I just saw Avatar for the first time...

It sucked!!

I am pet-sitting and their house has a giant, projection tv so I thought it would be a good way to watch Avatar.

I can’t believe how much I disliked it. I forced myself to watch the whole thing because I didn’t think I could say it sucked if I’d not watched the entire movie. The story line was so contrived and utterly predictable right down to the final battle between the bad G.I.Joe guy and the good fake avatar guy.

The special effects were good, but there are lots of movies with good special effects.

Yup, amazingly bad considering all the good press at the time. I can only think that hardly anyone in the press has ever read any good science fiction, or any good general fiction for that matter.

Well, I’ve read and seen a lot of quality science fiction, and I loved it. Anything you can say about it in terms of originality and dialog, you could also say about *Star Wars *(Ep. IV).

I didn’t much care for it, either, but if you didn’t see it in 3D, you didn’t see it the way it’s meant to be seen. In 3D, the effects were fantastic, immersive, and on a whole other level beyond anything else I’ve seen. The movie itself wasn’t very good, but I still came out of the theater very impressed with what I had seen.

There is no point to watching it at home. The idea was to watch in 3D at a theater.

Is the plot a perfunctory Pocahontas plagiarization? Probably.

But the goal of the movie is to immerse the viewer in a fantastic world which was created with real enthusiasm. Watched as intended, I think it succeeds. Arguably, putting more focus on the story would have stolen focus from the real star of the movie: the world itself. I’m not convinced of this, but I’m not convinced it isn’t true either.

blah blah Dances With Smurfs blah unobtainium is stupid blah

A movie that isn’t any good unless you watch it in 3D, isn’t any good regardless of how you watch it.

I don’t like 3D, it gives me a headache, I also don’t go to theaters anymore. However I did like the movie more than I thought I would when I watched on my computer. It wasn’t great, but it wasn’t as bad as I expected it to be.

Agreed. Can’t understand the appeal of this one. Didn’t see it in 3D, don’t want to.

I don’t think Avatar is going to hold up all that well over time as a work of art. As a technical achievement it’s pretty heavy duty.

I can’t see 3D (as in I am physically unable), so I went to the 2D version as well. It far exceeded my tolerance for unnecessary silliness but I suppose it wasn’t unwatchable. If the villain had even the tiniest bit of depth I suspect I would’ve enjoyed it a lot more; ditto for laying on the “noble savage” bit way too thickly.

Yes, another movie whose special effects blew my teen-aged self away, but is now completely unwatchable. I think I could watch it then because I didn’t have enough literature under my belt to realize how badly it was written, or perhaps I was in denial.

I watched it for the first time a couple months ago. I liked it. Not the best movie ever, but I would watch it again if it was on cable. There were a few moments where I went “Damn, I wish I saw that on the big screen.” I imagine I’ll go see the sequel in the theater.

People said the same thing about talking films back in the 1920s… :smiley:

I saw Avatar right after it came out in big screen and 3-D. I loved it. I’m not looking for avant-garde effects or deeply interesting plot lines or a work of art or depth :rolleyes: when I choose to go to a Hollywood blockbuster movie. Seriously, who under the age of 18 expects more?

I’m looking for cool special effects, good-looking people, a decent music score, and mindless entertainment. Pretty much anything from Dumbo to Avatar and any point in between satisfies me for $6.75 worth of entertainment.

I agree with this 100 percent.

Unfortunately it’s not feasible (and wouldn’t have been cost-effective even when the movie was still showing in theaters), but I’d say the ideal Avatar experience would be to watch the first half of it in 3D and then walk out. That way you’d get to enjoy the beautiful visuals and you could imagine that the rest of the story was resolved in an interesting and entertaining way.

For an adult, watching the whole thing on TV is likely to be a complete waste of two and a half hours.

It was OK, but a disappointment for James Cameron. I mean, this is the guy that gave us Terminator, T2, and Aliens.

This is way below those on the quality list and felt like a 1980’s script, and not the good ones he used to have/write.

Still, it wasn’t horrible. It had a few moments I liked. It’s not “Phantom Menace” kind of bad.

Ignoring the fact that silent -> talking was a much greater leap than pseudo-3D, I’m sure 1920 had its fair share of utterly forgettable talking films that weren’t saved just because they were “talkies”.

This is probably why I only see a movie at the theater every 5 years or so. The last one I remember going to was George Clooney’s Good Night and Good News, which was money very well spent.

Good Luck on finding that one at the video store.

What a silly thing to say.