Avatar Review: We Have the Technology. Now What?

I don't agree with the article saying "but movie magic makers still haven’t found a way to make CG players look less like finely drawn cartoon characters".
Gollum in LOTR and Kong in King Kong both looked pretty convincing.
I haven't seen Avatar yet, so I can't comment on whether sniper smurf looks cartoony yet.

This is going to be awful. I've been reading a few reviews and stories about this movie. I think I've come up with enough to form a conclusion:

James Cameron is avatarded. This movie is his attempt to throw his hat back in the ring. But all he is really doing is throwing a ton of money into an uncreative (nearly plagarized), over CG'ed, $17 dollars-a-ticket turd. In 3D no less! And if he is REALLY trying to send a message about over technologized society, man, did he miss the point. I've seen more ads to go to my nearest 3D theater, that I found showtimes for using my iPhone, and driving my 40ton gas guzzler to sit on my butt and suck down $6 Cokes and obesiety inducing popcorn.

I'll tell you what James, I'll give you a 3D turd. for free. For those of you that read this, please organize a boycott of this film. The future of film depends on it.

Wow, talk about simple-minded. It's hypocritical to condemn the destruction of a civilization because we use and benefit from the technology that allows us to savagely, mindlessly destroy them? Really? Talk about self-serving double-think. The author should stop and think about what an immense universe we live in. There could easily be more advanced civilizations than us out there.

Destroying less technologically capable cultures has been done many times in the past and it's contemptible. That's what this movie is about: soulless avarice. Think about that the next time you drive by an Indian reservation.

Cameron has done what any good writer should do: he's found an entertaining way to comment on the bad and good inherent in humanity—and it ain't always a pretty picture.

Haven't seen the movie yet, but my general problem with Hollywood blockbusters (including Cameron's last big project) is that they are never as interesting as they could be. Good writing and an interesting story would cost just a tiny fraction more than mediocre writing and a predictable story. But over and over again the stories are sooooooo simple. You can see where they are going from a mile away. Visually, of course, they are great. But man does not live by visuals alone.

Another "corporations are evil and so are we" movie I'll gladly pass on thanks to this review. Too bad I didn't have something like this for District 9. That movie was so bad I walked out after the first 30 minutes. Thanks John! I'll save my money.

I am excited to see the movie if not for the rehashed politically correct hate yourselves, technology, science, advancement, corporations, blah, blah that we're all getting sick of. But for 100 million dollars there ought to be some insane effects in 3d no less I'll enjoy the special effects, make fun of the story and a fun night will be had.

Evolution is driven by the better adapted out competing the less well adapted. While people are all basically the same level genetically, technologically they have not been, this replaced the other with a drive to excel and produce the technology we use and will use. Without that there would have been no driving force to create, no arts no science. You'd be sitting there in a mud lean-to with a handful of berries 2 starving kids and a lion about to eat you because you'd never invented fire.

It's not contemptible, its nature. All of it. Those "Native Americans", if your going to be politically correct, go all the way, out competed other tribes procured their resources food, women, supplies yes the very same thing. They in turn were outcompeted as well.

We humans are all top level predators until something better comes along, we are our only competition get used to it. And please quit complaining about it. If you see a problem i.e. those reservations then do what you can to help, volunteer send money whatever they need. But quit the guilt and complaining.

Every single film has used technology every play has had masks make up and such. It is an impossibility to make any far reaching statement without useing envirnmental resources to some degree, but I do agree with the notion that mabey Cameron went a little overboard. (Haha Titanic)Why did you pile crap on him for useing cutting edge technology then say that he couldnt get the uncanny valley out of the film? He was trying at least.

I'm certainly going to see the film, mainly for the truly groundbreaking CGI. I'm really afraid to find that Avatar falls short on plot and character development. I hope Cameron got the balance between technology and artistry right. Already I see things that remind me of other movies, like Alien (was Sigourney Weaver and all). There will probably be an explanation for it all, but the notion of floating islands and combining alien and human DNA sounds neither plausible or even original. Unobtanium. I know it's been an inside joke in the SciFi world and even the tech sector for decades now, but that's not an excuse for not bothering to come up with something more believable. The whole thing sounds like a metaphor for corporate greed (even though that's what got the movie produced in the first place).

They sit around their glowing trees, chanting

If you ever sat on a glowing tree and chanted, you'd never want modern comforts and entertainments again. There, my friend, lies true contentment.

I want to see the movie. I don't care about negative reviews, i mean look at the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind, that was a great jim carry movie and you never heard of it. I just want something different to watch instead of the same old crap.

i'm a BIG fan !!!

