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)
  • Stupid.

    JOHN Wed Dec 23 2009
    Rated as: 1/5
    Report
  • Just come back from seeing Avatar tonight.and despite the Time Out rcritic's damning, high-handed and moralistic review, I found the film moving and thrilling in equal measure.It's a brilliantly conceived and highly effective peice of entertainment which delivers in all the right places. If you go expecting to see deep, thought provoking psychological drama then you'll be dissapointed but as a thrill ride and spectacle for the eye then this simply can't be beaten. The 3D creates an astonishing depth of feild which deepens the sense of wonder and involvement. I'll definitely go back and see this again. Unbeleivably,Time Out gave Avatar the same star rating as the new (woefully bad) St Trinians movie which, frankly, beggars belief. Even-handed reviewing? I don't think so.

    John Wed Dec 23 2009
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • an allegorical phantasmagorical artistic achievement as you start to watch avatar you feel uneasy as the huge scale of production design is intimidating and the idea of earth dying for humanity to immigrate to foreign planets to survive and exploit as colonials is rather familiar ,where pandorum is a euphemism for the current milieu . than it changes forms as the first act introduces the paraplegic and frail but altruistic hero and his cloned nemesis who is a super natural indigenous replica of the local species ,called NA'BI,this is a genetic wonder called AVATAR . From here the movie and it's ravishing visual artistry take you into a magical land where the avatar meets a local maiden in a surreal landscape with bizarre species and the atmosphere turns magical and lustrous where love blooms between two apposite cultures and species . the second act converges on human greed where in familiar reminiscence of global colonisation and slavery ,human race wrecks destruction on the peaceful and mystically superior nabians . the cultural rituals and mellifluous rhythm of the visual art is in harmony with the pacing of the great musical soundtrack and it enchants and mesmerises every sense in explicit wonder. the carnage and the misery wrecked by battleships is a harrowing reminder of recent human history enfolding as exploitation of the natural resources by human corporate greed . the third act is the most intriguing where the script takes a sharp twist and the inert morality of human conscience is awakened ,as the revolution dawns and the finale in hair raising with an amazing denouement . cameron is both an intellect who can combine various contemporary human themes and issues of corporate greed,exploitation of the third world and a love parable which plays on your heart strings in the same movie with utterly dazzling visual aura and astounding technical skills , but it is the emotional impact of the relationship that forms between the two vicarious species which becomes a visionary landmark and reverberates hauntingly in your subconscious .

    usman khawaja Wed Dec 23 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • So hang on . . .you give 2012 a 4/5 because, hang on, the story was rubbish but the effects were amazing. Then you give Avatar a 2/5 because, hang on, the effects were amazing but the story was rubbish. I'll have whatever you're smoking mate. Only someone from a 'special school' would have 2012 above this one. Think they're should be a new round of job interviews coming up soon!!

    Josh Wed Dec 23 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • I think this review misses the mark by a long way. Obviously a film like this brings up everyone's own opinion. But for me, the story did connect with the audience on so many levels. Yes its predictable, but not every film nowadays has to be dark. Grand, epic adventures are just fine too. Definitely this year's best film and its up there with a decade top ten.

    Jake Wed Dec 23 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • i thought it was quite entertaining but a little derivative and maybe a bit of a kids film.it could of been a bit darker i thought.it seemed like cameron wanted it to appealto all ages hence the pg rating and slightly disneyish style.i think you would have to be a bit churlish to worry too much about this though and not enjoy the sheer visual spectacle.

    akhila Tue Dec 22 2009
    Rated as: 3/5
    Report
  • Totally agree with dan ^ this film is much more entertaining than this review gives it credit for. The effects are stunning and although the story is predictable at least it doesn't leave you asking questions about what the point was. If you want escapism and a film everyone will find something good with then don't be put off by the snobby critics.

    Anna Tue Dec 22 2009
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • It seems a bit unfair for the reviewer to ultimately judge the movie against the hype it generates - the supposed movie that "changed the face of filmmaking forever"? (Obviously we won't know that for another decade or so...) The script is formulaic, but still solid and effective - and I was impressed at how the technology did feel in service of the story. The moments where Sully has to drag his deteriorating body into the real world, and the time spent on developing the love story, seemed to indicate that Cameron understands the need to ground the story in some sort of reality (the CGI only goes so far...) Getting all these elements alongside the need for a broad-appeal blockbuster flick that will justify it's huge cost (not least the ticket price...), Cameron has done a pretty outstanding job.

    John Tue Dec 22 2009
    Rated as: 4/5
    Report
  • this film was fantasticcc. cant beleive people are critisising it. it took 15 years to make, i think job well done! amazing, so realistic. 10 million starts all the way. go watch it!

    rachellll Tue Dec 22 2009
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • Tree hugging Gaea conceit laid on thick, but also nastily militaristic. The hero was an ex-marine, and it was only because the military belonged to a corporation that it was like evil. As if the US marines themselves never killed innocent people. Miserable Hollywood propaganda. The battle scenes were pathetic. I found I was looking at my watch a lot. Studio Ghibli told the same stories better, and the acting was superior in their cartoons. Flying mountains indeed. Yawn.

    philmk Tue Dec 22 2009
    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