WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

"Avatar" - What Did You Think?

Posted: December 18th, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
"Avatar" - What Did You Think?Submit Comment
After all the massive hype behind James Cameron's "Avatar," the film is finally playing in theaters. If you have already seen it, we want to know what you thought. Write you mini-reviews in the comments section below.

In your review, mention if you saw the movie in 3D, like it was intended by Cameron. Was it mind-blowing? Will it change everything we know about movies? Is a trilogy needed to explore the world Cameron created? Or was it just average?

Come back on Sunday to see how "Avatar" performed in theaters. At this point, it has earned a less-than-impressive $3.5 million from midnight showings and will likely bring in $80 million over the weekend.

Click here to read our "Avatar" review.

Source: WorstPreviews.com


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 280 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
darthraige writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:41:06 PM

f*ckING AMAZING!
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:44:00 PM

@ darthraige:

Please specify, I'd like to know.
Long Pants Tramp writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:55:16 PM

With all its faults, I must say that I really, really want to return to Pandora!

It's been three hours since the film ended and I still feel rather melancholy leaving its wonderful world. There was something genuinely hypnotic about it. I couldn't care less about the plot or any of the (human) characters - they were what one can expect in such an archetypal story. I just want to close my eyes and go back.

And that's a pretty special feeling, if you ask me.
Aaron writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:55:17 PM

Saw it in 2d.

Pros: Visually Stunning. Epic.

Cons: Main Villain was unbearably two dimensional. Second half felt a bit abrupt. (but to me, it didn't feel particularly long as a lot of reviewers apparently thought.)

The trite plot: Seemed more like a cinematic device than a fault. Everything, visually speaking, is so outlandish and alien that the audience needs something familiar to ground them.

Worthy of the same rating as New Moon? on the basis of ambition alone - I don't think so.

Worth 9 bucks? Definitely. Worth another 9? To me, yeah.

"Game Changer"? For science fiction and fantasy - yeah, I think it raised the bar a bit. But then not all science fiction or fantasy is about alien life so..
Aido4258 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:56:41 PM

It was good, the CGI was the best I have ever seen, seriously, so photorealistic. The story pretty much speaks for itself, if you watched the trailer, you know the story.
Vin12 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:59:37 PM

@pete
Cameron delivered on the photorealism he promised. it was an old fastioned adventure story and reminded me as was expected, of pocahotas. ironingly, the only thinvg i hate about avatar was the 3d lol. it made me dizzy and took me right out of the movie. Other than that, as darthraige said f-ing amazing.
Aido4258 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:02:29 PM

How did, Did You Hear About the Morgans and Old Dogs get better reviews than this. They were sh*t movies WTF.
nope.com writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:07:19 PM

visuals were stunning

... that is it (don't count on seeing an engaging story if that's up your alley)

A shame you have to have a transformer's complex to enjoy this film
atn5022 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:08:22 PM

i thought it was fantastic. best CGI in film to date by far. I enjoyed the story, even if it was slightly generic. The 3d was extremely immersive, by far the best use of 3d in film, not just cheap gags.
47konst writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:09:07 PM

It's absolutely amazing and a must see for everyone. The effects are truly spectacular and though the storyline/script is flawless it still holds well. James Cameron is truly THE man. Giving the this masterpiece a 5/10 is a joke.
47konst writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:10:35 PM

I of course meant to say ...ISN'T flawless...
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:15:34 PM

Story is laughably thin but visuals were suprisingly fresh.

I'd give it a 7.5/10 but I believe that visuals are there to inhance a plot, not to make up for lack of one (which is why I'm excited for Iron Man 2).

Final rating: 6/10
Goober3000 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:16:26 PM

do you see smurf boobies?
carl4prez writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:17:38 PM

Not only is AVATAR the best film of the year, but one of the best films ever made!! James Cameron once again can give all the haters the middle finger as he graces the screen with the most jaw dropping effects since Dorthy went to Oz. The Star Wars of our time, it's also great with the actors, story, and direction. Simply put, f*ck George Lucas & f*ck Michael Bay, James Cameron is still the king of the world!
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:18:08 PM

"At this point, it has earned a less-than-impressive $3.5 million from midnight showings"

Lol
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:21:36 PM

"Not only is AVATAR the best film of the year, but one of the best films ever made!!"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHDQFEIHFWEOIHFAESOHICF HOLY sh*t f*ckING ROFL

"James Cameron once again can give all the haters the middle finger as he graces the screen with the most jaw dropping effects since Dorthy went to Oz."

yes, because we all know that Effects = Plot, right, RIGHT?! Wrong.

"The Star Wars of our time,"

Why is every third sci-fi movie the "star wars of our time"?

"it's also great with the actors,"

Agreed.

"story,"

Severely disagreed.

"and direction."

James did as much directing work as Brad Bird did for any of his Pixar films.

I also like how you listed Lucas and Bay as other related directors, you know, the CGI whore and the Explosion slut?
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:23:00 PM

anyway, I'll stop here.

Was I blown away? No, but I was mildly suprised. Will I watch it again? Probably not, unless its on tv and I have nothing to do.

as I've said: 6/10
Vega writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:26:00 PM

If it doesn't perform well over the weekend I can all ready hear them blaming the weather on the east coast. The news is making this out to be something on the order of Day After Tomorrow.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:41:47 PM

sorry people i have to leave the theater before the end i just can't stand the stupidity of Sam W. my God he just sucks all the movie i hope some day you will see the true that he is a piece of sh*t and that f*ck! GAYVATAR, the efects dont made an impression on me I like more a good history that good special effects. sorry for me 3/10 and somebody pls kill the douchebag of Sam W.
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:42:22 PM

I will say that the film is very good. The story is nice, the characters are all likable and both Worthington and Zaldana did a great job as Jake and Neytiri. The visual effects are spectactular and so is the soundtrack at times. Not everything is perfect though, the dialouge is ranging from good to decent to mediocre to just plain bad. It`s like several writers competed about deliviring the dialouge and the quality ranges all the time. The plot, while having it`s very good moments, can get predictable, not having any real surprise to impress
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:49:07 PM

Trueman, I'd expect nothing less from you, bud!
Too funny...
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:51:13 PM

Box office success may be Cameron's Unobtainium.

Ironic, huh?
4Faith6 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:51:31 PM

Just Saw it in 3D!!! ............... I am speechless! Is Was AMAZING!!! The 3D was very impressive and The CGI and Sound was Stunning! The story is something we can all take a lesson from! Go see it NOW!!! 10/10!
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:52:04 PM

Shut the f*ck up Trueman you Worthington stalker
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 4:53:52 PM

I think Trueman, not really a 'true man' at all, really hates Sam Worthington because he wants to lick the crackers out of Sam's ass. But Trueman can't, and that frustration is killing him.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:00:10 PM

"The story is something we can all take a lesson from!"

Or you can watch An Inconvinient Truth.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:03:20 PM

The only lesson you'll get from 'An Inconvenient Truth' is that Al Gore is as a pathetic a wannabe scientist and presenter as he was a vice-President and Democratic candidate.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:07:40 PM

@Min

test me! im ready for the trials! but all the people will see this movie and will think after several days that SAm W. make a stupid soldier thats is more stupid because the stupidity of Sam W.!

and sorry Min i just don't have the intelligence to imaging me licking the crackers out of Sam's ass, or maybe is was you who want that, represing felling maybe?
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:08:30 PM

That and "OMGSAVETEHPLANETZZZ"
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:11:41 PM

"test me! im ready for the trials! "

Look, man, don't put me in your bondage fantasies.
swoooop writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:13:23 PM

If it does badly, which it wont, they will leak a copy on the net and blame the downloaders.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:15:02 PM

"when it does badly, they will leak a copy on the net and blame the downloaders."

Fixed
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:15:31 PM

Trueman you're the only person on earth who hates Worthington,everybody else either likes him or have just accepted him,get over it bitch.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:16:04 PM

Yeah, save the planet. They call it global warming, even though it gets colder in some places and warmer in others. Why not call it Climate Fluctuation? Because that sounds more like the word 'weather'?

Yeah, the planet on average may be getting warmer. So f*cking what? Like ice did ever did anyone some good. Maybe they can settle Greenland properly then. Yeah, sea levels will slowly rise a few feet. Maybe. Coastlines will change and some sea level islands will disappear.

They act like 'global warming' is the end of human history. It may be a blessing in disguise. Like we'd want the planet to get 'cooler' instead.
swoooop writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:17:16 PM

If it does badly, which it wont, they will leak a copy on the net and blame the downloaders.

Restored
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:20:30 PM

Al Gore can suck on my nutsack
Kill-the-director writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:20:44 PM

it was good but i wouldnt go to as far to say that it was one of my favourite movies of all time. Visually this movie was stunning, but the storyline lacked slightly. i'd give it 7.5/10
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:25:40 PM

So, so far, seems it comes down to eye candy.
Is there more to it?
Coasterkid345 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:30:56 PM

That blue girl is hot....
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:31:08 PM

"Is there more to it?"

The "plot" is a combination of Pocohantus and Dances With Wolves, and the "message" is the same as Ferngully.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:32:30 PM

Spooks, you're forgetting "The Last Samurai".
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:34:00 PM

Which is exactly what 'some' of us have said for over a year...
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:35:15 PM

They went than more than four light years only to discover that evolution is a dullard?
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:41:22 PM

Well, we didn't get Duke Nukem Forever, but he did make a cameo in Avatar.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:55:09 PM

@MIn

I don't have bondage fantasies with that douchebag period, i just have my own opinion thats all the gay sucks you know he is not a good actor i just want the world to reconize that!

or maybe you are a fan of him? sorry for your its that the case
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 5:59:00 PM

He's not a bad actor you dope


TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:01:01 PM

And i used that name because i always tell the true! im not some fake due, thats say lies in the peoples faces nothing to be a true man like you say SAm W. lover!
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:02:04 PM

Derp88

no sorry my mistake, he is the best actor ever NOT!
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:04:29 PM

Too all SAM W. LOVERS Sucks this
8===============================================D
jackonjillsface writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:06:09 PM

I thought the film was brilliant. The story was a bit weak in places, but I was never bored. I expected many moments in the plot, but still had my fair share of "whoa, I've never seen that before" moments.

As far as the effects are concerned, when it started I shrugged it off as nothing special, but as the movie progressed I realized that I couldn't tell CGI from Reality. I thought it was amazing.

Though it is no Best Picture, it will be nominated and is definitely a must see for the year.
c-prime writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:09:40 PM

Eh...it was okay. The writing was flawed in countless areas, but it featured some impressive visuals and the battle sequence in the finale was pretty exquisite. I'd rate it a 7/10, maybe.

I'm just happy that Spooky can quit whining about this film now. Maybe he will finally find some other unreleased movie now to direct his immoderate irritation.
TheStig writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:13:04 PM

CGI: Obviously amazing.

Plot: weak at times, but not nearly as horrible as Transformers 2

Acting: solid for the most part

Cinematically sound as one would expect from Cameron. Bottomline: I wouldn't say "Star Wars of our generation" but certainly raising the bar a bit as far as what Sci-Fi can do. Certainly was effects driven and used that to fall back on when the storyline got a little rough, but certainly an entertaining movie. Best Picture? probably not...but overall a far better movie than I was expecting. Pleasantly surprised...
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:15:14 PM

Trueman, I don't give a cow's nipple for Sam Worthington. He neither sucks nor is he the greatest actor alive. I'm very indifferent to him. But I also don't spend every post on here bashing just one man, I spread it around. Constantly attacking the same guy just leads me to think you're in love with him. How else do I explain your obsession?
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:17:47 PM

Minkowski is right,thats what i have been saying from the start,Trueman wants Sam Worthington spunk all over his face
LeeMaca writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:22:55 PM

SO BAD
caught it in 3d, and i enjoyed Muppets 3d at MGM way more couldn't stay till the end!!!
c-prime writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:24:05 PM

There's a question I've been asking myself since watching the movie that's been boggling my mind though: What in God's name influenced Cameron to have the cat people bond with the planet's biota with their f*cking hair?! That was the most absurd, quasi-pornographic sh*t I've witnessed in a long time. I know the Na'vi are reminiscent of the Native Americans, a people who cherished their loose, flowing manes, but that homage was completely over-the-top. I swear, when Worthington's character mounted that alien horse for the first time and closed his eyes while grinning, I almost threw up from laughing.
c-prime writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:25:48 PM

"...i enjoyed Muppets 3d at MGM way more..."

Hell yeah, man. The Muppets kick ass in any dimension.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:41:21 PM

Incredible Incredible Incredible. The most visually stunning film I have ever seen in my life.

