It cost well over $600 Million to make, so is it worth a watch? Does the 3D really make that much difference? and don't those aliens look a lot like Ferngully? All answered (mostly) down below:
I'd love to know how you guys found it, hit me up down below.
And you can subscribe to the reviews at the triple j movies podcast. (No iTunes? head here)
I'd love to know how you guys found it, hit me up down below.
And you can subscribe to the reviews at the triple j movies podcast. (No iTunes? head here)
5 comments:
I can't say I found it as amazing as you did haha. Actually we only differ by half a star...so I guess we sort of agree.
I reviewed it here: http://filmvisuality.blogspot.com/2009/12/review-avatar.html
I thought the visuals were amazing but the plot was appalling, agreed with you about Sam Worthington. But I didn't think visuals could save it alone.
I also found the visuals absolutely amazing. The 3D was used superbly and the animation blew me away.
The plot was terrible and the dialogue was flat... but I didn't care that much. I was grateful it wasn't competing what you were watching.
I wasn't bored during the film and I wasn't waiting for it to just finish - something that I was afraid would happen if it wasn't properly sustained through the movie.
I think it was awesome, and something I could watch again easily.
Yeah, I think 4 stars overall is a fair call (I'd give it the same), but doesn't do justice to how good the visuals are, or to how Cameron has pushed the technology, raising the bar of what is possible cinematically. It's the writing that brings the score down overall, but I've seen it twice now, in both 3D and 2D. It's clearly a much more spectacular experience in 3D, but I prefer the 2D experience. Until they work out how to get 3D without glasses, this will remain a problem.
One thing that struck me on second viewing is how little the triteness of the messages and the cliched characterisations bothered me on second viewing. Perhaps I was expecting them and they just didn't bother me at all second time around. In spite of these flaws, I'm impressed that it can engage me completely for the best part of 3 hours and there's not a flat moment anywhere that I can disceren.
I disagree with you about Worthington's accent. It sounds like a Brooklyn accent to me and the missus didn't even know he wasn't American. For me, his voiceover sounded like a 40s film noir narrative, and I enjoyed it a lot.
Even on second viewing, I found Jake's appearance at the sacred tree on the back of the Tiruk quite moving and brought tears to my eyes. I'm even considering seeing this in 3D again, just to observe the technical aspects a bit more closely. BTW, I'm not a blockbuster type of film-goer at all.
I didn't see it in 3D, but BOY O BOY, I'm thinking of making a trip to Sydney just to find a cinema with the facilities so I can.
I'm a cheese-loving sop, so all the dodgy dialogue sort of just went over my head.
FUCKING GORGEOUS.
I want to go and see it again, and again. And maybe once more for good luck.
Visually spectacular - 3D has come a long way since red and green cereal boxes!
Seeing the movie and forking out the cash is worth it just to experience not only the 3D aspect but also the amazing land/landscape/environment created.
Dialogue is nothing special and if anything at times more cheesy than a Fat Pizza pizza.
I would have enjoyed this movie much more if I didn't take it so seriously.t
Post a Comment