[EDIT: ADDED section: Comments and/or Reviews by other Deviants!]Just got back from a late night 3d screening. Honestly, I'm as disappointed by it as I was with the trailer. Maybe even a bit more so, now that I've had time to simmer and think through the reasons on the ride home.
Before you go on, I'd like to remind everyone that this isn't a 'objective' review of the film so much as a rant about what I liked or didn't like. So that said, on to the fun stuff. I actually feel annoyed I have to spell it out to so many.General impression: 6.6/10 [EDIT: I've found the ultimate three liner to express how I feel about the film, here goes:
"I came wanting to root for the cheesy one dimensional blood-thirsty all-consuming machine of man, and to express my hate for blue furry aliens. But by the end of the film I found myself turning my back on mankind and all I wanted was to hump hot blue Na'Vi chicks. I have never felt more confused and upset with myself ever lol."
[EDIT: Learned from
that James Cameron told his Na'Vi designers to "make them fuckable." I stand free of guilt now! Just kidding. About the guilt part not the James Cameron part.]
Technology and CGI: 12/10 (mindblowing)
RDA Visual design (Human): 5/10 (-4 cause of the AMPsuit)
RDA Environment design (Human): 9/10
Visual design (Na'Vi and creature effects): 9/10
World design (Pandora): 5/10 (only because it doesn't seem as fresh as I felt they could have made it. Read Zeruch's review linked at the bottom of the journal.)
Story and Plot : -/- Sci Fi film of the year still goes to District 9 to me. I cried once.. or twice? Can't remember. And no it wasn't because of the prawn suit. Okay maybe... Just once. The other was when Prawn Senior said, "3 years... I promise". I still remember my parting line with the cinema, "fuck me, James Cameron better bring it, especially with 10 times the budget"
I hate to be the (seemingly) only person in this room whose got something negative to say about the movie, beyond the obvious lack of coherent story (still a major understatement imho). But I have to say I felt pretty empty after walking out of the cinema. Here's why (I'll start with the bad, and end with the good, just so you don't think I'm a hater.):
{EDIT: Because I'm not a hater of James Cameron!! I'm a huge fan of Cameron and I think this movie deserved a better effort in some ways! But mostly I blame it on the AMPsuit! This journal would have never happened if not for the goddamnned AMPsuit!
)---------[spoiler alert -stay away unless you want to taste Na'vi dog piss from here on!]-----------------The BAD with respect to the:Visual Theme for the RDA:I get the whole 'big idea' behind the Vietnam-era aesthetic for the military stuff. I do. But I still think its such a huge visual cop out, when you had the time and the budget to make something new and exciting and dare I say alot more relatable to the current generation (what about Iraq and more modern day tech as a reference for the future? I don't believe that Vietnam is the only conflict in history that showcases 'arrogance' and 'stupidity' as visual themes for the design, I think its the actions that speak for themselves, not the look...and its clearly holding the production design back, imho. The fact that the approach itself is so -literal- makes me feel insulted that they didn't want to try. I dunno, but it looks so... self indulgent. A bad throwback to Aliens perhaps. Problem is, it works even less effectively here than it did then.
Vietnam had Communist NVC and South Vietnam and the US + Allies fighting in a jungle setting on the same world, over containing the spread of communism. In AVATAR, you have an alien world, fantasy alien feline race, and 'private space military company' expeditionary force with corporate financial backing that is more Fern Gully meets a world purge in Warhammer 40k than anything else. Do you need a Vietnam era 'link'? Is it still valid? Does the audience care? What has the communist war of Vietnam to do with the story of a mega corporation running a village over to harvest a rainforest? I think it just limited the design potential and shot so many loopholes in itself as a result.