In spite of all the "new" technology in movie making, i seem to prefer to watch a "cartoon" style movie over one that has inflated, egotistical actors and actresses.. Voice Over Cartoon ANY day, Please!!

You guys are nuts if you think it's getting BAD REVIEWS????? It's rated 84% on Rotten Tomatoes.com and 82% on MetaCritic. The critics and the fans LOVE IT. Period. Go see it and enjoy.

@Azorus

I love Eternal Sunshine. Great film. And if you want something different, stay away from Hollywood ala James Cameron.

I'm gonna go see this because I love Cameron movies (minus Titanic). Abyss is still one of my favorites!

freudianslipnslide.blogspot.com

they just made fun of it on there own lol

I'm going to see this movie. Definitely.

My youngest kid is about 6th months shy of making it out of the house. Not quick enough for me to avoid an invitation to this one.

"Dad, will you go with me to Avatar?"

What are you supposed to say? "No, you little turd! I don't like to spend time with you! I'm going to Flanagan's for a Guinness and a game of pool."

I dont think that releasing CO2 in the atmosphere is a big problem for human as a species. Atleast I dont think its going to creat mutch problem that we cant solve with technolohy.

Humans have been adapting to climate change for thousants of years by being nomads. Its mostly women with bad jugdement and in need of attention that are hysterical about climate change and its making its way into polical decision sadly.

Put some pants on, build yourself a new house where it wont get flooded by the sea, if you beleive its worth the risk. You got 50 years to think ahead! If you cant figure out how to adapt, your responsible for yourself, you have been warned atleast 50 years ahead now.

The movie looks like great eyecandy but I predict the plot will be very simple.
I call it "Terminator meets FernGully"

My questions is,

if there is sufficient oxygen in the atmosphere for fire to burn,,,, why can humans not breath?

am i missing something?

He continues to push the boundaries...good work James Cameron

I smell the usual left-wing Hollywood self-loathing.

We're the bad guy. We're the enemy. We should hate ourselves.

Yawn.

@Pop_Sci_Fan:

I like the "Dancing With Smurfs" more. :)

"Cameron’s story clearly curses the proliferation of human technology."

Maybe it's not hypocrisy. Maybe Cameron just doesn't like his job and would be happier running a national forest.

I really don't get the point of this review. It isn't the technology that makes people push others around -- it's just a convenient tool. It's attitude, culture, that make people do stuff like this to the weak. As if there were no precedent in Earth's history for such behavior: I am sure you can think of some examples.

I guess you could make the case it's trite for a storyline. Do you seriously want a conflict-free screenplay?

jmatt: reality clearly has a liberal bias! Watch more 'Colbert Report.'

"In Avatar, the science and machinery of humankind leads to soulless violence and destruction."

Apparently, the author hasn't seen Terminator, Aliens, Terminator 2, The Abyss, or Titanic, as that has been one o the central themes of his movie.

The creation of Skynet leads to the near destruction of humanity. In Aliens, not only does human terra-farming lead to the discovery of a natrual [sic] predator which then goes on to murder the human population, but Cameron shows in what some describe as parallels to the Vietnam War how a more organized, technologically advanced force can have their asses handed to them by an indigenous low-tech opposition; and nevermind the attacks on the motivations of capitalism. The Abyss tells us that we need to abandon exploration and militarization of the oceans lest humanity get wiped out by a 300' tsunami. And lastly, the lesson we should never forget from Titanic is that no matter how technologically advanced we become, an iceberg will sink a ship and stop true love.

Where was your indignation then? Or was your face too stuffed with popcorn that we couldn't hear your alerts to us on the evils of the Cameron movie making machine?

Mr. Lewinski should learn to go to the movies without having to multi-task with his Witchhunting app.

Having seen the movie last night at a sneak preview, I would have to say that the reviewer missed the mark a bit concerning the message of this movie.

I know that technology plays a big part in the movie. The giant mechs and spaceships and the Avatar technology itself are at the forefront of most of the action sequences and the plot after all. However, I think that if the movie is heavy handed in any way, it picks more of a battle with foreign policy.

I could see how the reviewer would match this movie with The Last Samurai. The fights between the sword wielding Samurai and the gun toting Japanese army are really similar to the fights in this movie between the natives and the army. This mismatch makes you have the feeling of "oh this is unfair and wrong," but I would say that this is FAR from the main message of the movie.