And LOL @ spooky's surprisingly fresh remark. I love being right.
BigUnit writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:42:07 PM

the film was amazing, my favorite movie of all time.
Osiris3eagle writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:43:27 PM

It was awesome (not perfect but a Top 10 of 2009 for sure). f*ck Dustin Putman. WP needs a new guy to rep them, that guy sucks. He even thought District 9 was bad.
Osiris3eagle writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:45:10 PM

Saw it on IMAX 3D:

I won't defend the originality of the story, but the way its told makes the movie fun and entertaining. The movie has its faults; there were moments I cringed at the story elements and I also think the natives are goofy looking, but plain and simple it was very imaginative. The 3D isn't gimmicky and cliched (ie, stuff comes out to make you duck), it was immersive, so it felt like you were there. The time flew by: felt like it was 90 min long instead of nearly 3 hrs. That tells me it was well paced and never boring. And the action scenes are as good as there have ever been, it's damn impressive.
carl4prez writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:50:31 PM

Bay and Lucas are useless directors is what I meant. Lucas direct only 1 good film his entire career. And Bay, none. I was saying that the 2 other so called CGI gods are fakjes and have no clue how to make a good film. If I were to relate Cameron to any other directors itd be Christopher Nolan and Alfred HItchc*ck. And as for the Star Wars comment, I persoanlly have never said any other films were our star wars of the day. This one just stands out as the most orginal and fresh sci fi film since then. even district 9 wasn't that orginal. and as for Cameron's directing, just shut up. He manages to trasport you into the film, something 90% of directors can't do today. Lasly, as for box office, I just can't wait until this film blows you all away. It won't open to records, but in the long run after word of mouth, its gonna be huge. And if ya don't agree just look at the equally amazing Titanic that opened small but exploded into the highest grossing film of all time. Anyway, I know everyones entitled to their own opnions so I won't be crude like some on here and bash your. All in all, everyone should see this film!
carl4prez writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:52:00 PM

Here's my AVATAR review. Forgive my spelling, I didn't bother correcting it before It's published in my local paper, they got people who do that. lol


Back in 1939, audiences were left breathless when Dorthy stepped into the Techincolor world of Oz. 70 years later, audiences are in for the same treat.

For the past four years people have been doubting James Cameron's next film, AVATAR. They would say it'd be horrible. The effects would be a joke, the story stupid, and they even compared it to the biggest flop ever, the animated film DELGO. Well, Mr. Cameron can look at all of those people and with a smile on his face simply say "Ha ha."


We enter the alien world through the eyes of Jake Sulley, a former Marine confined to a wheel chair. But despite his broken body, Jake is still a warrior at heart. He is recruited to travel lightyears to the human outpost on Pandora, where coprparations are mining a rare mineral that is key to solving Earth's energy crisis. Because the air of Pandora is toxic, they have created the Avatar program in which human "drivers" have their consciousness linked to an Avatar, a remotley controlled biolagical body that can survive in the lethat are. These Avatars are gentically engineered hybrids of human DNA mixed with DNA from the natives of Pandora- the Na'vi.
Reborn in his Avatar form, Jake can wlak again. He has been given a mission to inflitrate the Na'vi, who have become a major obstacle to mining the precious ore. But a beautiful Na'vi female, Neytiri, saves Jakes life, and changes everything. Jake is taken into her clan and learns to become one of them, which involves many test and adventures. As Jakes relationship with the relcutant teacher Neytiri deepens, he learns to respect the Na'vi way and finally takes his place among them. Soon he will face the ultimate test when he leads them in an epic battle that will decide nothing less than the fate of an entire world.*


When it comes to CGI, I usually hate it. I prefer my effects to be done for real as much as possible. The perfect example of that would be THE DARK KNIGHT or even Cameron's last film, TITANIC. But James Cameron does such an amazing job at telling this fresh and wonderful story with the most impressive visuals I have ever seen, my old line of thinking fades away and the new one is that if they can make it look so real, I'm game. The work that Cameron has spent doing over the past 12 years has more than paid off. For the first time ever, it's nearly impossible to tell what is CGI from the real world. The Na'vi's look so real you could reach out and touch them and the world of Pandora is so lush and colorful it seems almost as if Cameron just went to a real planet a shot as doc*mentary. The speical effects in this film are so good, that they make films like TRANSFOMERS, STAR WARS (the new ones), & DISTRICT 9 look like childs play. Using a much better form of motion capture that director Robert Zemeckis has used so creeplily in THE POLAR EXPRESS, BEOWULF, and this years A CHRISTMAS CAROL, Cameron avoids the infamous "dead eye" look and makes the creatures look real, not an odd mixture of real and plastic. To sum up the visuals, and not ramble on, what you will see on screen will surely leave you in awe. With years of hard work and trials and tribulations, James Cameron has raised the bar for CGI and motion capture to a point that I think only he can reach. And when it comes to the 3D, Cameron score again. Every live action film to date in 3D has been a horrible cheese fest. From the cheesy JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH, the down right awful MY BLOODY VALENTINE, to the lackluster THE FINAL DESTINATION, live action 3D has only had one purpose: gimmick. But with AVATAR, Cameron makes sure that doesn't happen. Not once is something forced into your face. While stuff does feel like it'll get you at a few points, the main advatage is how the 3D brings you into the film, not bring stuff at you. When a group of soldiers are being prepared for battle, you feel like your sitting right there with them. When Jake and Neytirir are flying around on creatures, you can almost feel the wind through your hair. With 3D, Cameron has finally proven how it should be used. To submerse the audince in the film. To surrond it aorund them. Now I would have no issue with every film, from action to drama to horror to romance being in 3D. Could you imagine what i'd feel like walking down the yellow brick road with Dorthy? Sitting next to the Godfather as he makes an offer no one can refuse? Or hanging off the bow of the Titanic as she slips into her watery grave? It would be beyond words. And thats exactly how the technology of AVATAR is. (By the way, Cameron is planning on a 3D re-release of TITANIC, so thats one adventure you won't wanna skip either!)

When it somes to the rest of the film-contrary to other reviews- its just as good. Well a few characters may not equal the greatness of other Cameron classics, their just as good. Sam Worthington (TERMINATOR SALVATION) stands out above all as our hero Jake. He comes off as natural and you instantly connect with his character. Other great cast member include Zoe Saldana (STAR TREK) is perfect as Neytiri, Sigourney Weaver (ALINES) is absolute perfection as always as the hard lined Dr. Grace Augustine, Stephen Lang (PUBLIC ENEMIES) as the down right nasty Colonel, Michelle Rodreguiz (FAST & FURIOUS) as the risky pilot Trudy, and many many more. Not once performance is wasted in the film. There are a few cheesy lines of dialouge in it, but what film doesn't have that? The story is great and its so refreshing to see a story not based on a book, toy, or comic. It's so refrshing to enter a wrold you have no idea about. And don't worry about the running time. Nearly almost 3 hours, you fly right through the film and when the credits role with the tear jerking "I See You" Leona Lewis song, you'll want to stay seated and enjoy the ride again.

Overall, James Caemron's AVATAR not only lives up to the hype, it explodes it. No one had a clue how great it was going to be. From the awesome effects to the relatable characters, you can't loose with this film. Not only is AVATAR the best film I've seen this year, I dare say it's one of the best films EVER made. And the man who proclaimed himself "KIng of the World" at the 1998 Oscars, well not only is he still the king of the world, but now he's officaly a true god of cinema.

I give JAMES CAMERON'S AVATAR an A+

-Carl C. Foley




*plot taken from www.avatarmovie.com.


TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:52:48 PM

The story isn't bad or told bad its just an over used one. Should the film be penalized for that, sure. Does it make Avatar a bad film HELL NO! The visuals make up for the film's holes because its just so impressive, you can tell so much love and care was put into it, all the actor's performances were captured, he has brought photorealism to the theater, especially in Salanda and Worthington's characters who seem to look a little better than the rest (maybe their faces are just more recognizable). Either way, incredible.
Barney Stinson writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:53:22 PM

Here's my review.

I'm a big fan of Cameron's work and this movie is quite possibly his most hyped. I just got back from the midnight screening of Avatar in 3D. Well does it live up to the hype?

Yes! (and a small no)

I admit that I was disappointed with the first trailer but the movie is awesome. Let's get to the NO part first. The problem with this is the script. The entire story is completely predictable. There's cliches all over the place and frankly it's all been done before.

Now to the YES of the movie - the acting is great. Sam Worthington is everywhere these days and he deserves it because he's a pretty good actor. IMO he's the only thing that saved Terminator Salvation from being utter crap. I also gotta give props to Sigourney Weaver and Stephen Lang. The direction is awesome and I expected nothing less than awesome because it's James Cameron. The highlight of the movie is of course the effects and oh man do they look amazing. Pandora looks absolutely beautiful and looks so damn real. The Na'Vi really do look photorealistic and the CGI with the flora and fauna on Pandora is amazing. Cameron created his own 3D camera for this and spent a good part of a decade making his vision come true and the end result is simply awe inspiring. I just wish that Cameron had spent some more time on the script and this movie would be a perfect ten.

The 3D looks amazing and in my humble opinion it is the only way to truly see this film. I'll probably get it on Blu-Ray when it comes out.

9/10
carl4prez writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:55:49 PM

lastly, then ill shut up, I have learned to enjoy ur comments and its cool to see the fan and non fans go at it. i could live without the crudeness, but what they hey. so those of you I may have ticked off in the past, I say sorry and move on.
Barney Stinson writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:55:58 PM

By the way, has WP hired Armond White to review new movies?
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 6:57:21 PM

"And LOL @ spooky's surprisingly fresh remark. I love being right."

Yeah, but being right when Spooky is wrong just gets so old after a while, it's hardly a victory and more like a defeat in of itself.
carl4prez writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:00:23 PM

Oh, and anyone whos trashing Al Gore on here...your my hero. The guys a useless waste of air and space.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:00:39 PM

Ok i wont speak more of Sam W.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:00:56 PM

Ok i wont speak more of Sam W.
flaggingmoose writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:01:33 PM

An incredible piece of cinema. The thing about it is, that James Cameron has just created this new world which you feel such a part of as an audience member. Visually stunning - the special effects are the best I have ever seen. It was just beautiful to look at, and my god I wish I could go to Pandora! I thought it had very clear messages without being a pretentious piece of bullsh*t. Sam Worthington's clearly Australian accent loses the film a mark from me, so I give it 9/10. One of James Cameron's best.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:02:43 PM

NOT!!! HE IS A DOUCHEBAG AND I DESERVE TO BE ERASE DIGATIOLLY OF THE MOVIES ONCE FOR ALL!!
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:02:54 PM

Trueman:

Just less, dude, less. Not every damned post. Most of us don't care that much for him either. I know I don't.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:03:58 PM

I spoke too soon. f*cker.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:07:16 PM

I dont want any sexual thing with the GAY OF SAM W. I just want to hit him in the face with a statue like the Berlusconi was hit thats the TRUE OF TRUEMAN!
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:12:31 PM

LOL Mink you make a great point as always. Looking forward to your final thoughts on the film once you see it cause I know you'll have something intelligent to say whether you like it or hate it. (See how I didn't say Love it, cause I know you won't).

BTW This is not to say some of you other guys don't say intelligent things. I see these long reviews, I've read them, good stuff guys.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:18:20 PM

Thank darkknight. I'll probably download it (so I can better catch everything) as well as see it in theaters, just not right now. Or soon.
Freudian_Nightmare writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:20:42 PM

It was kind of a big "meh". Was the visuals good? Yes they were. Were they stunningly groundbreaking? No, they weren't. The film looked nice, but all that talk about changing the cinema...well, I couldn't see it. The plot and some dialogue, was kind of weak and unoriginal, but that was expected. The acting was decent, really nothing to complain about on that front.

But all in all, I'm a bit disappointed. It'll make the budget back, no problem, but we'll probably not be visiting Pandora anytime soon.
barley_cat writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:23:14 PM

Well now aint you a flatter-er DK! Lol. Still haven't seen this movie, probably shouldn't have read these posts before i saw it as now i'm just going to watch it expecting it to suck!

Maybe that's a good thing?
bacci40 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:43:38 PM

here is my question to you all

i watched et for the umpteenth time last nite

after almost 30 years the film still holds up

do any of you feel that avatar will do the same?
Derp88 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:44:31 PM

Sam Worthington's clearly Australian accent loses the film a mark from me, so I give it 9/10.

LOL

Hate Aussies or something? who cares about his accent

SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:46:08 PM

"do any of you feel that avatar will do the same?"

Thats like asking if you think Twilight will be remembered like Shakespeare would be.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:46:21 PM

Is* not would be.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:47:40 PM

bacci: How about giving us the 30 years, first, before we answer that question?
barley_cat writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 7:50:47 PM

thats because twilight doesn't have men in tights aint it spooky?
vaodsi writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 8:15:49 PM

Titanic is ridiculously over-rated.... who cares of avatar is overhyped?
this movie was awesome.. and i think it's funny that worstpreviews chose mr. putnam's review.... dustin is the guy who gave OLD DOGS a fresh rating....... don't take his review seriously at all it's retarded. That being said.. this movie has faults in the form of clunky dialogue and sparce character developement. However.. the actors are so good that they rise above it and still hand in performances that make us feel for the characters and care. Lots of new age environmentalism... but really who cares? i mean seriously maybe i jsut loved this movie cause i'm a nudist treehugger in nor cal... The crowd i saw this with loved it. HUGE APPLAUSE.. if this movie does not make much this weekend it doesn't matter. this movie has legs and some posititve word of mout. i mean seriously the majority of even these cynical users gave it a good review... i mean if spooky cupcakes.. who HATES avatar gives it 6/10..... then yeah this movie was cool and i enjoyed it a lot. it's also my kind of movie. and the ending was great. the second half was far superior to the first so if you walked out.. oh well you missed the best parts! The 3d annoyed me for the first 45 minutes but then i got used to it after a while and by the end i enjoyed it... i've never been a fan of 3d. It had moments of very cheesy dialogue but oh well. Basically... like dr. augastine tells jake about the forest, to enjoy this movie you should take it on it's own terms. i want a sequel... NOW!
vaodsi writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 8:20:12 PM

OH! and zoe saldana is AWESOME!
and darknight... i agree as always.
vaodsi writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 8:21:00 PM

seeing it again tonight
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 8:41:21 PM

Please forgive me if I repeat something already stated.