Exosuit..AMP suit: Yeah, you knew I was gonna rip on it first right

1)Looks like retrofitted Apache cockpit with 4 limbs hooked up to an often over-emphasised motion capture system. Can half a billion dollars buy good taste? Suppose not. For a film that has its only excuse as a 'visual extravaganza with stuff you have never seen before', please don't shoot yourself in the foot. It is so uninspired, and... haha, i think I get it now.. that's the 'arrogant' look they were going for!! -_-
2)Awkward 'tech sense'. 1950s overall aesthetic, with civic-industrial limbs, with 1990-2000s gun and graphic design. Has better hydraulic and movement capabilities than its looks suggests. Fails at how to make design 'seem' efficient or even sensible given its PURPOSE, or failing which, how to simply make design interesting and exciting. Why does it look and move so clumsily, have such an awkward gait and silly firing stance that is GANGSTA STYLE FROM DA CHEST YO and ridiculous belt feed prone to jamming (when firing from the hip in a much more macho fashion and a large drum magazine would have sufficed)... and have a HUGE glass cockpit just begging for an accident to happen?
If they had armoured up the cockpit just a tad, it might actually be passable to me (I, like many fanboys out there have fucking low standards when I'm desperate to WANT TO LOVE JAMES CAMERONS STUFF). But since they chose to go hollywood retard and 'expose the rider! The audience needs to relate to the pilot!'... you get a big fat 0 from me. In short, it doesn't look and move and feel like a war machine. Please don't say they were 'modified civillian power loaders and that they weren't expecting heavy resistance. The fact they had what seemed like hundreds of gunships loaded for bear and even mobile fortresses with cute firing positions on its back are good enough reason for me to assume they were prepared for the worst. Simply ridiculous. You would think the mecha in such shows is the most futuristic, fantastical sci-fi idea that would visually catch the eye and win the hearts of fanboys like me. Well it spat in mine.
3)It's 50.cal machine gun sounds far more 'realistic' and beefier in the Ubisoft Avatar game (that's what they call it despite it looking more like 20mm). Look at the damn muzzle brake on the thing. Why does it sound like it fires small caliber munition. Only chance to gunwhore the concept: fail. How can you fail at something so simple. I refuse to think its an oversight. Which means it had to have a reason. And that reason, is fail.
Gear: I get the pixel camo thing. Isn't that modern? What happend to Vietnam era plain olive camo...the theme they were obviously gunning for in the rest of the RDA design? I'm not even asking for pseudo vegation pattern here, I'm saying PLAIN? Also ignoring the breathmasks (which are perfectly fine civic looking design)... where are the helmets. They year is 2150 and life expectancy is down to 20 seconds? Is that why no need for helmets? Or body armour? stupid expensive AMP suits when you could have fielded more troops with proper body armour and greater survivability for the same price. Okay.
Weapons (namely the bullet firing guns): I swear. The guns, of varying calibers and styles are beautiful, but all sound the same in pitch. The moment the 'forest charge' scene came up and the lead exosuit guy opens up... I was almost in tears. For a moment I thought he was firing his sidearm or something. From that point on I just couldn't help but notice all the guns sound alike...and weak. Even the M60 looking mounts on the side of the Scorpion/Samson(?) choppers... to the much faster firing dual miniguns mounted on the "Papa Dragon" dropship. For a film that seemed like the easiest way to feature gunporn (not to mention no limits since its fantasy)...really came up short. Designs looked brilliant, but the sounds are so sad and weak. Oh but the rockets and bombs sound great and thumpy and so full of bass. Not that I cared for rockets more than guns. As I'm sure most people do... they are so impersonal and 'cheap', even from a narrative point of view. I will never understand.
Environment design (nature): What? For real? I think games like Lost Planet has more exciting, fantastical and yet credible environments that don't just create immersion but enhance the suspended reality you are already in. Games have better balance of 'real' and 'unreal' than this. I didn't pay serious money to see a pretty tame 're-adaptation' of a tropical rainforest, and even for one- a single page out of national geographic blows my mind more. I think I know why, because it seems to be portrayed so naturalistic at times, that it dumbs down on the awe factor. I know they apparently did fucktonnes of research and design, and I commend it. It just a shame that I didn't notice any of it between the rocket blasts and daisy cutter bombs. I'm sorry. OR should it be the other way around
USB link theme(my friend came up with that term, thanks Weiliang, you're a genius.): The USB-hivemind theme that Nature/Ey-wa(?) shares is absurd. EVery fucking thing is plug and play via brain stem connection. Hi ma'am, where can I plug my brain extension? Up your **********? WOOOHYEAH LETS PARTAY!!! I'm IN CONTROL OF YOUR MIND BEEYATCH. LETS RIDE! No I'm serious. That's how they ride and TAME their horses and mounts. By mind-link. Okay. Animal rights? Nevermind.
