he made it. Run to the cinema! Run!

    Podboy Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • During the film’s visual piece de resistance—the final, 45-minute, war-of-the-worlds type action sequence—“the applause was really half-hearted. It was like, yes, we’re into it, but we’re not that into it. Didt like it. Looks great but feels like a worn out piece of a smelly underwear.

    Katarina Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • If Cameron wasn’t going to make a great movie with his rumored half-billion dollar budget, he could have at least given us an entertaining train wreck. But Avatar, which plods on for a punishing two hours and forty-two minutes, is more boring than bad. There’s no denying that the motion-capture 3D visuals are some kind of technical achievement, but after spending a while in the aquarium-like world of Pandora, I started to feel like I was staring at the world’s most expensive screensaver.

    Nerve Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  • Dear Lord I am pissssed!!! It takes 3 HOURS TO GET TO A POINT THAT YOU ALLREADY KNOW AT THE BEGINNING??? Are we that pathetic? Are we American after all that dumb??? I would give this film a minus 3000 if I could! Screw the 3D and all that animation when it has no point! Jesus Christ people this movie is the most obvious experiment Hollywood ever pulled off! They essentially are testing how low a movie can go without a good script and and fresh ideas because they are preparing thousands of copies for the next decade. Dear God THIS WAS INSULTING!

    Uighur Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • The movie is perfect for slightly retarded people. 3D is great but I cannot compare this to any serious movie that has substance.

    Ivan Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • @ Godbluff If anyone knows of a more spectacular visual experience, I would like to know? - Any Kubrick film - ANY.

    johnir Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • THIS FILM IS AMAZING IN 3D!! no one can give this film a 4 star or below

    eddie Thu Dec 31 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    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