Like the reviewer mentions, the army is on Pandora in the first place to get the unobtanium. All of the battles in the movie happen so that the humans can get the resources they want.

There are clear analogues to parallel moments in history. Our (speaking as an American) history with Native Americans is the most clear parallel here, however there are also nods to current foreign policy as well.

In my opinion, every aspect of the war for oil is almost identical to the war for unobtainium. The movie even mentions terrorism, "othering" the culture you are at war against to distance yourself from them, and attempts to appease foreign cultures with domestic pleasures like blue jeans and McDonalds.

Also, I have to disagree with what the reviewer says about the CG in this movie as well. I was blown away by what this movie does with its visual effects. I would liken my experience of watching this movie with how I felt watching District 9. Very early in the movie, I forgot that those weren't real creatures acting alongside real people. This movie did the same thing to me. I will say that the creatures do have a little more "polish" to them than seems natural. They seem almost glossy and too smooth the be jungle creatures.

Its quite funny how all you talk about the environment , well i guess he delivered that message too , but more strongly he was saying american can not go into war whenever for whatever they it suits them coz they gonna have an reaction ,like in all the war they caused so far , the message was simple and strong .

i my self saw the movie and i was very impressed took me to a different world(literally) the plot was simple i must admit it but i could feel the frustration of how arrogant people like the humans( which "surprisingly" were Americans )
think can do what ever the f... they want.

and finally it has thumbs up for me :)

I am sorry John Scott Lewinski, but you have shamed yourself.
you said "In Avatar, the science and machinery of humankind leads to soulless violence and destruction". This is false, it should be "In Avatar, the soulless violence and destruction of aliens was done by a more technologically advanced race: humans". In fact science and machinery aren't even the main point of the movie, the movie was about how a self righteous people can heartlessly destroy a civilization for personal gain, but it also mixes in the individual. the science and machinery of human kind did not lead to the destruction of aliens, it was greed.

this has happened many times in history, for example, the Nazis vs. the Jews, or the American colonists vs. the Native Americans (By the way, the Native Americans actually had many opportunities to destroy us, but didn't because they were too nice, divided, unlucky, etc.)

This article had completely missed the mark. I saw Avatar at a midnight showing this morning. I've seen more than half a dozen movies in digital 3D in the last year. I still was not expecting the simply amazing effects that drive his movie. Yes the plot is a bit predictable by anyone who has seen Dances with wolves. The point of this movie is in the journey! Ten minutes into the movie u won't care about that. You will BELIEVE in Camerons world. Obviously the author of this article had their imagination surgically removed at the end of childhood. Don't listen to the haters. If you love science fiction, love the idea of visiting a new world, you have to see this movie in 3D. Don't cheat yourself out of something very special.

Having been a subscriber to Popular Science for 45 years, I am very disappointed in this article. Lewinski and the commentor devipod obviously do not understand science fiction nor are sci fi fans. This story is the classic scifi story in the style of Larry Niven, Heinlen, and all the masters. Maybe you should review and comment on a genre that you are familiar with.
This movie is making movie technology history just as Star Wars did. THAT is the point. This magazine is Popular SCIENCE for crying out loud. We should appreciate the science and the science fiction, not deride it. This milestone marks a change in what is possible in movies and ultimately, in virtual reality. Congratulations Mr. Cameron and crew!!!

I do like the idea of being in an avatar body.

Can't WAIT to see it.

Ok really? The author is patronizing the message of this film because it wouldn't be possible to make the film without technology? That is terribly short sighted. Whether you agree with the message or not, nobody is going to call the film hypocritical for such a reason. You might as well condemn "The Matrix" for it's message. The amazing visuals in "The Matrix" would not be possible without computers, yet the movie warns about the dangers of advanced computers. It's ridiculous to have such a narrow view.

"Every penny Cameron left unspent on story development poured into the film’s richly detailed world."

Hi, as you might expect, the people credited with screenwriting these big things are rarely the people who did the work. I gave the story for Titanic to Cameron years ago and many other to his colleagues. I also came up with the Jedi, the Training, The Force, (Spielberg), the Pirate Code, etc. and I've been the go to guy for beloved stories for most of the last twenty-five or so years. I guess that changed with Apocalypto, which the anti-semite directed. You'd think that after I gave them the Star Wars, E.T., the Passion of the Christ project, and a host of other hugely successful films that Mel (who, in fairness I've never met) and this guy Cameron would be eager to work with me again. Cameron came to my house, hat in hand, and left with Titanic. I was, of course, cut out of this piece of ...
I hope nobody sees it, and I hope everybody sees Cameron for the thieving no good rip off artist that he is. Of course, that is just one person's opinion. I'm sorry for being a little bitter here, but you become a crime victim and see the culprit wax fat on your property which Cameron claims, and you might complain a little, too.