-Yes I get the whole ham fisted point that everything on Pandora shares a sacred bond that transcends flesh. Question is did they need to make such an explicit reference to Native American tribe culture for the Na'Vi? 'Savages?' Wow.-
Except its obviously not done to the Navi, but rather to the unfortunate and pitiful inhabitants of the rainforest. The main irony is how all spirits are deemed equal in the eyes of nature, and yet they are used and abused by the Na'vi for their own food, warring and petty affairs (like horse riding when you have flying mounts. Right.) I got nothing against animal abuse in a fantastical context, I'm a really insensitive brute. But it is contradicting and confusing when you create this unnecessary layer that constantly attacks the fabric of the story and the protagonists you are trying to get me to root for.
Another irony here is that after they take down an animal with a NEUROTOXIN ARROW, and while its in its infinitely painful death throes, they pray, yes pray long and hard, and wish the spirit of the animal well on its journey to return to the tree of life and finish by stabbing them in the heart while the poor animal is writhing and gurgling in extended death throes.
Could you maybe kill it as fast as youfuckingcansoasnottoprolongitssufferingmaybe? THEN proceed to religious mumbo jumbo after? If i was a spirit the only thing i'd be doing when i leave my body is giving you a very long extended Pandorian finger.
Overall point I'm trying to make is if every sentient being is interconnected mentally and physically for so long and they are in many ways more evolved than us... why are they all 'immature' retards whose highest form of technology is bows and arrows? ACtually, I take that back. I suppose technology doesn't define the success or evolution of a species. Just intellect. So why are they still so barbaric when you have 'education potential' beyond comprehension at your fingertips. A Hive mind that's stupid and primitive. Doesn't add up.
ZERO Gore but plenty of 'R rated implied violence': Where. is. the. gore. When 50.cal goes into a cat persons body, I want to see cat person fluids in the camera. We deserve it. Gore doesn't make the world a worse place. NO GORE makes it obvious we are restraining ourselves and coming across as pretentious in a film that is ALREADY A VISUAL INDULGENCE EXTRAVAGANZA for teen types that are old enough to watch HOSTEL. PLEASE, we kill nature and burn whole forests and stab alien dogs in the face and light alien horses on fire but we can't show some good ol' BLUE CATGUTS... O M F G!!! ANGRY.
MUSIC: I know its James Horner. What makes it even more worrying is how it sounds like Enemy at the Gates at times...most of the time. You know the 4 note motif.. that unsettling arrangement. Its practically the main motif in AVATAR as well. I know, beats me. I hate having to keep telling myself to ignore it when all the 4 notes says to me is "caution, danger ahead, cause Ed Harris is waiting to blow you the fuck away with a godly sniper shot while you're making a 6 foot running jump." when they are in an EPIC SCENE SUITING UP FOR BATTLE. GAWD!
AND NOW FOR THE GOOD (yay): Na'Vi and Creature effects: STUNNING. I was actually turned on by Nayfiri. Zoe Saldana voiced her anyway. I don't want to sound like an anthro lover but damn it her body just looks like Angelina Jolie's. And she has an open back thong and no shirt. Okay? And her face just looks so Jolie. Jolie + Cat girl + Open thong, squatting legs wide open over a Panzer Dragoon looking mount. Please try to see what I'm seeing. I dare you.
Creature designs not stuff that blows me away in the originality department, but is clearly the strongest aspect of the film's aesthetic to me. Simple and thoughtful, nothing overly complicated. Very...'refined'. I'm glad the creatures 'only' look that cool, its almost as though the creature designers were looking over to the RDA department going *lol, come on guys.. catch up, I can't make this any cooler or it'll really make you look bad* Hat's off again. I think Neville Page did alot of the creature work? Awesome.
Aside from that, the acting/animation/mocap and facial animation is nothing short of AMAZING, I was totally immersed and there was little need for 'suspension of disbelief' effort on my part. It was that real, that good. Hat's off to the animators. Especially that 'mega dog'(Found out its called a "Thanator") scene where its scratching wildly at the base of tree to get at Jake Sully. Holy shit was that raw!