Just saw it in 3D but not in IMAX which I immediately regreted. The scope of the world Cameron cretes is unmatched in modern film. Most impressive is the fact that everything on screen breathes with life, from the indigenous plants to the forest floor, EVERYTHING. That being said I had no doubt that Cameron would deliver on this aspect after all the hype. The biggest hurdle I had going in was the blue people. I'm please to say that actually they may have been the best part of the film. From a distance in large numbers they became a little cartoony but up close they are completely realistic and believable, ESPECIALLY the female lead. You can tell that Cameron paid extra attention to the emotional detail expressed through her character's facial features and mannerisms. From this standpoint I guess you can say that Cam has changed films for good.

Problems: "Dances with Wolves in space" is a pretty good description of a shallow plot. While I didn't think it was as preachy as some have described, I did think it was disgustingly thin and unoriginal. The choppy editing didn't help either. I got the feeling at times that it was missing something, like an explanation of what had happened to Earth and how man had lost its humanity. Its simply not up to the standards that I've come to expect from Cameron. That being said as a visual and technical debut Avatar still delivers. I just don't want this to be a reflection of Cameron's future projects. His R rated films have been much more complete. To me Avatar is Cameron's equivalent to other former R rated director's high concept movies. Peter Jackson has LOR series and King Kong, Del Toro has HellBoy, Raimi has Spidey, and now Cameron has his Avatar. I hope he doesn't decide to follow their path and become a slave to this style of film. He's too good of a director to sacrifice such important things as plot and editing for visual thrills. Avatar is a great film compared to all the other crap I've seen this year. It just doesn't completely live up to Cameron's full potential. Perhaps now that the tech has arrived he can improve other deficiencies in future ventures.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 8:49:40 PM

On a Cameron scale this ranks right between The Abyss and True Lies. Terminator 1 and 2 and Aliens are still much better.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:05:48 PM

@ bacci40:

On one thread you're complaining about the site having too many people commenting, on the other thread you're posing an open question for everybody that feels like replying.

This is what you said:

"i liked this site much better when no one commented

you guys are all aicn rejects"

- You want an open debate or not?
Make up your f*cking mind, you incoherent idiot.
thedudeman69 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:12:20 PM

Great flick. I am a fan of Cameron and this made me more so. I need to see Alien and Aliens now.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:21:48 PM

What the hell is an 'AICN reject'? Is that when you're rejected from Harry Knowles den of mudsuckers because you're too smart, so you come over here where the comments are actually, occasionally intelligent? I mean, look all these lengthy comments! Like you ever see sh*t like that over there at AICN.

Nevermind that AICN is one the UGLIEST movie sites in the world. That guy made his website back in 1996 and just stopped.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:25:46 PM

"It just doesn't completely live up to Cameron's full potential. Perhaps now that the tech has arrived he can improve other deficiencies in future ventures."

Well, the deficiencies are in the story, the acting, the plot and the dialog, so I hope to god there's a technology to fix that for him.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:32:11 PM

I didn't find the acting to be bad at all, the dialog however is questionable at spots, mainly some of Lang's and Weaver's lines. I enjoyed Lang's performance though, he did it well. Zoe Saldana was GREAT, she's the real star of this film by a mile. I think she'd be up for some awards if it weren't for the CGI (I know its a weird statement but CGI really casts a certain shadow on her performance, especially since her face is modified in the role).

We all know the stuff about the story and stuff. I just thought I should give Zoe a shout out, she impressed me.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:35:53 PM

bacci just doesn't know what he's talking about.
The typical hit-and-run poster.
If he likes the replies, he'll stick around to talk, if he doesn't, he takes a hike.

And the AICN reference wasn't even clever.
Had he said "rejects from the Film Academy", I could see the insult in that, but if the AICN rejected anybody, that person should actually be grateful to them.

And "ET" vs "Avatar"??? WTF???
Talk about far-fetched!
Ranger writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:37:23 PM

I haven't seen this yet... but here's my review anyway:


Zoe gives me a raging boner!


Thx. for reading.
Blank x2 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:43:35 PM

Trueman, I know you said the CGI didn't blow you away, and you are in love with Worthington, but for God's sake learn grammar. You are butchering the English language.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:49:44 PM

Trueman is posting from Spain and he's learning the language. He's a character.

His reasons behind his passionate feelings towards S. Worthington are... a bit of a mystery.
J.A.Ottley writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:51:20 PM

lol Ranger.

Pretty much agreed, but its mad weird because my bloody GF looks like a splitting image to Zoe
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:53:21 PM

"Nevermind that AICN is one the UGLIEST movie sites in the world. That guy made his website back in 1996 and just stopped."

I've thought this for years! What a clusterf*ck of a site. To make things worse, as some of yall know I live in Austin where its based and have the misfortune of seeing HK at the theater every now and then. At close to 400lbs, ghost white, and "hairy" he's one of the more revolting peole I've seen in person.
J.A.Ottley writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 9:53:30 PM

hmmmmmm, PP

I've think there is a conclusion to Trueman's love for Sammy.
Maybe Trueman went to Australia and him and Sammy had a bit of a one night whammy bammy.

Trueman feels lost and deserted because he was dumped for Christian Bale...
Only seems right why Bale flipped on the T4 set, he found out about their affair :D
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:01:16 PM

lol@Sacdaddy's description of hair knowles.

f*cking fat bastard looks like the love child of Roseanne and sasquatch.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:05:03 PM

http://www.toshistation.com/skycap/images/IMG_5067.JPG

Harry Knowles and his 'flying buttress' supports.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:05:51 PM

@ J.A.Ottley:

Lol! All theories are possible at this point.
But you know what's going to be funny?
His reply when he sees this!

For some reason, the sheer hatred he has for S.W. always makes me laugh. It's probably the angry Gollum, it just goes so well with his comments! Gets me every time.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:11:49 PM

mink, that link... I'm almost speechless.

And bacci thought anybody would feel frustrated over being rejected by that (semi-)human blob...
J.A.Ottley writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:17:59 PM

hmmmmm i concur PP.

I think next were find out that the Illumintai and the Freemasons, where involved and Trueman & Sam's Affair, while Sam was dating Bale, led to the murders of Biggie Smalls & Tupac.

:D you just gotta love his hatred...

TRUEMAN though i have a very serious question for you...
What is your take in Sam Worthington starring in a role that he did to you that fateful night?
You know the film called Clash of the Titans after all he did clash you with his titan, right...?
:D
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:21:38 PM

"he did clash you with his titan, right...?"

- LOOL!

I predict his reply will involve a long penis-like shape written in the text box.
J.A.Ottley writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:26:23 PM

I predict his reply will involve a long penis-like shape written in the text box.



So what you mean, briefly in 3 words...
Sam Worthington's Titan

i think WP can post an article for that :D

i see it now
Exlusive sneak peak: Sam Worthington reveals his Titan
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:42:02 PM

"Sam Worthington reveals his Titan"

... and by Trueman's hands, of all people!!
The irony...
goat1202 writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 10:59:38 PM

Trueman please stop typing, you are killing the english language until it dies from it!! And I think your frustrations stem from the fact you are deathly afraid of spelling out Sam W.'s full last name in its entirety.

Douchebag
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:08:27 PM

@Mink: Yep thats him in all his glory. Now try to imagine him with a tub of the corn in one arm, 2 large cokes in the other, and several packs of candy wedged in his rolls of fat and you've got my nightmare.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:10:54 PM

Hilarious!
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:11:57 PM

LOL Douchebag. What happened to DoucheNozzle?
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:13:04 PM

The guy with the Thundercats avatar? He still posts, but very rarely.
prabuwiz writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:15:09 PM

THE MOVIE WAS AMAZING!!! the review given is bullcrap.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:16:44 PM

As a matter of scientific curiosity, I have to wonder when Knowles got laid last.

I know that seems mean, and perhaps he cannot help his weight problem, but come on! Take a f*cking shower! Cut that hair! Who the hell does he think he is? William Wallace? Braveheart? Yeah, he's have to have a courageous ticker to deal with a bloodstream made of molasses.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:24:50 PM

Watching Rambo 3 right now. This movie is the sh*t. And its dedicated to the fighting rebels that evetually became the Taliban! :) Think Avatar may have lifted some plot from it too. Let's see, foreign soldier in a strange land fighting with the indigenous peole to force out ruthless invaders. Either I'm on to something or Avatar's plot get thinner by the minute. Thank God it looked good (I'm allowed one copout per month on this site).

Oh sh*t "Who are you? -- You're worst nightmare." Great timing!!! Classic!!!

I've had a few drinks tonight :)
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:28:14 PM

Have another one for me, if you would. And yeah, Rambo, any Rambo, rocks.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:28:19 PM

I think the bad guy bearhug move died with the 80s. It was pretty ineffective.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:29:51 PM

Rambo, god love him.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:33:21 PM

@ SAC:

I can see what you mean, with some "Rambo" in "Avatar".

And what about the:

Zaysen: "Drrrrop your weapons! You have no chance of escape! Come forrrward! I wish to take you back alive! This is your last warrrning! The choice is yours!"

Trautman: "What do you say John?"

Rambo: "f*ck 'em!"

ehehehe...
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:35:03 PM

Oh sh*t LOL!
SACdaddy writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:38:43 PM

The song at the end of this movie is worse than Avatar theme song.

BTW, that song was killing me on the way out of the theater today.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:42:38 PM

Soooo, would anyone care to watch 'The Making of Avatar' video?
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:44:41 PM

You mean Leona Lewis' "I See You"?
What a poor choice that was!

It's like, "I see you", I just can't stand LISTENING to you!
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:47:27 PM

mink, if it's 4 years of Cameron sucking c*ck for production money, sounds like something shefone would take some interest in...
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:49:06 PM

LOL. Well, I thought it was interesting because it has pretty much all the main cast and Cameroon talking about what went into the film.
minkowski writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:50:01 PM

...Cameron, not Cameroon, which is an African country...
Peter Parker writes:
on December 18th, 2009 at 11:56:05 PM

... does he explain the Smurfs involvement?

I'm kidding, but I actually caught 10 minutes of it on YouTube.
Castor Troy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:03:16 AM

Loved this film, but did laugh my ass off when one of the blue dudes gets shot as soon as he lands on the hanger - epic fail of imax proportions !

Only thing i really hated was the i see you music by leona lewis. Hell this would have been a better theme - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUXboldb87Q
ozymandiass writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:21:36 AM

@ Spooky cupcakes http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2635&p=.htm this article explains the 3.5 million gross.
HIRONAKAMURA86 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:26:31 AM

"The story is something we can all take a lesson from!"

Or you can watch An Inconvinient Truth.

@SpookyCupcakes, i agree mate.

I saw it IMAX 3D but apart from the amazing Na'vi people and Pandora(Though the creatures looked and seemed retardedly and unnecessarily colourful), the story was painfully thin so basically what we already knew. Thankfully(not right theoretically in this context or any tbh lol) alot of the 'main' characters die, pah-eeeuuwwww lol. The score was bad too.... Very obvious and not needed i dont think, very underwhelming in my opinion.
HIRONAKAMURA86 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:28:17 AM

His best since T-2 though lol
murphyslaw93 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:30:43 AM

I honestly dont know where I stand. I just got back from a showing and I thought it was one of the coolest things I've ever sat through and laid my eyes upon but at the same time i was like the worst movie ever made. The visuals were unbelievable, the CGI so fantastic, a lot better than it looked back in the days of trailer #1, and the 3D was really really cool, much better than FD4. The story is real thin and very cliched, the characters are pretty thin as well besides Zoe Saldana's Na'Vi character and i guess Sam W. The story is dragged out beyond belief and some of the dialogue is laughably bad. Cameron's intents are good and a good deal of the scenes work well but there are a lot of atrocious parts of the film. However, the climactic battle was pretty dope and I really liked the ending, the last like 40 mins were pretty solid. But a lot of the early stuff is just like run-on ideas, and Cameron's overall direction is nothing spectacular. Id probably settle between a 6-7/10. I may see it again to rejudge
minkowski writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:35:22 AM

Did you know:

There's an actual disease, called argyria, that turns your skin blue. It's caused by the ingestion of silver.