Simply put, this is the most visually stimulating film ever to be produced. Its striking visuals hook you from the very first scene. The film and story deliver a clear and concise criticism of human nature: we are destructive, we are greedy, and we are selfish. The film also forewarns us of the impending death of our planet. Years from now when we are gone the earth will reclaim itself. Look to ancient civilization and you can see that this has already taken place. While we habitat this earth we also share it with every other living creature. I ask you what right do we have to destroy what is not ours? The ignorant will say that this is the course of evolution; the strongest and smartest will survive but how intelligent is the man that destroys his own home? Yes Cameron is a hypocrite but that does not tarnish the message this film brings. If you read this review and decide not to see the movie I am sorry you are missing out. What the review does not tell you is how the film also illustrates the aspects of humanity that makes us beautiful: Our ability to love, to form friendships, to form families, and to control our fate.

Wow. The technology used on this film is absolutely amazing. I'm excited and scared at what might be in another 10 years. Might be waking up from nightmares, because movies are just too real.

www.adowp.com
www.bid4designerhandbags.com

So, are you saying Cameron stole the plot of Nausicaa of the Valley of the Winds, with a little lifting from Dances with Wolves and a few other movies? I'm shocked, shocked to learn that. Wouldn't be the first time he did it. It's not common knowledge that Cameron stole the storyline of Terminator from the SF writer Harlan Ellison. It came out in the trial that Cameron bragged about stealing the idea while on the set, within the hearing of half-a-dozen people. Ellison won the lawsuit.

I'm going to see it (probably next week), even though it has a somewhat recycled alien/enviromental-themed Pocahauntus story. My local movie theater has Dolby-Digital Surround Sound, so I can't wait to hear the sound effects! Too bad I can't see it in 3-D, because our movie-theater isn't 3-D, and I live outside the US on base...-sigh-:(

I think what frustrates the author so much is the line I believe Jake had where he realizes the Navi did not want them there, that even with all their education and advanced technology, they had nothing the Navi desired. This film was hardly a portrayal of technology as "evil". It was more about how we use technology and knowledge for evil. The navi were very aware and knowledgeable of their own surroundings and learned to embrace their existence as "energy we borrow, and later, return." To call the film's theme hypocritical is far-fetched. Just because the Navi did not value technology as highly as the humans did, didn't mean they believed it was evil.

I will say this movie had potential but thanks to poorly written dialogue, undeveloped supporting characters, and a pretty weak soundtrack Avatar could not become the epic film it should have been. It had powerful themes that were weakly delivered. I love the line from the commander about his opinion of fighting terror with terror. It's so true and it's sad to see so many reviews of defensive backlashing. While I have less respect for Cameron as director now, I did overall enjoy the film. It's worth a gander.

I know you understand what you think I said, but what you fail to realize is that what you heard is not what I meant....

First of all, note to Yeow: The film isn't in 3-d anywhere. It was filmed in 3-d but it's being shown in 2-d.

Now... I cannot believe how many people there are out here who have nothing better to do with their lives than write inane comments about things they haven't experienced. And how many people are getting paid to write reviews that are as woefully off the mark as this one is. One can only hope that this uninformed piece of crap will expose Mr. Lewinski to his present and future employers as the benighted Yahoo he obviously is, and limit his career to jobs that prohibit him from expressing his opinion. Since virtually the entire critical community has praised this film, it is obvious that unless Dick Cheney has room for another neo-Goebbels, we should be spared any further examples of what Mr. Lewinski would like to pass off as "wisdom". Of course, Mr. Cheney might just have such a job available....

One thing: His name is Jake Sully not Scully

I totaly agree with the point BNicholson makes. But at the same time, how can we critisize something of which most of us know nothing, or nearly nothing, of what we're critisizing. Sure, it's defenitley no Dune, nor is it any other sci-fi epic, but it could still be good. If a movie critic likes a movie, it doesn't meen it's good. If a movie critic doesn't like a movie, it is probably because he is credited for being a mean S.O.B., he may not have actually paid atention to the movie, he may have just said "two thumbs down" before it was shown on the big screen. What if this movie sucks, and all these people are mad for a couple minutes, or even a couple hours? they're not going to demmand the money back, the people like Cameron will still make thousands of dollars, regardless of if people like the movie, regardless of how good or bad the movie is. I, for one, like movies that I have already decided are bad, but aren't horrible, I may even like them because the fact that they are horrible, and that it's funny when it's not suposed to be.