Transportation design: - Generally liked it all, except for the Vietnam theme thing which I really don't think makes for 'cutting edge shit you've never seen'... but i've explained that above and I don't want to sound like a broken record. For what it's worth, I think the 'vehicle' design is more successful because it has alot more sense packed into its details (and I'm betting a much easier time in designing since they practically rip style and elements off Hueys and Cold War era stuff.)... What I'm more impressed with though, is how they manage to make the silhouettes and profiles so attractive and simple at the same time. Even the dual cockpit on the 'Papa Dragon' dropship. Senseless, but made up for by cool fierce aesthetic (like a double headed turtle of some kind)...and functionality factor cause apparently one pod is for navigators/weapons crew and the other is for the piloting crew. Maybe its 2 pods to increase survivability. Once again demerit points because clearly the designers never cared about 'wow that sure looks hard to CLEAN and maintain'...which subconsciously affects people's view towards design, whether they realise it or not. But thats 1 demerit point to a 10 point design. Also it has what I think is a close in weapons pod in front, with dual miniguns. That's made of win. I'm that easy to please. I know :/ Come to think of it, why isn't it on top to let it do its job better? SEE THIS IS WHAT I HATE about writing this thing about Avatar.. some of that design is always shooting itself in the foot!
-Rogue 1 (Michelle Rodriguez's Scorpion)..that's what she calls it in her last moments right? How apt. Rogue 1 stands apart because it is the only bird that has 2 wire cutters in a 'devil horn' configuration. I thought that was pretty cool and gave her real character. I seem to notice such things. ^_^ [edit: just found out ALL of them had it. -__- Thanks Mike.]
-"Daisy Cutter use" trans-atmospheric shuttle had makeshift fire positions bolted on its back in the final assault. Along with 'sandbags' made from supplies and gear just quickly strapped together . I totally dig that. But then I realise that to have done that they would have guessed that they'd be attacked from above. So why did the entire wing fly at the same altitude, eventually still low and vulnerable to attacks from above. Wouldn't a small detachment of defender craft helped by giving more effective support fire from a higher alt? Just thinking back to WW2 and B17s and some 'military authenticity'. Plus its not as though the would've changed the inevitable outcome right? Details, details.
-I think I spotted different variants of the dragonfly as well. I think I saw one with a much sleeker, thinner profile more akin to a AH1... in the hangar scene. If my eyes weren't playing tricks on me, then well bloody done for a detail.
Environment design (human): Holy. Wow. Probably the only reason I stayed awake through the show. The amount of detail, not to mention attention to the corporate theme, is just mindblowing. Its hardly ever overstated (unlike the military design in the show... sniff) and it makes so much sense. Nothing much more to add other than brilliant. Did I say brilliant? Even the animal cage setup they have for the Avatar's in training. That is just.. bizarre but so.. fitting, like your pet that you still don't trust to stay home : ) Brilliant detail.
I think I'm done, if I think of anything else I'll keep editing the text, but that's really it from me, I'm all spent.
Reason why there isn't a proper 'closing statement' is to reflect my exact sentiments after watching the movie. Because there is no real sense to the story, you then seek out the next best thing, the art. And I think I broke it down here pretty neatly. So its not hard to be aware of what one likes or dislikes, and that is often the saddest thing, when you really want to love a work of cinema in totality but end up scraping the bottom of the barrel or picking scraps from the table to fuel your reason to love it. OH and thanks for all your comments. Some were unfortunately rude, even from people I thought were mature, but otherwise a nice balance of lovers and 'non-lovers' as I will call it.

Please share your views if you care to

Would love to hear what everyone has to say about the film. Cheers and goodnight!
ADDED section: Comments and Reviews by other Deviants!
[link]<------please click on Zeruch's original link to view the images. Unfortunately the formatting doesn't carry over and so the links don't appear as they should. Remember to view the original source!!!!!!!"For those of you so enamored with Avatar
what in bloody hell is wrong with you?
It is a good (not great) B-Movie with mostly C-grade scripting and D-List acting. Was it a decent adventure-y film for a Sunday night? Sure. Was it the grand cinematic experience its been hyped to be? Not even close.