Real life Papa Smurf/Elder Na'vi

http://amazingdata.com/mediadata/Image/0200906251627031870.jpg
HIRONAKAMURA86 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:47:31 AM

I agree with Murphy totally(and i paid 9quid) ..... and Mink.... tut tut.
ashhamari writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:02:57 AM

best part----Neytiri nipples..and CGI
everything else sucks.. 3d effects look tepid during chase sequence ..rest of the time awesome

still best art Neytiri nipples
overall 6/10
parabola1 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:20:11 AM

Absolutely incredible... Still speechless...
skybax3 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:38:20 AM

Go see Avatar, once, twice, thrice; this movie will re-define film making and on top of that, as far as I'm concerned, it is the greatest sci-fi film yet made. I literally will dream of it tonight.
minkowski writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:53:05 AM

"it is the greatest sci-fi film yet made."

What, were you just born or something? Best scifi film ever? Wow.
coolguy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 2:07:11 AM

3D was overrated but he movie extremely enjoyable. really hope they make another.

stephen lang was a badass mofo lol
JohnnyMonad86 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 2:46:14 AM

I loved it. I'm not a huge fan of 3-D, because I don't find it necessary in most movies. But the 3-D helped enhance the fantasy/sci-fi world this takes place in. The cast was great. Sam Worthington was incredibly amazing. Good job Mr. Cameron for that casting. Visual effects were top-notch. And like someone said on one of these message boards not too long ago, I really just let my mind wander off into the planet of Pandora. That's really important. Forget all the practical/impractical stuff. If you just let loose, you'll find yourself living and breathing the same air as the Na'vi do. It's more fun that way.
chiefone writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 2:49:18 AM

Special effects 10/10, story 7/10, Script 6/10 and acting 7/10. Overall a good movie. I dont think it's the best sci-fi flick since Starwars, but it surely has the best special effects ever created
rocketman writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 5:20:59 AM

@Sacdaddy
Rambo 3 is fuking amazing and kinda ironic after 9/11.Very underated as 80's actioners go.

As for my Avatar review.......not seen it,can't be arsed it freezing outside in Blighty at the mo so i will probs catch it on bluray,watch it when all the fuss and hype has died down and judge for myself if i like it.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 6:54:22 AM

What happened to your avatar Rocketman? You can't go wrong with Skywalker (unless its Anakin I guess).

You got to see it in the theater in 3D my friend. IMAX if possible but definitely somewhere with a big screen and good sound. I'm probably gonna have to see it again because my theater didn't even have surround sound. Of course the theater next to mine was rumbling like crazy so I got royally screwed. Bluray wont do it justice unfortunately.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:05:43 AM

Damn, I just had some pretty crazy Pandora dreams. Wonder how long those will last? This is bullsh*t! I can get this movie out of my head!!!
rocketman writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:16:00 AM

@Sacdaddy
Got bored with my avy,i do have other luke ones on my commie though,might go back
As for Avatar,if the bloody roads were not frozen solid i would probably go to Manchester imax today,just don't fancy breaking my neck on the ice.
nea writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:40:15 AM

The movie really has its flaws; the plot is standard with a weak ending; the characters are too cliché; But still, I watched the premier in 3D starting from 11pm and I never once looked art my clock. I never yawned. the movie just kept me. The pacing was good; The environment beautiful and everything just mind blowing. The 3D felt natural, not in other movies that jsut do specific 3D scenes. It just worked. And the Na'vi embedded in this dense forest was just so... sooo... cool, good, beautiful.

Even if I could name many things that just were weak, this is a movie I am looking forward to just watch again (and I do not have that very often). The world feels just like there is so much more to see.

And with the now proven technology I am looking forward to Alita. Damn it, the Battle Angel in the beauty of Avatar will be the most awesome Cyberpunk EVER!!!
BigUnit writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 8:49:43 AM

okay anyone who doesn’t agree that Avatar was good, is obviously just in denial lol seriously and some people on here are saying that that visuals were just okay… whaaat you got to be kidding me, the fact that every little grass, every little flower, tree, cloud, the WHOLE SETTING of the film was done by computer and the fact that you couldn’t even tell. Now if that’s not groundbreaking idk what is. AVATAR was a flawless movie, Finding something wrong with Avatar is like picking a needle in a hay stack. Yes you can say the 3D isn’t that good, but the 3D was just the same for every other 3D movie, that has nothing to do with AVATAR itself. People don’t understand what it took to make this movie, how much thought was put into this film, and the fact that the actors were just running around on a green screen, the final results are just amazing. And breathe taking for that matter. So all you haters out there stop wasting your time, cause I guarantee the other 90% of the people that saw the movie, loved it.
LeeMaca writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:10:59 AM

Nope not in denial just didn't like this movie at all, James Cameron watched fern gully on acid and came up with AVATER come on!!! sam worthingon no, the dude from dodgeball hell no, and as for Ms Weaver stick to Alien and ghostbuster movies all in all i'd give this a dontwasteyourmoney out of ten!!!
LeeMaca writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:13:43 AM

SINCE WHEN DID VISUAL EFFECTS REPLACE PLOTS?
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:16:50 AM

Before the movie they showed the traier for Angelina Jolie's Salt which I assume is based on the graphic novel. Am I the only one who thinks this looks absolutely terrible? When are they gonna figure out that there are other bitches out there that can look good kicking ass besides Jolie. She's getting older and less attractive by the minute, and for some reason she refuses to sport that sexy TR spandex anymore (which means no more big angry titties!). Plus the girl's actually a good actress now and really doesn't need to keep doing this crap. They should find someone else or stop making these "chicks with d*ck envy" movies. In contrast, Cameron Diaz and Tom Cruise's new action trailer looked surprisingly good. I thought I would never say this, but it was kind of refreshing to see a hot woman screaming and acting real girly during a gunfight instead of kicking ass and taking names. That trailer probably got the best response from the audience in my theater.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:21:02 AM

"SINCE WHEN DID VISUAL EFFECTS REPLACE PLOTS?"

When Independence Day came out.
Freudian_Nightmare writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:27:26 AM

@bigunit: sorry dude, but 90% is a bit too high. I would say that 30% loved it, 30% hated it and 40% lays in between.
Bryan.Rivelli writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:32:10 AM

All in all, I wasn't blown away by the movie.
Sure, the setting for the movie, Pandora, was fantastic...it was bright, vibrant and all around awesome.
But now i see where the critics and skeptics came up with the idea that Avatar is a knock-off of Dances With Wolves...
Honestly, in my own opinion, the plots are nearly EXACTLY the same, with the minor details differing.
The plot was bland and really didn't seem any different than every other, "Foreign invaders attack nature based dwellers" movie...then again there are only a few movies actually like that.
The beginning of the movie was dragged out and long, and if they removed the minute scenes, they could've cut the movie down from a long, boring 3 hours of "WHEN WILL IT END!?" to a more tolerable 2 hours.
From the middle on, however, that's when things started to get interesting.
I enjoyed the villain, he was the perfect foil to Sam Worthington's character and who he is exactly.
All in all, I'd give the movie a simple 3 out of 5...
The CGI, a little silly at times, with the native creatures looking like rejected Star Wars monsters, but the Na'vi looking pretty intriguing. 3 out of 5
The Story, overall generic, with nothing new brought to the table other than the Sci-fi elements, 2 out of 5
The Setting: The planet Pandora, f*cking 5 out of 5, truly, one of the only parts I really enjoyed was the hour worth of B-Roll of the planet itself.
The main characters, really believable, but the others just seemed to be there for filler, and were pretty random at times.
And finally, the action sequences. The action scenes were really the second great thing about this movie, they were filled with epic-ness and left you on the edge of your seat.

Unfortunately, Action scenes and Setting don't make the movie. Without a proper plot, the movie is just bleh.
I will give it though that the visuals are pretty distracting from the main plot, so unless you weren't really focusing on the plot, you're good.

In all, the movie is not groundbreaking or revolutionary, but it's just a good movie...it wasn't horrible and it wasn't amazing.

Well, those are my two cents, feel free to bash if you'd like.
tcu21 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:33:56 AM

@sacdaddy: I have to agree with you on that one. Yeah she was attractive when she was younger, but I never thought she was like the hottest person in the world like all these other people did. Either way it's getting a little old (no pun intended). It's becoming the Meryl Streep thing, they're just casting her in movies hoping that she'll get some kind of Oscar nod.
Bryan.Rivelli writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:49:13 AM

And also, while on the topic of Salt........still a bit confused on how this happened.... but yeah
When I saw that trailer, I sat there...in utter confusion. I had no clue what the f*ck was going on in life at that point...
Really the movie seems random, and I was confused out of my f*cking mind.
So yeah, not a movie I'll be checking anytime soon.
BigUnit writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:57:24 AM

90% thought it was enjoyable**
Bryan.Rivelli writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 10:03:44 AM

I must say I disagree with you BigUnit. Saying that just makes you seem ignorant to the fact that a movie that is worked hard on can in fact be bad. Don't take offense to that, I don't want to start any trouble, but there are people who in fact didn't enjoy the plot that ripped off of several other movies, it didn't work with them, it didn't work with this.
Like I said, the movies visuals and effects were great, the scenery was good and so were the alien natives...but the plot which makes up more than 50 percent of the movie was weak, and that's my reason for only seeing it as a good movie.
gitrmnky7 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 10:26:16 AM

Well what I have heard so far is that the CGI is amazing and the story is lacking. CGI is cool, but this is why 80% of movies that come out today suck. No one cares about the story anymore. I saw the preview for this movie, and like some of you said, thought it looked EXACTLY like Ferngully. Help me decide if i should see it in theaters, or rent it, or just not see it at all. I like CGI, but I like story a whole lot better. I'm a bigger fan of talent, then of a big piggy bank.
aisfororiginal writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 10:54:25 AM

I have to say I really enjoyed the world and would like to see more. I'm sad the video game was such a flop because I think that had more potential than the movie.

Saw it in 3D. I really enjoyed it, but I think I was more visually engrossed than anything. Story was predictable, but what movie isn't these days?
Jabba_RT writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 11:10:26 AM

My GF and I saw it last night in 3D. Yes, the story is a lot of what we've seen before, but it was entertaining enough. To that point, if Cameron waited all this time for technology to catch up to his vision, why didn't he develop a better and more original story with deeper characters? He had plenty of time to do it.

In the end, I found the film very entertaining and visually incredible, but it wasn't like I was surprised by anything that happened. Also, I really hate all these 3D flicks being pushed on us for no apparant reason, but I'm actually glad I saw this one in 3D. It really enhanced the visuals and drew you into the world.
Jabba_RT writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 11:22:04 AM

@ SACdaddy

Agree with you on the "Salt" flick. The audience was laughing during the trailer, which is usually not a good thing when it's not a comedy. I though the Cruise/Diaz flick looked meh. All I kept thinking was how much Cameron Diaz is looking like that girl in Star Trek "The Menagerie" when they finally revealed her f*cked up face. She is NOT aging well.
Powderedtoastman writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 11:54:52 AM

I have to agree with @derp

Sam Worthington needs an accent coach. He constantly goes in and out of his Aussie accent. Which could lead me to rant about how he should never be considered for Cap because of that alone...

ANYWAYS. I loved the movie. It is definitely Dances With Wolves in space. But whatever. The story was enthralling, the effects were the best I have ever seen, and the acting was pretty good. And I feel the same as @long pants... I want to go back to Pandora.

The question for me now is: How many times will I see it?


For all of you who have not seen it: Go see it in 3-D at least! IMAX 3-D if you can!
Roark writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:23:14 PM

Saw Avatar last night. It was extremely disappointing.
Pros: Visual effects were compelling.
Cons: First hour and a half was like watching nature channel (bored to tears). Story is predictable and uninteresting. Casting is unwise. Acting is low grade. Movie was way too long. Characters were two dimensional and pathetic.
Verdict: Waste of my time and money.
Apologies to all Cameron fans.
bacci40 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:27:09 PM

carl4prez,

lucas directed 3 great movies in his career...thx 1138, american graffitti (he got great performances out of all of the cast) and star wars
OneTime writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:31:24 PM

saw it in 3d..pretty amazing...so much depth and detail.
kataar1 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:42:33 PM

The movie was visually stunning like nothing i've ever seen (i watched it in imax 3d). The storyline is not the best mainly because we've heard it a few times before but its the way that they tell it what makes it interesting. The last 20 minutes of the movie are just stunning.
rabid writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 12:53:59 PM

I'm planning on seeing this tomorrow night. I hope its fun. I haven't heard a single negative review from anyone I know yet. Everyone seems to think it was amazing, so that's pretty promising.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:15:25 PM

Anybody that had big enough problem with Worthington's accent to dislike the movie must really have a problem with films like Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and Rescue Dawn. Bale's sh*tty accent makes Worthington sound like he from Kansas! Sam's is fine. Sigourney Weaver sounded like she was struggling with her lines a lot more than him.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:29:08 PM

Made $27 million on opening day, chances are slim that it'll break the 80 million line.
rabid writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:29:25 PM

The film is set a hundred and fifty years from now, so I'd think realistic accents are pretty irrelevant.
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:33:26 PM

Lol 'I am legend' had a bigger opening day.
ironhide-autobot writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:44:05 PM

I thought it was utterly amazing in evrey way possible,and it was by far the best and most entertaning movie ever made.
warlord writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:46:51 PM

it was ok its not the dawn of a new world it's a movie and in two of three years something better will pop up
Peter Parker writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:54:23 PM

By far the most entertaining movie ever made???