ROBO-MECHS are AWESOME... but I'm not totally convinced this movie will be so... either way I'm going to see it.

This movie is not a bad movie. Is it original? No. Is it thick with environmentalism?, yes. Does it condemn tecknology? No. It condems greed and celebrates rich cultures and nature that shouldn't be needlessly swept aside for money.

The biggest misconception is that this movie is going against the anti-environmentalist movement. It is not. I don't think that movement is characterized by greed obsessed militants. The main people (me) in that movement, simply believe in a compromise between technology and nature - Using our resources responisibly. We are not offended by Jake's desire to save the aliens he grew to love. Go Jake!

The sad part is that we have been labeled as anti-environmental, which is obsurd. I enjoyed the movie and thought the effects, 3D and all were spectacular. I enjoyed Dances with Wolves too and no more agreed with the treatment of Indians in that movie than the greatest environmentalist.

The environmentalists should be wishing for all technologically advance cultures to die, after all they have arrows and domesticate animals to do there will. There is always a compromise, but extremes are dangerously hipocritical.

The bad guys in Avatar are flat as in all of Cameron's movies. Titanic - Flat, Aliens - definitely flat. Get use to it; it's Hollywood. There is little depth in the industry anymore, and Avatar will get nominated for Oscars for the sole reason that it appeals to the tree hugger crowd that dominate the Hollywood culture. (Who by the way abuse the environment worse than any of us.)

Regardless, it was fun to watch. Oh, one more thing, the carbon footprint for making this movie well exceeded the carbon that I will produce for my entire life.

 The original reviewers article is interesting not for it's insight but more for it's lack there of. One the one hand he talks about the technologies developed and invented for the move then says that they were not as ground breaking as those invented an developed for Star Wars, odd but ok chalk it up faulty logic. To me the thrust of the movie was not anti-technology like some of the posters think but rather anti rape pillage. The right of a people to protect what is theirs against all comers. Some posters have floated the argument that the strong out compete the weak, yes this is true, though I doubt that same poster would be so intellectual if they or their loved ones were the victim of thugery like the Na'vi.
 The Na'vi use technology -yes bows and arrows count as technology- the hero of the story uses and exists because of technology, it is the lack of respect for other cultures and unchecked greed that is the enemy in the story, not the "one dimentional modern marine"; He is just the crunchy  topping on the evil cake. Dances with wolves in space with a happy ending. Brave native battleing a modern incarnation of the Dutch East India Company, the story has been and will be told thorugh out our existance.

Ok so i actually saw this movie.. i didn't want it to succeed, but it did on alot of levels, i opted for the DLP & not the IMAX.. Its changed the game people.. this movie has the goods..

I saw the movie, liked it a lot.

As a person who saw the movie, and read this review, I give this review zero stars out of five.

The review is critical for for no reason other than being critical.

It's yet another movie that feels like you're watching somebody play a video game.

Every review I've seen says the same thing: A+ effects, C (or lower) plot.

Sounds like the George Lucas problem: filmmakers become so entranced by the bells and whistles that they forget they need things like a good story.

I saw it today! It was awesome from every perspective - CGI, storyline, concepts, details(by the millions), the 3D is very nicely done, and technology (although we've seen a lot of it before, it was believable and well used). One central concept reminds me of a Buddhist lesson in the interconnected web of life, except instead of imagining it it is all there in 3D and discovered piece by piece as you watch. All in all I loved it and would recommend it and hope Cameron makes a ton on it. The whole thing about him being bored on his own creation is a bit irrelevant in my mind.

I saw Avatar so this is an opinion; the bad: the 3D is cumbersome and sometimes blurry, the plot is "Dances with the wolves" + "The emerald forest" totally predictable. The good; the CGI is undistinguisable from real actors, the aliens and their planet are as real as if you had been shooting there. That's to me more milestone in film history than the 3D system. A 10 for Cameron! I may see the movie again in 2D to enjoy the awesome real CGI.
Regarding the "new" 3D systems; I saw in 1982 in Paris an special exhibit of the then "new" holographies at Forum Les Halles. There was an amazing "living" portrait of the Queen Elisabeth, among other cool holographies. I though; "Soon we'll see that in a movie!" My question; Why not holography movies yet? That will be the NEXT step in moviemaking, not crappy glasses.Any expert can reply?