Here is a rundown:
* Just to get it out of the way, yes, the effects are staggering in places, in particular the aerial scenes. On that front, and that is the only one Cameron seems to have any skill at, he scores.
* He gets one-dimensional performances out of actors that can do so much more, including one of my favorites, Sigourney Weaver. Seriously, the acting only works when it comes to cretins like the big Marine guy, who is supposed to be one-dimensional in terms of having a focused area to root against. By the end of the film though, you almost start hoping he wins and scorches the planet into a burnt cinder. Giovanni Ribisi is so pathetic, he almost wins out against what I have long thought was Camerons worst casting blunder, Paul Reiser in Aliens. Talent like Weaver and Worthington deserve better.
* The scenery in much of the film is at best an homage and at most a full blown pillaging of the Roger Dean library. Seriously, look at things like Arches, Dragons Garden, Sea of Light and one has to wonder. Apparently, I am not the only one who thinks this either.
* Im sorry, but while some of the facial mannerisms and such of the Navi are impressive, the overall idea of a bunch of androgynous, gigantic smurf/elvin hybrids as things one could feel empathetic to, I am wondering if Cameron has joined some kind of bad anime-cosplay-furry commune and otherwise lost the plot of reality altogether. The idea that there is any emotional heartstrings to pull on when two of them get it on in a supposedly sacred religious site is also kind of baffling.
* The ecological and political themes of the film are so hamfisted, so overbearing and telegraphed, it almost insulted the intellect. Its not that expect big cerebral concepts in films like this, but even by that standard Avatar is just one drunk and clumsy epic.
* The use of some circa-1995 grade font to subtitle the weird Mezo-American/Urdu/Bantu miasma of a language the Navi spoke was just an eyesore.
* An element actually called Unobtainium? Are you
never mind. Maybe you thought you were being ironically funny. Hint: no.
No James, you are not King of the World. The only thing I can really thank you for is that in having helped the 3D camera tech you used in this film, real directors like Ridley Scott will be using it to make actually great films.
In all fairness, 5.5 out of 10."

"I completely agree with your visual design analysis. Always in the back of my mind was the thought, why doesn't this leap out and grab me like star wars does? It certainly had a bigger budget. The throwbacks to random parts of earth history were unexpected and irking. It just didn't strike me to be as rich and unique as I expected it to. The excessive saturation of everything completely detracted from the visual look at ALL points, where to the stage there was the slow motion desaturated scene and I went "Hey, that looks more realistic". Some points I was so enamored with the beautiful glowing and oranges and greens that I wasn't paying attention to how sad the scene was meant to be. It was too bright and lovely for me to take it seriously. I know it's over-cliche to desaturate when there's chaos, but damn, man, I couldn't see the war for all those gorgeous trees.
For me, I noticed some different stuff. The lack of backstory killed everything for me. We had no idea until twenty minutes in that this wasn't the first time they had tried the avatar program. And the character development was weak at best. The process of identity crisis and self definition, and his monumental choice to change permanently into his Na'Vi body, was made insignificant by the fact that we know nothing about his past, and what would motivate him to change his identity at all. Sure his legs were a nice cop out for motivation, but I felt no emotional investment in the character at all. He was a stranger to me.
I think perhaps Sully was meant to be the blank slate character that people can step into the shoes of and empathise with, a sort of video game protagonist who you identify yourself with...but I wasn't after an introspective experience. And even then, if that was their intention, then it would only serve to make me feel more confused about my identity because i don't have the option of changing bodies. If you want to call that a moot point, go talk to my friend jacob, he empathised with the character and now he's depressed because he wants to reidentify himself, but doesn't have the option to change bodies. A small psychological point to most, but it irked me.
There are some other things that annoyed me. First of all the film had the worst transition I have ever seen, where the two main characters press their faces and breath in, which was supposed to segway to the sound of the engine in the next scene. I felt myself slightly jump when the shot changed. Who the hell gave the green light on that transition? I expected fluency from a budget that huge.
Organisation of story to provide immersion seemed...flawed at best. Sully is our protagonist, so why is it that the first time we journey onto the most beautiful parts of the planet in a helicopter IS A TWO SHOT SCENE? Jake is discovering the beautiful vistas of a new world for the first time, and seeing a place he'd heard about back on a dry earth...and yet we are not granted the cinematic glory that such a moment would provide? We see two shots from a neutral, "God" point of view which show the helicopter...and yet we can barely see the vistas which some visual designers spent weeks working on? Just a waterfall they fly over?