I seriously doubt it beats "Brick House Butts - The Movie"...
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 1:57:48 PM

Good call on the accent Rabid. Bladerunner's future had everybody speaking something between english and Japanese. Then again Cameron didn't really bother to give us any idea what was going on in this distant future other than Earth may be running out of "green" and injuries can be fixed with the right amount of cash. He never tells us what the Unobtanium is used for or why there was such a rush to get to it. It would have been nice for him to take 2-5 minutes to let us know how mankind got to the point of raping other worlds for resources. Its called backstory and plot!
rabid writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 2:21:43 PM

The trailer for SALT was f*cking amazing. And that's coming from a guy who hates Angelina Jolie's bony ass and broomstick arms.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 3:24:41 PM

To my fans:

i going to see Avatar today, them i will give you my review, i going to go Open minded and forget all the bad post of the movie.

In the subjet of Sam W. I dont give a sh*t of that gay, i just think it will fun hit him in the face with a statue, and dont love neither hate the douchebag, i just think is fun insult him and all of his fanboys, i meant what happen in Hollywood there are no more actors, because that sucker is in all the movies lately, i can act too, make you all belive that i alredy see Avatar and left the theatre before the end, hahaha.

Sorry for my bad english im learning from my self i dont have money to pay for classes, i using this blog for pratcing and learning a little bit more from your language.

Ps. I dont write the Sam W. last name because is too long and can't remember it
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 3:42:12 PM

Dude what the f*ck with the Worthington hate lmao seriously. I mean I'm indifferent to him he hasn't done enough to make me love him as an actor or nothing but what did he do to make you so upset besides become successful? Like jeeze louise stop hating on the dude non stop it makes YOU look bad.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 3:43:20 PM

Trueman, YOU are the man!
Your posts crack me up and your hatred for S.W. has become a funny curiosity here on WP.

I think it's great you're learning the language on your own. I admire a self-educated man. Props to you.

Keep it up, bud.
Sechio writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 3:51:59 PM

TWO WORDS....
ABSOLUTELY AMAZING
10/10
Jabba_RT writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:06:22 PM

Big props to TRUEMAN for self-teaching English. May not be the best choice using these blogs as a teaching tool.

Maybe someone on here can get Sam W.'s number and he can donate some lessons.
Last Acting Hero writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:20:33 PM

@TRUEMAN.. I'm a huge fan of you and your posts. You're a funny guy, BUT I must ask for a favor of you. Help me talk sh*t about the predators movie!!! Thanks, looking foward to your review of avatar too.
tob623 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:35:15 PM

This movie was visually stunning! never seen anything that intense looking. But the story itself was pretty much exactly the animated movie Fern Gully. Other than that not a horrible movie.
Parker_Von_Mink_Ranger writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:42:56 PM

This is one of the greatest sci-fi movies ever made. I have never seen so much detail and beauty before...i want to return to Pandora.. 10/10

and yeah, f*ck you wolverine jr. and spookycupcakes, u mink wannabe. Ur posts aren´t funny so pls crawl back up ur mothers ass.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:43:05 PM

@Trueman: where are you from anyway?
Parker_Von_Mink_Ranger writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:44:03 PM

and yeah, the Worstpreviews review is a joke. did that guy forget to take his medication or what?
Parker_Von_Mink_Ranger writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:49:09 PM

Dustin Put-(my d*ck in another)-man


Dustin Putman Did u hear about the 8/10
Avatar 5/10

This is funny stuff.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 4:55:59 PM

@ SAC:

Trueman lives in Spain, according to what he wrote a few days ago on another thread.
kerryellen1407 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 5:09:18 PM

Avator would have been a 10 out of 10 if it were not for the rotten 3D. How to totally spoil a great movie with its wonderful CGI effects? Show it with having to wear thick, dark , black plastic glasses that make the screen dark and small. Not to mention giving a headache afterwards. I felt so totally robbed of a great cinematic pleasure by having to watch this movie in 3D.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 5:20:59 PM

Ok, Ferngully, Dances with Wolves, and The Last Samurai are obvious possible source materials for this film, but what else? I've already made the loose Rambo 3 connection but what about Dune?

Dune: Paul joins the indigenous people of a foreign world to fight against an invading alien race looking to rape their planet of Spice (which is the most valuable substance in the galaxy). He essentially becomes one of them by drinking their special water and riding the most feared beast on the planet. He uses the beast in the final battle to conquer the invaders and drive them of the planet. Sound familiar? Dune was a very popular sci fi book when guys like Speilberg, Lucas, and Cameron were younger. Is it the source of their inspirations?
Ranger writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 5:34:44 PM

@Parker_Von_Mink_Ranger - WTF is up with putting my name last?!?!?!?!?!

f*cker!

lol.
Jabba_RT writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 5:44:10 PM

@ kerryellen1407

All of the theaters around me playing it had both the 3D and regular versions. Your only choice was 3D?
VN1X writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 5:55:39 PM

I [i]just[/i] saw Avatar and I was blown away. This movie is worth all the hype. Sure the story isn't original by a long shot but the way Cameron presents his version of it comes close to near perfection. The visuals speak for themselves and were absolutely thrilling. No literally, [i]thrilling[/i]. Goosebumbs enducing.

Never have I been moved to such an extent by a movie of this calibre. Usually they just fall in the category of 'epic' or 'awesome' but this was so much more then that. There are numerous scenes in Avatar which are, albeit a tad cliche, absolutely beautiful. Both visually and emotionally.

I can't wait to see this again and return to the wonderful world crafted by Cameron to see what I missed and if it holds up to a second viewing.

/cries tears of joy

Oh and saw it in IMAX 3D
wonderBOY writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 6:11:21 PM

Imax 3d largest screen in the world
it is the best looking piece of sh*t ever
best cgi but lame ass cliche story they should of called it ferngully: Pandoras Box or wateva
RajMahal writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 6:20:40 PM

So Avatar got a 5/10...but Did You Hear About the Morgans got an 8/10...

Something you're not telling us, Dustin?
RajMahal writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 6:22:57 PM

@Parker_Von_Mink_Ranger

definitely didn't read your post beforehand...

...but glad we're on the same page.
pleshy writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 6:24:00 PM

James Cameron brought another miracle to this world. I saw to movie about an hour ago (in 3D, of course) and I still can't believe what I saw. I feel that I'm still in Pandora and frankly - I don't want to leave. Every detail in the movie is perfect and the story is brilliant. I just can't believe how they managed to create this masterpiece. I'm definitely going to see it again these days and maybe another time after that. There will always be unhappy people and negative feedback and with Avatar I can see why but that doesn't make the movie (I feel funny calling it a movie) less amazing. It will always stay in my heart.
Euler writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:13:32 PM

FX were great. The story, unfortunately, was stolen from "Dances with Wolves", but with a different ending.
BigUnit writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:24:57 PM

i had AVATAR dreams last night
Ranger writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:26:00 PM

@Euler - I haven't even seen it yet. But from what I've read and heard about, this storyline is taken from other movies like Star Trek: Insurrection, and a bunch of others mentioned in other threads.

But for the effects alone, I'm looking forward to seeing this in IMAX 3D.
minkowski writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:26:16 PM

That's funny, because I usually dream about big breasted blonds with bottles of coconut oil...
Sveppi writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:28:05 PM

Absolutely loved it. I've never been pulled in to a fantasy world like this.
BigUnit writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:32:43 PM

i like how all the avatar haters out there are like "i guess its a good movie", its like you guys wanted this movie to be just awful so bad lol well you know what sorry to break it to you, it was a master piece, and all of your commits have proven that.
Tebeck writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:45:07 PM

Movies like avatar are what we need to bring back the creativity in hollywood. Excellent. A sequel is not necessary but would still be an asset as long as its still written and directed by cameron. NO SPINOFFS OR REBOOTS
redbluedevil writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:46:44 PM

Plot holes? Yup. Screenplay in need of major polishing? Yup. Lives up to all the hype? Probably not. The start of something big? Oh yes! And the only way to see it is in 3D IMAX.
redbluedevil writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 7:58:05 PM

btw, I did see it in 3D Imax (in case that wasn't clear). Final rating - 8/10.
mjbodnarek@gmail.com writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 8:30:57 PM

Amazing, I saw it in 3D and it was MIND-BLOWING! But the love Story and intriguing Characters were its strongest aspect. Do yourself a favour and see this masterpiece.

PS. Who ever gave this film a 5/10 score, you wouldn't know a good movie if it hit you in the face. You gave Old Dogs and Did you here about the Morgans? a better review. It is a Disgrace!
The Phantom 95 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 8:31:06 PM

Oh my god this was the best movie ever made. also i was lucky that i saw it in 3-D
The Phantom 95 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 8:35:27 PM

Oh my god this was the best movie ever made. also i was lucky that i saw it in 3-D. The 3-D was great and it really works here because it's not like before when horror movies took over 3-D
Clarence Worley writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:45:05 PM

Just saw it on IMAX. Here are my ratings; Special effects 10/10, plot 5/10, acting 7/10.

The story felt a tad too preachy but the acting sort of compensated for it. Other times it felt like the movie was made as a vehicle to showcase the newly developed technology.

Overall, the movie was entertaining. But in order to fully appreciate the work put in, i believe that it should be seen on IMAX. Otherwise, it might just come up short.
skatemaster62 writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 9:49:00 PM

just asw Avatar and all i gotta say is James Cameron color me impressed. saw it in 3d on regular screen and very much enjoyed this film
minkowski writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 10:19:44 PM

Avatar's first day stands as the third highest-grossing ever for a December release, some 27 million. Pretty good for a film that has no pre-existing franchise or fans. And better than Titanic's inflation adjusted 14 million.
Mighte Migit writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 11:03:04 PM

a truly amazing film
whoever writes:
on December 19th, 2009 at 11:51:17 PM

I saw it in 3D and thought it was amazing. I glad to report that there was no 3D blue sausage with all those loin cloths moving around.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 12:20:46 AM

Watching the Russian cam now, and I don't get the mad, hysterical hype, once again.

It's like some old Western with Tonto or Pronto or whatever. The Na'vi make a lot of animalistic, tribalistic noises, and all I can think about is just how much this reminds me so much of that British film 'Zulu'.

And then there's the sets that look like they were lifted immediately from The Abyss. I guess Cameron did the concept work there.

The CG is nice, yes, but evolutionary, not revolutionary. Looks like a tenth generation game cinematic cut-sceen strung together by a Hong Kong master of machinima. I kept looking for the Nvidia logo.

And what's so special about 'Pandora'? It doesn't even look that alien. Sure, strange monsters abound, but no more than those found in Star Wars. The whole place, save the silly floating mountains, looks like New Zealand, and as beautiful as NZ is, it's no more impressive than the lands of middle-earth.

And then there's the slow mo during the final battle, like Cameron thought the audience too slow to properly view his genius at work. Either that or his dramatic license has gone limp.

Ok, and then there's one of these aliens that's obviously a cross between a bat and a monkey? Why is it we go these four long light years, these millions and millions of miles, only to find things that look just.like.us? Or some derivative? I cannot believe that nature is that limited. The imagination used here on the fauna and flora is only marginally better than Star Trek, and far less exciting then Star Wars. Cameron is simply no Lucas, and all the good and the bad that implies.

The slo-mo action with the arrow at the end, and the corny music. Like something from Kevin Costner's Robin Hood flick. Duke Nukem's death scene heralds another slow take on the passing of the main protagonist.

People riding around on things that look like dragons..like Cameron decided to rip off some Ursula Le Guin book covers.

Mountains float, but lily pads do not?

Some of the facial animations are horrible. I had to stop the film just to stop laughing. One Na'vi looked his was supposed to be in thrall of an emotion akin to sad anger, but it made me think he just had a nasty bowel obstruction.

Can't really rate the dialog because it seems Boris Yeltsin did all the voices.

Story is just so f*cking derived and tired. How many times do we have to see the same situations? You've got a little Braveheart, a little LotM, a little Smurfs, Fern Gully, Jurassic Park, Land of the Lost and about a thousand other films. This isn't the product of fertile imagination, it's the product of every film Cameron has ever seen, a handicapped vision that's crutched up on the minds of many a concept artist.

The system they jack into is less like the Matrix and more like a mo-cap rig, which is amusing because the Na'vi are animated in real life using mo-cap...

The acting ranges from bad to slightly better than mediocre. Lots of dimensionally challenged characters here. The only-evil Duke Nukem is one of the most egregiously shallow roles depicted, and Giovanni Ribisi hardly compels me to take him seriously.

Sam Worthington is...Sam Worthington. I don't think this guy is going to get a Walk of fame star anytime really soon. He's about as interesting as meatloaf.

I can easily see Avatar sweeping technical awards, because it is a milestone there for sure, and not too much competition this year, but I'll eat a cat if I believe it'll get best picture, best actor, et cetera.