EXCELLENT movie i'll give it a 10. the visuals were unlike anything that i have ever seen. the 3D was so INTENSE i can only imagine what it looks like on a IMAX screen. story who cares i wanted to be entertained and I was. after 2 hours I looked at my watch because i didn't want it to end. WOW!!!

Amazingly similar to "Call Me Joe" by Poul Anderson,1957 - A story about exploring and terraforming the surface of Jupiter through the use of bio-mechanical life forms whose consciousness is controlled via remote control by human researchers in orbit above the planet.

i dont understand why SOME people think that this movies story and characters arent very good....
i saw it and i have to say it is the greatest movie i have ever seen in my life, even better than district 9 which was really good.
so what if the story is basically a cookie-cutter?
we have pretty much ran out of new ideas for new movies.
havent you noticed that for the past couple years that most of those movies are remakes or borrow the story from other movies?
next time there is a review like this, you should see the movie any way, and look at all the good things about the movie, like the awesome creatures or vehicles, or even the cool alien race which i thought were awesome!

remember back in the days when movies, music, etc. wasn't so damn political, everything has to have some political undertones to it now. That's why music from the 50's and back are better

I saw Avatar over the weekend (2d, 3d was sold out Q.Q), and i have to agree with alot of the commenters here, the reviewer is way off base with his claims of hypocrasy regarding the technology in this movie. I really seemed to me that the message was less "Technology is bad", and more "Greed is bad".

technology is just a tool, like a hammer. you can use a hammer to kill someone, or you can use it to build a house. the antagonists in avatar use advanced technology, but its just thier tool. the technology itself is neither good nor evil.

as far as the natural world of the Na'vi, it is very different from our own and i have trouble drawing many parellels. for starters, our world is not made up of a massive network of biological synapses spanning the globe, and we do not have the ability to directly interface our minds with that network. if we did, our history would be very different im sure.

at the end of the day, its science fiction. and beyond the message of "greed is bad and we shouldn't exploit those less powerfull than ourselves" i think the movie can be enjoyed for exactly what it is. An fantastic story that inspires a kind of wonder that i haven't felt since i was a child seeing our own world for the first time.

I haven't seen the movie, but I have seen so many commercials that completely give away the plot that I can just say I saw it and save money. Seriously, though, the film maker spends millions and millions of dollars on technology for his movie that basically says technology can be dark and bad and used for nefarious purposes.

A movie that uses high-tech stuff to say that high-tech stuff is BAD is not going to get high ratings.

The author of the article is waaay off base. The movie doesn't say that technology is bad, nor does it say that humans are bad. There were humans that were fighting to save the Pandorans, and they used advanced technology to do so. The author was just trying to sound smart. And some people apparently belived him.
Reading comments from people thanking the author for saving them a few bucks is ridiculous. It was a very beautiful movie. Your loss. I've seen it twice and will see it again. And not just because of the effects. Yes they were mind-blowingly great, but it was so much more than that.
And for people that bag on it's complete similarities to Dances With Wolves, did you ever stop to think about that movie's similarities to other stories of the same theme. It is a very basic premise.
"…but I have seen so many commercials that completely give away the plot that I can just say I saw it and save money. "
Did you not go see Titanic? I'm guessing you already knew the plot to that as well. Have you ever watched the same movie twice? I'm guessing so. Why would you do that if you already knew the plot? The answer is quite obvious. Quit trying to sound so superior. Just go and enjoy a good movie. Your loss if you don't.

This is the best movie in my life! I enjoyed every second of it!
I did not see any movie twice! This is the first time that I am going to see a film for a second time.
Technology is great! Far more advanced than any of the Star Wars! (I love them too!). If you did not see Avatar, you missed something very important in your life.
I agree with a previous comment - it is not just the technology that makes this movie outstanding! The whole idea is marvellous! The development of intelligent life on Earth went in a wrong direction compared to Pandora. We are technical and technology driven. They are in peace with their beautiful nature. At the same time they are more powerful in controlling and changing the world around them than we are!
Another fascinating idea is about their global intelligence. You can be an independent intelligent human and still connected to others into a global intelligent network! It is like a God for them. Their God can hear everbody and help, but does not take sides. Only supports life in different forms and peace on the planet.
And the film shows a real mechanisms for their communication! You can plug into the system and pray your wishes.
All our religions suck compared to such an effective system! You can pray on Earth just for your own satisfaction, no one hears you... and no changes for the better.
They can combine their wishes into one very powerful flame!
I want to be there!!! I want to live on Pandora!
I want to see this movie again and again!

