Aliens was more of an action adventure / suspense movie; Alien was the horror movie.
I think you missed what I meant: I am the father of an infant son, so I can’t get to the movies very easily now, and won’t be able to for a long time – certainly Avatar won’t still be in the theaters the next time I can get to the movies. (I pretty much expect not to go the movies for a year or two – maybe more.) So I can only watch movies on DVD. If it’s true what Bosstone said, that it’s not worth seeing it on DVD, then maybe I won’t ever see it.
That’s only my personal opinion. The thing is, it’s a pretty, pretty movie. If you’ve got a large screen TV and a Blu-Ray player, you might still find it enjoyable to watch at least once. For me, the 3D IMAX experience was the interesting part, and I happily spent the length of the movie soaking in the delicious eye candy. But it certainly isn’t a movie I would watch for the story or acting, and my TV isn’t sufficiently awe-inspiring to make the movie’s visuals worth the price of the DVD. The action scenes may save the movie, but there’s plenty of movies far more interesting with action scenes that are just as good, like Transformers.
one more for the imax 3d version or nothin.
I subscribe to the movie trailer theory that if the trailer (which is suppose to entice you) sucks then the movie can’t be far behind.
I love stereo imagery, photography, and movies in general. I was willing to suffer through a stupid plot and mediocre acting if the 3D and the scenery was good. Since the director was supposedly working out the kinks of the new camera system I feel honor bound to cut him some slack but he doesn’t have a clue how to maximize the effect. Even with lowered expectations the 3D effects were a meh+. The computer generated scenery was very good and gets good marks for creativity.
I thought the performance capture system was quite amazing. I allowed them to show facial expressions with much more fidelity than anything I’ve seen previously in CGI. You don’t notice it so much with Sam Worthington, who isn’t that expressive an actor to begin with, but with Zoe Saldana’s performance as Neytiri they have set a new high water mark for CGI acting. It makes the previous systems look like the actors were trying to do their roles with a big shot of botox in their face.
I thought Cameron was quite restrained in his use of 3D. He avoided “Hey, we got 3D!” scenes. I think that is a good thing. Heavy handed use of 3D tends to take you out of the story. The only scene where I really noticed the 3D, was the one with the woodsprites, which I will admit was pretty cool.
It looks great, yes. Very colorful, vibrant, and so on.
But I’ve seen variations on this story many times already. Dances With Wolves, The Emerald Forest, etc. Indigenous people live in harmony with nature, rapacious invaders arrive to destroy and kill, one invader gets inside the natives’ tribe and goes native and then turns against the invaders, yada yada.
Nothing new.
I think this may now be the most commonly said thing on this board, more than Hi Opal or Rio by Duran Duran. 
Avatar felt to me like a good SF novel from the '70s. As if Ursula Leguin and Joe Haldeman had collaborated on a book.
I suspect that since so much of the film’s allure and glory is in the ‘3D eye candy’, it will come around theaters again at least in a limited run (unless TNT gets a hold of it and plays it into 4:3 lo-def oblivion).
That’s how I felt - that it was good, old-style SF (like District 9 was, too) - shades of Deathworld, shades of The Word For World…, definitely shades of Call Me Joe.
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. But, for three days afterward I couldn’t sleep, just like when after I watched Paranormal Activity. PA scared me, but Avatar was a pleasant experience. Maybe all the CGI is messing with my brain.