It's just too derivative, cliched, underdeveloped in story and character. Even the music is nothing special, played on cue for sure, but beyond that, it sounds just like James Horner, which it is, not surprisingly...
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 12:25:35 AM

Oh, and the loaders and also the gunship from 'Aliens' return. Yeah, Avatar is like Aliens, just not as good and painted with a kids Crayola set.
jchavez12000 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:10:13 AM

It was an okay movie, just dont watch it in 3d. That wore my eyes out.
kyearby writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:24:01 AM

definitely one of my favorite movies. Avatar is a movie you can watch again and again and will never get old. The light-up forests and animals looked amazing. I kinda like how the animals were similar to the ones on earth like the dogs and horses.

the last battle scene was BADASS. best part of the movie for sure. I recommend seeing it in theaters. It's worth the money to enjoy it, rather than watching a bootleg copy online. I suggest seeing it in 2D though.
fraazjo writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:30:50 AM

I doubt if this will change movie making much.
Besides sci fi/fantasy epics, what other type of movie will use this technogy?
Romantic comedies?
Period dramas?
RoadDogXVIII writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:38:50 AM

I question Dustin Putman's sanity. He gave Avatar a 5/10, while he gave Did You Hear About the Morgans an 8/10. He's just pushing me further into seeing the former movie, considering the latter is not only the bajillionth unoriginal romantic comedy this decade, but is getting slammed by the critics and may be up for a Razzie. So, basically, I could give a sh*t.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:41:28 AM

"It's worth the money to enjoy it, rather than watching a bootleg copy online"

You should send me a ticket, then.
warriors187 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:44:52 AM

225 comments...I am glad that worstpreviews is getting big,,,but i still miss when we few were able to speak among one another without having to go through a ton of BS,,,,Im only 20 years old, so gimme a break, broskies
kyearby writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:50:43 AM

you are very pessimistic minkowski. every post i see from you is negative. cheer up a little. is any movie up to your standards? or is star wars just the best movie ever made and everything else sucks?
rabid writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:09:44 AM

I haven't seen it yet, but if you're watching the camcorder version, then I don't think you're really seeing it. This is one of those times when it pays to immerse yourself. I'm seeing it tomorrow night. I'm excited!
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:10:16 AM

"you are very pessimistic minkowski."

I'm realistic. I see what's there, not what I want to see. Open your eyes before it's too late. Do you want to live your whole life blind? Recall what Blade said to Zoe, when she asked: "Why can't you just be nice?". And he answered: "Because the world isn't nice".

"every post i see from you is negative."

You shouldn't read them, then. Read someone else's post instead. You do no one any good bitching about my 'bitching'.

"cheer up a little."

I am quite happy. Probably happier than you. Truly happy. Content even.

"is any movie up to your standards?"

Sure, just none of this garbage. Avatar is sub par story with advanced graphics. It's a pretty f*cking silly film. Cameron can do better. Or can he?

"or is star wars just the best movie ever made and everything else sucks?"

I don't like Star Wars either, much, and had you actually read and comprehended what I wrote about Avatar, you would know this. Had you read my comments in the other thread, some days ago, you would know I don't care for Star Wars, and yet you somehow claim that everything I post is 'negative' when it's quite clear by your ignorance of my opinion on Star Wars that you haven't read really anything I've commented on.

So, please, spare me your sermonizing and condescension, because obviously you're in no position to do either.

"but i still miss when we few were able to speak among one another without having to go through a ton of BS"

Sorry you feel that way. I hope my opinions are not bullsh*t to you, but if they are, that's too bad. We have to share. None of us own this place. If you want to hear one homogenized opinion, with just a few posters, tough. And it's not an echo chamber and I won't let it be one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_chamber_(media)
blinkbomber writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:13:27 AM

even though you were mostly right with your analysis of it, Mink... i would offer to send you a ticket anyways, just because i dont believe a bootleg would do it justice.

like i said, you were right on most of your points... in the end it just comes down to if that affects your experience or not. it didn't for me, and i enjoyed it. it was more than good to me, but not great.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:16:52 AM

"but if you're watching the camcorder version, then I don't think you're really seeing it."

Of course I am seeing it. Watching a film in '3D' or on the big screen should not sway me one way or the other. If it is, then I am not being objective. I'm letting the film's avenue of commercial depiction market itself to my opinion.

The film should be enjoyable regardless of how it is presented. If I have to see it in IMAX 3D to take it in, then why buy the thing on DVD? A film is a visual story. That's the tradition. It's not a roller coaster ride.

And most of my criticisms are not dependent on camcorder resolution. I can watch the HD trailer to criticize the CG. And I have. But thanks anyway.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:19:15 AM

"i would offer to send you a ticket anyways, just because i dont believe a bootleg would do it justice."

I can afford a ticket, but I do thank you for your patient generosity. I'll get around to seeing it on the big screen eventually. I just don't go to theaters for anything. It has to be something special, otherwise theatrical viewing becomes as routine as a bathroom break.
Derp88 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:26:31 AM

Star Wars was rubbish
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:31:12 AM

I meant to say that once you've scraped away the thick patina of CG and effects, a film's story should still stand well, alone.

Let me ask you this: if you had never seen Avatar, and you had only read the final script, if you had never seen the trailer, how would you rate the film? What if Avatar was a book, a novel? How would you rate it then? That's my question. Do that for me, close your eyes and imagine that.

Because if a film cannot survive a reading of it's script, it's not worth it.

I just think a film is like a friend. You should choose them, I hope, on the content of their heart, not on the quality of their looks. But that's just me. Obviously I approach things just a little bit differently than most.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:35:39 AM

"Star Wars was rubbish"

The first three were ok. I've seen them maybe once, and not until about 2004. They would come on back in the 80s and 90s on television, and I would just change the channel. The original trilogy was made well. The second...a boring brood of bastards. Like the Baldwin Brothers.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 3:46:42 AM

I love the first three Star Wars movies, there's a lot of nostalgia there but at the same time I appreciate the good vs evil tale and how it was presented. Star Wars and Avatar share something in common which is scale. They tell very simple stories but the magnitude of it all seems so epic and grand. Plus the original Star Wars trilogy did a lot of amazing things technically. The new trilogy... *sigh*. I'm not even going to start with that sh*t. It makes me want to punch walls.

You know Mink I'm torn on your point because one it's true but at the same time I'm a big believer in the "theater experience". I mean there's a reason we project these movies on this 40 foot screens. There's a reason we have a dozen speakers and thousands of watts of sound coming from them. The theater is supposed to add to the enjoyment and serve as an aid to immersing the audience in the material. I don't think it's you being biased that's the way the movie was intended to be viewed. People don't make movies solely based on just the stories because that's doing the medium a disservice. The visual component is huge and in some films larger than others and the theater experience is a huge part of that. But at the same time the story is the backbone of it all so I don't know.

What do you think of IMAX?
VN1X writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:04:46 AM

Damn. minkowski didn´t like the movie or even enjoy it. What ever will we do?

Oh I know...
SEE IT AGAIN FOR GREAT JUSTICE GODDAMNIT!
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:11:28 AM

Hello people i gonna give you some honest thoughts about the movie:
for a film that take like 4 years of making, the are some faults in the dialogue, some mising explications, about the background of the history of the unobtabium, whats the humans using for? The first arrival of mans on Pandora where mising, how they found the unobtabium, where is pandora, what system, for so large pre production and prodution this movie has some mayor problems.

In the visual theme, well its only the tip of the iceberg only a preview of what is going to happen with the movies in the future good 3D, the animation stil doesnt look that super but the jungle was amazing well the box office will tell!

And the acting doesn't boderg me At all, of course, Sam W. Sucks all the time, but i was happy because he was cripple and sargent hit in the face, that was very funny hahaha im still laughing about that hahaha my wish have come true hahaha. my rating of the movie 7/10 only because i like science fiction!!!
VN1X writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:13:18 AM

"Of course I am seeing it. Watching a film in '3D' or on the big screen should not sway me one way or the other. If it is, then I am not being objective. I'm letting the film's avenue of commercial depiction market itself to my opinion."
How can you be objective if you're not viewing it the way it was meant to be viewed? Hell... Why even download crappy cam quality rips if you're a film geek. It doesn't give you an acurate presentation of the movie in the slightest.

"The film should be enjoyable regardless of how it is presented. If I have to see it in IMAX 3D to take it in, then why buy the thing on DVD?"
One of the reasons this is an IMAX 3D must-see is because of all that's going on and the immense visual detail put in to it. When not seeing it in 3D you lose all of the special touches that make it stand out from the crowd and make the experience even better. That plus this movie paves the way for 3DTV's. That's not to say AVATAR alone could have done so but the only way to even come close to the IMAX experience is to watch it on one of those beauties. At least... That's what I'd like to think as I've never seen a flick on one of those things before.

"A film is a visual story. That's the tradition. It's not a roller coaster ride."
Err... Obviously films aren't roller coaster rides in a literal sense but to say they can not enduce the same feeling is absolutely ridiculous and backwards. They are an experience which can be even more emotionally thrilling and breathtaking than a roller coaster ride and leave you dazzled days after you've seen it.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:13:42 AM

Animation wasn't super... IT'S HUMANS MOVING! I mean I don't mean to shout at you or be a d*ck but those are real people moving, it's not like the movement is canned.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:43:02 AM

All I'm going to say is that the biggest theatrical screen is inside my skull, between my two ears.

"I mean there's a reason we project these movies on this 40 foot screens."

Sure there is. But what do you do later? If the film is only good on a 40 foot screen, how can you ever enjoy it in your home? How could you ever enjoy the magnificent and simple pleasure of a good book or any other decent film, unless it's blasted onto the side of building?

Yes, IMAX and what not are there for a reason, to make bad movies look better, and to make good movies LOOK awesome, but again, it's all superficial. I don't approach films from a "does it blow me away" attitude, which is why a Bay film, no matter how large the screen, is still garbage to me, just loud pretty garbage on a 40 foot wall.

"There's a reason we have a dozen speakers and thousands of watts of sound coming from them."

I guess. All that noise doesn't make a bad film any better, it's just makes it louder, and I guess for some folks, loud and pretty is all that matters.

"The theater is supposed to add to the enjoyment and serve as an aid to immersing the audience in the material."

In America, that's known as the imagination's wheelchair.

"I don't think it's you being biased that's the way the movie was intended to be viewed."

And if that's the case, then the film is working overtime to impress me with how loud it is and pretty it looks, rather than making me feel and think.

"People don't make movies solely based on just the stories because that's doing the medium a disservice."

Really? Because if I recall most of the best films are also good stories.

One of the best films in history is Alfred Hitchc*ck's Rear Window, a simple film with simple audio. Expensive set, but still. No f*cking 3D, no 20 speaker sound system. And Rear Window, on pure quality alone, totally ass rapes Avatar.

I mean, you make it seem like I want a movie set to the rhythm of a book. What I want is simply a good story first. Pile the visuals on top later. It's like building a car chassis with cake frosting, and then dumping the pretty fiberglass shell on top. No go, there.

I'm just not impressed with merely pretty pictures, especially not the sh*t you see in films. I'm not that shallow. Sorry. Sure, if movies looked like the artwork from a Spectrum artbook, then yeah, that would add to the experience, but they almost never do.

What I'm talking about here, is a film meeting the basic visual threshold for properly depicting the world in question. I have no issue with Cameron's CG, because that is what is required for depicting his world, his ideas, realistically, but I surely have an issue with the demand that Avatar must be seen in IMAX theaters, and that somehow, this loud, in your face, explosion of sights and sounds somehow compensates for a sh*tty story, but because if everything is pretty and loud, everyone should be happy. That's bullsh*t.

So, for me, there's a big difference between a proper depiction, meeting that required visual threshold, of the fantastic and the pompous demand of a film to be seen in IMAX 3D and booming sound.

"The visual component is huge and in some films larger than others and the theater experience is a huge part of that."

The visual component is as large and loud as they want to make it, but like a sh*tty band with a laser light show and enormous megawatt amps, it's still a sh*tty tune you're hearing, and no amount of auditory and visual prosthetics will be able to compensate. And that's what it is, a prosthetic. A f*cking wooden leg for a crippled film.

"But at the same time the story is the backbone of it all so I don't know."

And what do you call something without a backbone? A weakling. A runt. Something that cannot stand on its own. Which is precisely my point. Without a strong story structure, a film is on the crutches of gimmicks to survive. In the case of Avatar, the crutches take the form of 'immersive' 3D and 'cutting edge' CG.

See, the way I see, it is that films like Avatar try to overcompensate. Look at Blade Runner. Great film. Lots of good acting and some fine plot elements. The threshold for immersion was met because the necessary depiction of the world was met. There was no need for IMAX 3D, just to come away with a sh*t-eating grin and a resolve to heap praise on the film. None of that.

And as Yeats might have said, with respect to Avatar, "things fall apart; the center cannot hold".
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:46:28 AM

"Damn. minkowski didn´t like the movie or even enjoy it. What ever will we do?"

You can like 'your' movie all you want. You act like we're related or married or something. I don't know you and you don't know me. I'll like what I like and you can like what you like, but at least I will understand my preferences, whereas you'll just be a slave to visceral and primitive reaction. Your attitude is summed up as "Ooooh, look at all the pretty lights". I can actually articulate. To each his own, huh?
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:56:07 AM

"How can you be objective if you're not viewing it the way it was meant to be viewed?"

Avatar is not ONLY a 3D film, it was released in both 2D and 3D, to be enjoyed in which ever form you choose. I've chosen the 2D route simply because I'm going to look at it *objectively*, on the merits if story and plt, dialogue and direction, not on the basis of how loud and pretty it is. I am not a monkey, animated by shiny objects.