P.S. I thank the film director for the strong connection with the war in Iraq! Parody of the marine!

Who the hell let you vomit false realities on a magazine website?
You are a short super adult piece of S*** making too much money.
You completely missed the point of the movie that science, technology and nature are one and some people just cant see it cuz they are blinded by their own greed or self interest.

I am a huge fan of this movie (seen it 3 times, always in 3D) but I think the point that Cameron is trying to make with his message about technology (that PopSci doesn't seem to be getting) is not an attack on the concept of technology or industrialization. These are necessary advances for us, even if they don't seem necessary to the Na'vi, and he probably gets that. What this film is attacking is technology without conscience, and industrialization without regard for others. As for the environmental message of the film, we do need to take care of our planet, especially seeing as its the only one we have (at least until we figure out interstellar travel). Leaving completely aside the films messages, the plot may be something everyone has seen before, but the acting is to a degree where you really don't fixate on the fact too much, and completely leaving that aside,, this is a film that people need to see, if only for its breathtaking portrayal of another world that may just be out there somewhere. Hopefully this film will do something to inspire future generations to figure out how to get interstellar travel rolling, because it certainly did for me.

While the plot is simple, I think it's important to realize that this is about epic storytelling of a classic sort - it's not a mystery or political thriller focused on twists and turns of an intricate plot. The aim is more visceral, effectively tapping a few deep themes that will resonate for many people, rather than to amuse or engage the mind with cleverness of plot. There is room for many movies styles with different purposes; for this one, a simple plot that stays out of the way may work best.

Most literary works are rehashes or elaborations or variations on what has come before; the more important question is "what did they do with the theme, how well did they manifest their vision and take on it?".

The theme of a "turncoat" who switches allegiance *based on which side's values they find superior, and specifically values which are idealized but often not practiced by the tribe they are departing from* is hardly new, but it's a hard one to pull off. We're programmed at a pretty basic level to especially despise anybody who betrays the tribe, whether the tribe is right or wrong; the idea of standing up against "your own people" for a higher purpose or a larger "us" is relatively more cerebral and recent.

It's interesting that the reviewer and some commenters see "high tech" as a monolith (you can't pick and choose among uses of technology - if any use of it is good, then you are a hypocrite to criticise other uses), and that they see the movie as being anti technology. They forget that the SCIENTISTS in this film - the apex technologists - were protagonists. Obviously it was not a condemnation of all technology or all technologists - but of a soulless greed which happens to use technology for force against those in it's way rather than for improvement or learning.

Also, the Na'vi's energy network is another non-mechanical technology. In this fairy tale (meant respectfully), their technology is intricately connected to balance, rather than to exponential growth and extractive exploitation of natural resources. Given that humankind is currently on a historical cusp in choosing between sustainable and exponential technology models, it's natural that a movie contrasting those in fictional format will push some buttons! Clearly Cameron is more oriented towards the sustainable and integrative, which will please some and piss off others - not an unheard of role for drama.

The four basic tensions behind drama - man against man, man against society, man against nature, man against himself - were all played out in this movie; that was more important to this movie's dramatic success than an intericate plot. An interesting aspect is that the Na'vi serve both as "man" (expanded to mean sentient and sapient creatures) and to represent nature.

In more politically progressive venues, some pan the movie because it shows "the primitive colored natives need a white guy to lead them to freedom, being incapable of setting their own destiny". I see this as being more about hybrid vigor, about a fusion of the two backgrounds being needed - Jake is a figure who turns out to be of mythic proportions, who draws from both cultures.

Is Cameron not similar, in terms of bridging the worlds of high tech and of "woo woo nature loving spiritual and environmental" sensibilities? One man's bridge between cultures is another man's "hypocrit".

By the way, did anybody else notice that the movie's CGI characters were effectively "avatars" of the motion captured flesh and blood actors (resonating with both the biological avatars of the movie, and the virtual avatars of 3d gaming). There are a lot of nesting analogies played with in this movie.

EstherGeek says "Seriously, though, the film maker spends millions and millions of dollars on technology for his movie that basically says technology can be dark and bad and used for nefarious purposes."

I suggest you see the movie before concluding that you know it all from the trailers. The folks here have focused on the technology aspects, but that's really only background to the movie. It's a love story, it's about personal courage, it's about deep choices of how to be human in the broadest sense, and it's a violent 3D battle. It's about a vision of spiritual interconnectedness that many yearn for in today's fragmented world. You may love it or hate it or have a mixed reaction - but if you think you "know the plot" from the ads and that basic plot summary is that matters about a movie, then you may be missing out on the many rich other levels that separate good and bad fiction in any medium.