What in the ******************
As an amateur filmmaker, scriptwriter and film student, this film brought minor irritations on so many points. I'm presuming it was for the sake of time that these sacrifices were made. I understand that, but I still disagree with it.
The music was uninspired and repetitive, reminiscent of the composer's previous work. I was not impressed. At all. As a musician, songwriter and absolute music lover, I found the compositions and the implementation to be...uninteresting.
Let me get this straight. I can't do a better film. But people who are getting paid thousands to this stuff, THEY SURE AS HELL CAN DO A BETTER FILM. Having seen District 9 and Dark Knight most recently, both technical and cinematic masterpieces, I feel Avatar has fallen short of its intended calibre. And maybe I would have enjoyed the film more if my friend hadn't spent three days trying to convince me until I eventually consented when he offered to pay the ticket and transport - his hyperbole was so desensitizing that I became pessimistic about the film. I was pleasantly surprised and I enjoyed the film a lot, but it did not live up to the hype in my opinion.
Ironically, I'd give the film 7/10 - I did enjoy it a lot, as a movie experience, there was a lot to be had there and the explosions were tasty. I just had to get all the negative stuff off my chest because I'm sick of people claiming that this is better than star wars and halo etc. ><"

"FINALLY someone with a critical review of Avatar! And FINALLY someone who's equally disappointed by those bloody awful mech designs! The really painful thing is; how often does mech combat get a decent budget and a huge audience? They obviously had tremendous artistic resources available so what's their f*in excuse, huh? Epic epic mecha FAIL. Gimmie 5 minutes and I'll pull 20 amateur artists from who could have come up with better designs. C'mon, Cameron, really? District 9 did a better job in that department -and the difference in budget is probably close to the gross national product of Sweden. Obviously, this film is a huge and wonderful technical achievement, and deserves praise where it's due -but that just makes weak designs in one area seem all the more incongruous and unforgiveable. This ain't no B movie Robot Jocks right? So WTF?
Can't comment on the rest, cuz I actually haven't seen it yet. But I really appreciate this in-depth analysis and your brutally honest perspective. "

I agree with you especially on the lack of creativity inherent with the Vietnam-esque etiquette to their designs and themes. You'd think that Cameron would've moved on to more original ideas after using that style in Aliens, but hell maybe he figured if it worked then during confused times in the real world then it would work again in today's climate. Really expected more out of that.
And I'm really glad I'm not the only one who kept wanting scream at someone over the 'glass windows' on the mechs. They really were screaming "kill me here-->" with that one.
Oh and lets not forget your mention of the retarded 'lanetary USB network.' To be honest, I was hoping they would have some kind of mind-boggling plot twist concerning the origin of that. I mean come on, if any living organism can communicate by simple contact with a fucking ponytail isn't that a big deal there?? I couldn't believe they left that completely unexplained. The sheer lack of real plot development/twists beyond the cliche and mentally numbing was a real downer for me.
I think I'm going to use your description of the movie from now on whenever I describe it to somebody: "Fern Gully meets Warhammer 40K purge" Hell that would've probably turned out better actually.

I agree with your points. Personally I found Avatar to be cliched from the moment I figured out the storyline from the trailer; I went expecting eye candy. I watch movies on two levels; an analytical level and a suspension-of-disbelief level. Some series, like HBO's Generation Kill, are done so well that analytically I don't see anything wrong with them*, except for I believe two things in the example of GenKill. I feel that they could have conceptualized Avatar a lot better and I would have enjoyed it far more. The sound effects completely lost me; it's an important thing to consider that unlike the United States, where most of the civilian populace has no idea what heavy weapons sound like, many other countries have mandatory military service. I believe you've served, and I know all of my Finnish, Swiss, and Norwegian, friends have - they too noted the very weak weapon sounds. It was pretty bad for one of them, who is the assigned gunner of a Pasi 8x8 APC; he spends a lot of time behind a KvKK 12.7mm HMG.
Add Media
Style