To judge something on colors, sights and sounds is the height of sueprficial subjectivity.

"One of the reasons this is an IMAX 3D must-see is because of all that's going on and the immense visual detail put in to it."

Which has nothing to do with direction, story, plot, acting, dialog, elements of creativity, consistency, you know, all the sh*t that actually constitutes a good film. Or at least aids in the objective and proper dissection of one.

You're seeing it superficially, by how you REACT, I'm looking at it internally, by how it WORKS. You wouldn't buy or rent a car just on the basis of looks, or date on the basis of outward appearance, would you? Yeah, you probably would...

"Err... Obviously films aren't roller coaster rides in a literal sense but to say they can not enduce the same feeling is absolutely ridiculous and backwards."

Sure they can, but they shouldn't as a threshold for merit. That's what I am saying. They should meet the threshold of a f*cking good story FIRST, not later or if ever. And that's the deal.
rocketman writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:04:59 AM

@Derp
No its not,the first film 'Star Wars' was more ground breaking than anything Avatar related.The new ones i agree though are deeply flawed.But ou can gimmie a Lightsaber and an AT-AT over a set of blue smurf tits anyday,like Ewoks didn't do the whole 'vietnam v's the colonial army that trys control a primative race on a moon thats covered in vegitation'thing years ago and they didn't need Sam Worthlesstons help either.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:08:16 AM

And yeah, Unobtainium. How f*cking stupid. Like I need another Cameron film to tell me how greedy and monstrous humans are, while that hypocritical f*cktard bathes in his billions of dollars, drives his cars, flies in his jets, basically enjoys the gooooood life as 'King of the World', while millions go hungry.

If there's a greedy, arrogant narcissistic prick, sucking off the lesser fortunate, it's Cameron. Just another rich *sshole liberal Hollywood d*ckhead, enjoying the good, good f*cking life while lecturing, sermonizing us with his self-righteous sanctimonious bullsh*t. What a prick. And we buy into every time. How stupid are we, always taking purchase of another morality tale, dressed up in pretty clothing, to tell us how rotten we are.

Unlike the poor saps in Avatar, Cameron obtained his 'unobtainium'. King of the world he is. And what a stupid name for something. Why not call it 'wecantfindthesh*t' instead?
vaodsi writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:11:03 AM

haha.. and ewoks on endor sucked... :)
nitishbhat writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:20:15 AM

@mink
i agree that just good visuals dont make a good movie. but calling everyone who enjoy a good visual treat monkeys, just shows how big of a snobby douche bag you are. i love a movie which has a good plot, acting and direction. but i also like visual effects because i m a graphics designer and i now how much work is put into it. an if u really think visual effects doesnt need creativity, then i dont know why people give sh*t about what you think.
and yes, avatar was meant to be watched in 3D. and if u havent yet seen it, then you have missed out on a lot.....oh ya i forgot, u are not a monkey who is entertained by shinny things. you are a f*cking snail who could not process and appreciate all the detail put into this movie.

its fine if you were bored with this movie. even i did not think much of its story. but stop treating people who enjoy a bit of visual effects as lower beings than you.

try being less snobby, you f*cking douche bag.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:24:25 AM

"i agree that just good visuals dont make a good movie. but calling everyone who enjoy a good visual treat monkeys, just shows how big of a snobby douche bag you are."

Thank you, monkey.

"its fine if you were bored with this movie. even i did not think much of its story. but stop treating people who enjoy a bit of visual effects as lower beings than you."

Hey, there's hierarchy, and I'm not at the top, and you're not at the bottom, but you and I sure as hell are not equal. I don't invent the f*cking thing, I'm a slave to it just like you. Now go eat your cheetoes and watch things explode.

"try being less snobby, you f*cking douche bag."

No, monkey, I don't think I will.
nitishbhat writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:30:36 AM

well.....its your life. be as doouchy as you like.
minkowski writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 5:44:08 AM

Thank you. I appreciate your tolerance.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 8:07:33 AM

From the opening scene where SW wakes up from cryo on the space station its obviously a 3D movie. That may have been one of the best establishing shots of the film. It prepared you for the new levels of 3D advancement this film was emmerced in and prompted you to the meticulous level of "technical" detail Cameron delivers for the rest of the movie. Watching it bootleg on a pc is like watching the Super Bowl on your Iphone instead of going to the game!

They released it in 2D because every theather around the world doesn't have the new digital 3D capabilities and some audiences just don't like the 3D. I always avoided 3D movies because they gave me headaches. This one did too for 5 minutes and then my eyes completely adjusted and I really found it fascinating. This is more of an event than your typical day at the movies.

Mink, I've said it before and I'll say it again, JUST GO SEE THE f*ckING MOVIE!!! If not, no offense but your often "valued" opinion really doesn't carry much weight. Not many people, including Cameron, have hyped the story as being a masterpiece. He probably wrote it 15 years ago on the sh*tter and didn't spend a dime doing so. Why don't you go and see what he spent the next 9 years prepping, 4 years shooting, and $400 mill spending on and stop worrying about what he did on the can. I was disappointed with the plot too but not enough to close my eyes to every other aspect of the film. While I'll agree that it is not his best film, its still worth the $10 and 2hrs I spent seeing it in its true format. With all of the time and money that Cameron put into this process, you're really sounding pretty cheap and lazy watching it in an inferior medium.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 8:55:48 AM

Ok, it was actually $12.50 and I was a little pissed buy the price increase for 3D :)
SACdaddy writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 9:43:04 AM

"by" sorry got $$$ on the mind
VN1X writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 10:23:21 AM

Ahh damn Minowski. IMAX theatres are there to make the movie experience even more superficial and shallow then they already are. Thank you for pointing that out to me. I must be an idiot.

Obviously they're just blindfolds for the audiences so they can not deduce what's REALLY going on in terms of the inner workings of the films. Dang.

I think we should've not only seen it on DVD or a crappy cam rip but on a 12inch no-color TV. Maybe then Avatar and other movies with pretty and distracting visuals could really be objectively(re)viewed.
Jabba_RT writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 12:15:17 PM

Ok, so I think what we've all pretty much determined after all this is that mostly everyone agrees that the story is weak and the visuals are great.

To all the jackasses on here that have proclaimed this film to be "the best film ever made", what did you think of Transformers 2. You must of loved that pile of steaming sh*t! That story made Avatar read like Citizen Kane.

Think what you like, but Avatar is not going to go down in the history of film as being the "best film ever". Unfortunately, all you eye candy retards just need some explosions and sparkly colors in front of your face for 2 hours to satisfy you.
Jabba_RT writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 12:20:52 PM

It's pretty obvious how similar Giovanni Ribisi's character in Avatar and Paul Reiser's character in Aliens are. Did anybody notice that both their names are Carter? Not a huge deal, but come on! Cameron, can't you at least give them different names even if they are essentially the same character?
chiefone writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 12:27:04 PM

Definately not the best film ever made, I wouldnt even rate it in the top 100, but the visuals were spectacular, I kinda agree with everything Minks stated in his review. Anyways still thought it was ok, If I do decide to see it again, it wont be till it comes out on DVD and it'll be only because fo the visuals
RickyGabrielBird writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 12:50:24 PM

With this new craze of 3D I wonder if we will start to lose the essence of movies and sway more towards visual entertainment.

Is Avatar the middle ground to a movie and a 3D 'ride' found at Universal Studios?


RickyGabrielBird writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:11:48 PM

I also think the requirements of a cinematic experience differs between a lot of people.

I want to go to the cinema to be entertained on a large scale with the big screen and the way too loud speakers. Sure, I want to see crazy special effects and massive shoot outs with explosions. I could never sit in the cinema to watch my favourite films such as Memento, Eternal Sunshine and Shawshank because these films I would rather watch at home.

For all that was wrong with T4, Indy and Star Trek (Wrong to me of course! Im a Shatner fan), they were great to see on the massive screens.

Avatar for me, will probably fall into the 'Ill only see it at the cinema' category as I believe that this is the type of film these stupidly expensive cinemas are built for.
rabid writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:16:17 PM

3D is just another way of exploring the visual art form. Some films concentrate heavily on being visually immersive. It's only as much of a gimmick as the shaky-camcorder films or imax movies. It's art. Enjoy it or don't, but there's nothing wrong with varied methods to show a film.
Plus, Cameron was smart. People can't and don't want to bootleg 3D.
Kurskij writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:23:11 PM

f*cking amazing. The characters feel incredibly alive, the visuals are stunning. It's only-in-3d-experience. Cameron really is the King.
VN1X writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 1:41:03 PM

It boggles the mind how people think 3D will eliminate a certain depth in films. Like we can only have one thing or the other...

How this works is beyond me.

Also, comparing Transformers 2 to Avatar is comparing Hitler to David Attenborough.
TH3D4RKKN1GH7 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:05:46 PM

I'm not saying seeing it in IMAX is supposed to make it better, but it is THE WAY to see it. It is the INTENDED way to see it.

At the end of the day we feel similar -- movies should have a great foundation, story, script, and acting-- but when it comes to rating the film as a whole you take the theater out of that like it wasn't apart of the equation to begin with. When these guys are making these films they are saying, "alright now how's this gonna look in the theater" they're not shooting for your DVD and Flat Screen. Sure the basics of the film should still be compelling (which in Avatar's case its not entirely) but the theater experience is still apart of the film's overall presentation.

Another thing I want to bring up in this equation Mink is this. In the case of Avatar, is the story bad or is the storytelling bad? Which is really more important? I mean Speilberg doesn't use really compelling stories, but he's known as the great director of the generation. Hitchc*ck the master of suspense and Mr. Simple stories, never did anything complex but it was the way he presented it all that made it impressive.

Cameron, I believe, has told the story rather well, the story is an unoriginal but it's told fine.
TheCount writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 2:07:10 PM

It inspired me so much, I now want to join the army, go to Iraq, go undercover, fall in love with an Iraqi and realize we shouldnt be there and fight back against the evil Americans!!!
ironhide-autobot writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 3:00:32 PM

i aggre with parker von mink ranger all the way
MattC903 writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 4:31:07 PM

@ mink what are a few of your favorite movies?
steamluv writes:
on December 20th, 2009 at 9:08:17 PM

Amazing, indescribable. I honestly feel that you HAVE to see this film before you die. . .sorry Brittany. This is a film you just have to see to know what Im talking about. Oh, and Minkowski's a douche, always has been.
Popcorn101 writes:
on December 21st, 2009 at 1:09:41 AM

this movie is up there with my favorite movies ever(Gladiator, Taken, Braveheart, LoTR:RotK, etc...)
rabid writes:
on December 21st, 2009 at 4:00:58 AM

I just returned from seeing Avatar. I have to say that it lived up to every bit of the hype that surrounded it. It was visually the most astounding film I have ever seen, the most immersive and exciting. It was truly a work of art. And I'd say it's the greatest science fiction film ever made.
And yes, the effects for this film were groundbreaking. I have never seen anything like it, but I really hope that I do again. James Cameron is the f*cking man!

And I would totally bang that giant blue broad.
Spankfish writes:
on December 21st, 2009 at 2:44:44 PM

Plot, story and ALL the charecters were average at best. Parts were just way to predictable by far.

Impressed by the visuals, but could see why he used all that green for day and bio-luminecience type stuff for the night-time scenes. To cover any animation mistakes.

Thought some of the motion capture was a little clunky in parts, like the horse type creatures.

I had worked most of the story out from clips, tv etc a long time ago, so nothing in it suprised me.

I'll give some examples. He falls in love with someone elses girl, so theres bound to be conflict between them. But when they see how brave and honarable he is its all forgiven. Sounds like a John Wayne film.

Her grand-father or someone rode the big red dragon thing and brought all the clans together in a time in need. So guess who else will do the same thing?

I'm sorry, but District 9 was a far superior and origanal sci-fi film in all factors except cgi.
yankster132 writes:
on December 21st, 2009 at 4:04:22 PM

was a very good movie but District 9 is the sci-fi flick of the year
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 21st, 2009 at 7:23:46 PM

@mink

Just to add my two cents, barring the most gushing Avatar fanboys, I think most of the more astute viewers, the ones that consider themselves cinephiles and movie buffs of one degree or another, acknowledge that, at the very least, the story isn't original. And maybe some of the dialogue is weak. These are points on which we can find some small consensus. But for many, it didn't detract enough to prevent them from enjoying the movie for all the other things that it does right. Some people felt incredibly immersed in the world of the movie, found the story, while a tad weak, engaging enough to sustain interest...and maybe some were even moved by the film's images and scenes. The final battle is more-or-less universally acknowledged as kickass.

The tomatometer for the movie is 83%, and 94% for top critics. While it might be a little early yet to tell where the final score is going to be, IMDB's user rating is currently standing at 8.9. That makes it the highest rated movie of the decade, above even The Dark Knight. Now, you can make the Transformers argument regarding the dumb masses, but it wouldn't really apply to the 3 ratings above. The first two scores are critics' scores, and the IMDB user ratings are generally pretty consistent with the sentiments of average users of sites like WorstPreviews and other movie sites.