First off I would like to say how can anyone form an opinion
on a Movie they have not seen ? We all make comits on its generic predictable story ,and I was warned about this before going to see it, in my opinion the story "works" and was done in such a way as to be easy to relate to , I was very impressed with the films technoligy, some scenes where just an awe inspiring jaw on the floor experence .the NA,VI where very convincing to the point where I had to remind myself this is a fantasy film, The 3D imaging realy is imersive and makes the viewer "feel like they are there " The films way of looking at humanity realy sets it apart from other films in this catagory it looks at "us"" soceity as a whole (with a few not so subtle refrences to events on earth we can all relate too) For some its a real wakeup call, to others a very imersive fantasy story depends on the person seeing the film.
I found it to be an astounding example of human creativy
that is well worth seeing, and recomend that people check out
youtube with the search term "Avatar" to see how the film was made.

Okay, a couple of things:

1) The special effects were awesome, but I felt the 3-D renderings were severely lacking. Too often you saw a door swing towards you, but then when going through a waterfall or seeing rain from the sky, it was flat and looked 2-D. I don't care about doors, but seeing myself immersed in rain or water is awesome.

2) The storyline did suck. Not only was it predictable, but it didn't make any sense. It was never explained why humans needed this precious metal that just happened to sit below the center of an alien's habitat. Was the metal needed to save planet Earth...extend a scientific break-through..or what? Because saying the metal was worth millions per ounce means nothing, particularly in the future when there's no reference to inflation. Maybe a million dollars in the movie was like a hundred dollars today.

3) I appreciate the story was trying to show how capitalism breeds greed so awful that we will destroy mother nature at any cost to achieve our sadistic goals. I myself, am a big believer in green technology and removing the poisons we eat, drink and breathe every day. However, it doesn't necessarily make a great storyline, particularly for a cutting-edge 3-D action movie. And if Cameron wanted to get this point across, he should have done it in a documentary, not a movie where people can't relate because it's not perceived as real.

www.dupagelawfirm.com

So yes I am completed surprised at the rave reviews that Avatar is getting. Personally I wouldn't bother at all with the 2D version - the script is certainly not this movie's strength. Maybe the IMAX version might be a better option for those really wanting to see some real science fiction 3D action.
www.eprostateproblems.com

Avatar after only hitting the cinemas for a few weeks is well on its way to making movie history, by surpassing Titanic as the world's biggest earning movie. Certainly the local cinemas showing the 3D version are booked out for multiple days in advance, even for late-night and afternoon sessions.
www.ankylosingspondylitiscenter.com/

It is true that technology makes the amazing work of Avatar happen, for me though, the film was a bit too long, especially when you wear the 3 D glass sitting there for more than 3 hours, maybe not for my kid. Interesting article here though. Thanks,
www.profimasking.de

Technology and Content:
Traditionally technology mostly helped with and not the content, for Avatar, in my view technology did helped with the content and I think that is part of the reasons what it was so successful.

thanks,

www.cool-art-studio.de

Destroying less technologically capable cultures has been done many times in the past and it's contemptible. That's what this movie is about: soulless avarice. Think about that the next time you drive by an Indian reservation.

With the death of mainstream criticism caused by the tyranny of the PR machine, its great to read a review that is really on the money. Sure AVATAR is flawed but its still a rather enjoyable experience, quite beautiful in places, surprising in others and truly groundbreaking because Cameron uses the technology to tell a simple story with characters you can engage with. He seems to genuinely care about the audience and their experience of his films rather than just serving up a load of visuals. Isn’t Cameron interesting because he is someone who is interested in the World outside cinema and explores themes and interests in his work; only a diver can create world’s like Pandora and only an ex-truck driver growing up in the 70’s can have such a love hate relationship with machines and even the military industrial complex? He has something to say, which tends to suggests he’s actually an artist unlike the empty, bombastic, visual stylists who came after him and make “tent pole” films devoid of story and characters but based on toys or theme park rides. As for the flaws of AVATAR, sure everything is simple but I suspect that’s because Cameron wants to play to as wide an audience as possible and realises that not everyone is as sophisticated as the cineastes who write blogs or reviews. Thank God someone who is as successful as James Cameron, still wants to be ambitious and take risks in a World that would happily pay him enormous sums to make another Terminator, Aliens or other franchise. Even if you don’t like the film give him that. And I write this as someone who hated TITANIC with a passion.

JeremyQooki

www.eaffinitymortgage.com