The first point I'm trying to make is that, you do happen to be in the minority. Which is perfectly fine. You are entitled to your opinion, especially since you have articulated the reasons why. More important point though, is that your opinion is based on a Russian CAM version of the movie. Sure, it wouldn't hinder you from making whatever judgments you want about its core story--you could do that with the script alone. Now, if based on that script, you decide that, no matter what magical wonders the director manages to pull out of his sleeve in the transition from screenplay to movie, there is no way that you can like a movie made from that steaming pile of turd, then you would probably be right--no amount of dressing up will turn poop into pudding. The thing is, the key difference here is that most of us don't feel that the script was poop. It was serviceable. It was a potato. Kind of bland, kind of boring. But deep fry that sh*t and throw on some salt, you have in your hands the delectable french fry (or insert whatever your favorite potato-based dish happens to be, mine just happens to be french fries). And that's exactly what Cameron did.

French fries are the best when it's hot. Fresh batch so hot it'll make your tongue burn. After it's been sitting in the cold for a while, not so good. Like chewing cardboard. That's what a cam version of a Avatar is. French fries that have been sitting out for too long. Now, if you had interpreted the story not as a potato, but a piece of turd, then it doesn't matter what format you see it. Poop is poop. If that's you're opinion, then so be it. Nothing wrong with that...

...But belittling or deriding a person for suggesting that the experience might be improved with a trip to an Imax 3D version, that I see something wrong with. The suggestion was something within the bounds of a little something known as common sense. I had to dig up these quotes from you:

“And again, even it is true, watching a DVD rip of a film is vastly inferior to watching the film in the theater. The two expereinces are not remotely commensurable.”

You're absolutely right. That was you talking about a DVD rip. I would assume this would apply even more for a CAM VERSION, and even more so for the most expensive movie ever made (arguably?) where half the point is IMMERSION into its world, seeing each blade of grass and feeling as if you're almost there. You talk about making “objective” opinions about a movie. The objective opinion would be seeing the movie as it was intended—and seeing the same version that EVERYONE ELSE saw. We're not even talking about the same movie, as it stands. If you were the only one that had seen the movie in Imax 3D, and all the rest of us had seen a grainy cam version of it on our iphone in the freezing cold in Antartica without our clothes while polar bears are chasing our naked asses, would our experience of the movie be even remotely similar? We don't even have the common basis for comparison. Your experience is biased, not ours. You watched a crippled version of the movie, the kryptonite weakened version stripped of all its strengths. Maybe those strengths were things that never could have swayed you one way or another to begin with, but how could you know that without trying it? But your experience of the movie might have been forever discolored by the unfortunate circ*mstances of your Avatar cherry popping.

This is coming from somebody that didn't even like the movie all that much. This is coming from somebody who agrees with most of your points regarding the movie itself. I mean, I liked it a lot, and it was definitely worth the $13 bucks I paid for it, but I didn't love it.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 21st, 2009 at 7:43:06 PM

*I know there are no polar bears in Antarctica.
nitishbhat writes:
on December 22nd, 2009 at 8:56:30 AM

@ TheGrittyNitty
i agree with you completely, except for one thing. this should have been directed at so many more people like mink who stick to their per-release views about the movie.

@mink, no offense, but i even saw the 2D version a few hours ago, and i dont see why you have such a loathing towards this movie. it looks awesome. i mean, the story is good enough. at least its not as bad as transformers2. the visuals look good even in 2D. maybe not as good as in 3D, but better than any other 2D movie out there.
EvilDeadAlex writes:
on December 22nd, 2009 at 10:16:39 AM

Taking all factors into consideration....I just saw this movie in IMAX 3D and I would have to say it is a five star film. No doubt about it.

Make sure you go and see this movie in 3D, IMAX if u can that is how it is intended to be shown. The stunning visual effects literally take you to another world, and the negative reaction some people have had to the plot is misguided.

Cameron wants you to experience this amazing world he has created, and enjoy every minute of it, it is not dependant on a deep or complex plot with lots of twists and turns. The plot is good, the movie is utterly original and completely redifines what a movie can be.

The bar for future films that go down this road has been set very high.

Another point....any one else think the sam w love interest is pretty hot for a 10 foot tall blue alien?
rabid writes:
on December 22nd, 2009 at 11:41:20 AM

When a movie is 3 hours long, the seat never starts to hurt my ass, and I immediately want to watch it again... then I know that I have just seen a brilliant film.
Eben1277 writes:
on December 22nd, 2009 at 5:47:05 PM

f*ckIN TREMENDOUS.

The movie experience was totally immersive. It doesn't matter that the plot was predictable and the script was weak, it didn't take away from the enjoyability of the film in any way. It was excatly what I expected actually, Dances with the Last Samurai in Space. When Sam W. was giving his speech about showing the Sky People they can't just take whatever they want, I could almost hear him saying, "They can take our land, but they can never take, OUR FREEDOM!!!" Just because a plot has been used before doesn't make it a bad one. I left the theater feeling like I had just gotten a phenomenal movie experience. In fact all I could think about was how I can't wait to see it in IMAX 3D, as good as the regular 3D was. And normally, 3D can go get f*cked for all I care, but in this movie it just helped totally bring you into the world.
mickrussom writes:
on December 23rd, 2009 at 4:25:41 AM

Avatar stunk to high-hell. If it weren't for Cameron's Abyss, Aliens and T2, this movie would be derided, lampooned and called out for the pile of festering caramelized feculent slime that it is.

This movie is rife with terrible acting, horrific dialogue, and its 'message' is delivered through constant abuse of moral hazards. We have moral relativism, betrayal and treason being perpetrated for the greater good.

This was a 3D wrapped celluloid that without the stunning (yet stupid looking) visuals would, especially in novel form, be a bloody laughing stock.

The aliens stunk horribly. What's with the talking bi-peds with two eyes, a nose and a mouth. Has it ever occurred to these creative people that new life might be a colony of nano-bots, a slime mold with intelligence, life that aspirates with copper based blood, non-DNA self replicating life forms? Why is everything a blue monkey? At least in 1969 when Star Trek was populated with "old-form" Klingons that looked like a bronzed human they were on a near-zero budget, but at least they were totally re-defining sci-fi and giving a window into the future.

Crap like Avatar, especially after T2, Star Trek, Star Wars (Ep 4,5 only), is shocking. Its showing that Cameron is a master of marketing mass subscribed explosion fests laced with politically motivated parables and drivel and sub-themed with nothing intellectual because there is nothing beyond the visual veneer, it is fundamentally puerile trash that's been hussied up to look like way more than it actually is.

Anyone who defends this movie is simply a below average or nearly average mind that can't see past visuals that are no more complex of a stimulus than a piece of string is as a cat toy. They are incapable of rational or critical thought and are very likely a wage slave heavily in debt working towards no particular end, lost in life, and movies like this are a form of escapism where they "want to believe" and become immersed in something because their own lives are basically mundane, insignificant and unimportant.

Moral hazards. Identity politics. Thinly veiled political positions. Preaching to the customer/consumer/viewer. Moral relativism. Severe lack of plot, dialogue and finally acting capability.

This is a turning point for the world. It is showing how things that stimulate basal sensory centers in the simplistic human mind lead the herd into mindless oblivion.

I mean, the Avatar are flawless, they have no strata in their society. The bad guys here are 100% bad, and have no capacity for rational thinking or empathy, except scientists in white coats, they have all the wisdom, empathy and intelligence and are always right. The characters were utterly simplistic, like toys and images made for pre-verbal children. Its like having tele-tubbies in massively expensive exquisite 3D where every frame is lovingly crafted to present to you some of the flattest, most uninspiring characters ever created.

This movie is clearly below average, if you liked it you are the reason Hollywood is cranking out garbage these days. This man spent 10 times what District 9 costs and made a movie far worse, (not that that was any benchmark or the cat's meow), and this huge budget could have given 10 directors a shot at making something good.

This block-bustering famous director / famous actor garbage has to stop.
bugdog writes:
on December 23rd, 2009 at 10:06:30 AM

Ranks with "The Hurt Locker" and "The Road" as one of the best films of the year. Cameron's storytelling techniques and technological advances more than make up for the thin plot and dialogue that is no better than that in "Titanic."
mickrussom writes:
on January 26th, 2010 at 8:27:19 PM

McDonald's sells the most hamburgers but they are crap. Yet with your logic, and the logic of the Avatard or Avatar fan, you celebrate crap because its popular. You don't care that the hamburger is responsible for deforestation using slash and burn farming (rather than sustainable rotation), you don't care the ingredients are unsuitable for human consumption. You like the taste and the price. You are a feral prole seeking self pleasure. You want your BREAD and CIRCUS. Doesn't matter if its good, bad, moral, amoral, toxic or not, you don't give a hoot. You want to pleasure your brain.

You are celebrating the success of foisting corporatist crap on the public, charging a premium for it and all through a movie that tries to communicate that corporatism is morally reprehensible.

All this demonstrates:

1) People are generally stupid. And given how stupid the median intelligence is, and half the people are dumber than that.

2) Crap outsells quality. That is why all the plastic crap in Walmart is made in China. People are just too stupid to pay for or care for quality. I can PROVE the toxicity of phthalates, alkylphenols, bisphenol A (BPA), PBDEs, PCBs, PAHs, diglycidyl ether, PFCs and leeching formaldehydes. I can PROVE it. And I can show you that phthalates, alkylphenols, bisphenol A (BPA), PBDEs, PCBs, PAHs, diglycidyl ether, PFCs leech from cheaply made products and poison you. Yet you keep buying the stuff up.

3) A misguided notion that volume sales are a sign of success. So when a certain drug company sells things like thalidomide or Viox at record sales levels yet its later shown this trash is toxic and causes heart attacks and birth defects, you would celebrate the commercial success?

This movie allows idiots, dolts, dullards, mentally deficient persons, addleheads, pinheads, dimwits, dodos, blockheads, boneheads, dopes, nincompoops, dummies, microcephalics, coelenterates, ninnies, nitwits, numbskulls, twits, momos, morons, imbeciles, cretins, dunces, fools, ignoramuses, retards and the feeble minded to mentally masturbate, to enjoy the BREAD and CIRCUS.

This movie has the following traps that have lead people who like this movie (Avatards) down a pathetic path.

1) Escapism. Because reality is unbearable for these morons.
2) Justification. If you feel food about this movie you can't be "wrong." It allows you to continue to live at standards of living that are not justified by your intelligence level or value to humanity and justify it all because of how you feel.
3) Allowing one's already weakened mind to be further perverted by utterly simplistic and childish renditions of scenarios that are some of the worst material for parables and demonstrations of societal mores.
4) Lust. Celebrating the sexual predation of an interloper with a primitive noble savage while said savage is going through vulnerable circ*mstances.
5) Gluttony. You stuff your fat faces with toxic popcorn (oils in popcorn when heated are very toxic), and artificially flavored candies while you enjoy your BREAD and CIRCUS.
6) Extravagance. The pomp and flair of this spectacle and the ridiculous budget that could have been better used to allow tens or more directors a shot at making better films is simply extravagant all channeled through a man with 5 ex wives and a huge helping of hubris.
7) Greed. The greedy nature of James Cameron and his pseudo intellectual movie that portrays greed as evil yet this very vehicle, the movie itself, was fostered out of greed and the love of money.
8) Apathetic listlessness. Those misanthropes who fester in melancholy use this bread and circus to further justify their acediac dispositions and behaviors. None of those who watched the movie actually believe in true meritocracy, libertarianism or self determination. They live in and actively produce a society which is antagonistic towards liberty and self determination through the creation of an authoritarian and autocratic state. Cameron uses the deep seated rage against INGSOC and the oligarchies controlling everything from cradle to grave to keep your morons to buy tickets and love it all the while making a billionaire richer.
9) Despair. This movie allows the festering in sadness and despair to not do something about it, but to gather for bread and cirus to make the promoter rich while ignoring endemic issue on the society they are pretending to rail against.
10) Again, another sedentary activity for the fat idiot moviegoer. The average Avatard ate a daily allowance of food whilst doing nothing for three hours. Then the same corpulent cowboy for freedom and justice uses his sausage fingers to type praise for this piece of trash on various forums.
11) Embracing rage. This movie depicts a an who is coursing with anger, rage and wrath. He lead the noble savages poorly and every executive decision he made was poor resulting in many deaths. It took divine intervention to swing the tides of war. Yet the protagonist is enjoyed as a hero. His rage, anger and wrath was satanic and nearly cost the noble savages everything.
12) Envy. The protagonist was green with envy over the noble savages carefree lifestyle and uncrippled/superior bodies. Not only would he be able to walk, he would be superhuman. This protagonist was no uber mensch. His Envy lead him to betray his own people, potentially dooming millions/billions to loss of life without obtaining the needed fuel to survive all to sate his envy.
13) Pride. This protagonist, despite being a disastrous executive, smiles ear to ear after "his victory." Yet in the scenes depicted it was divine intervention that saved the noble savages, not the protagonist. Yet as he participates in the rounding of the people he betrayed in a very fascistic manner he grins ear to ear with pride. He is not only full of pride but also of great vanity. He was the opposite of humble.

Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things:

bread and circuses

(Juvenal, Satire 10.77–81) (c. 150AD)

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved