I've never seen "Avatar"

[delphica]

Eh, I can see the reasons for a person who isn’t interested in seeing a movie/show to have a conversation about it, especially if the work in question has become some sort of pop culture phenomenon – I thought the OP was fairly neutral. With Avatar, I can also see it being an interesting question because it certainly did quite well at the box office at the time, but people might have different thoughts about whether it aged well.

Personally, I didn’t see it in the theater and saw it at home. It did not do a great job of keeping my interest. I can barely remember the details of the plot. I can see how the visual effects are impressive … but not enough that it made me want to watch 2 hours of them.

[What_Exit]

I saw part of it on cable and I got pretty bored. It is a dumb movie and the “awesome” CGI was at the expense of a good or sensible story. To me it was a very long video game cut scene. I’ll probably never watch it completely.

[dracoi]

Much of Avatar is a beautiful escapist romp through another culture and another planet. The first time I saw it, I totally lost myself in that aspect and it was some of the best hours of my entire life while it was going on.

The problem is that there’s this ham-handed plot shoved into the middle of it. Even as I was leaving the theater, the euphoria of the experience was already giving way to “Wait… What?” Stupid science, stupid caricatures… it would be a little like getting halfway through Harry Potter only to discover that it’s secretly a Jack Chick tract about the evils of witchcraft.

I’ve seen Avatar on TV a couple of times since then. I stop and move on at the point where the fighting starts.

[Rachellelogram]

@dracoi

Much of Avatar is a beautiful escapist romp through another culture and another planet. The first time I saw it, I totally lost myself in that aspect and it was some of the best hours of my entire life while it was going on.

The problem is that there’s this ham-handed plot shoved into the middle of it. Even as I was leaving the theater, the euphoria of the experience was already giving way to “Wait… What?” Stupid science, stupid caricatures… it would be a little like getting halfway through Harry Potter only to discover that it’s secretly a Jack Chick tract about the evils of witchcraft.

I’ve seen Avatar on TV a couple of times since then. I stop and move on at the point where the fighting starts.

Watch the Rifftrax, you’ll never go back.

[YogSothoth]

I enjoyed it very much. I can ignore the White Savior parallels and most of the other problems

[Learjeff]

First, a warning: I’m easily amused. I’m glad I am, too. I saw it at home on DVD, on a 47" screen but no surround sound. I enjoyed it.

@galen_ubal

The story is basic, the acting competent - both not bad, but not good either. The visuals are tremendous, however, and the movie well worth seeing - but only on the big screen.

That sums it up pretty well.

@CalMeacham

Cameron has been and can be a superb filmmaker, in all senses. It’s impressive to be able to helm a science fiction film, and to convince the powers that be to let you make it, and to get the funding, to get a decent story, ac decent script, good actors, state-of-the-art special effects, and to put it all together. To make the dialogue believable and the characterization good, to be aware of what’s been done in science fiction and refer to it as needed, to not lose the audience in needless technical stuff or fanwanking or handwaving – all of that is a gift. Cameron blew me away with The Terminator, and cemented it with Aliens. terminator 2 was that rare thing, a sequel that stands up to the first. The Abyss was too damned long (but excellent in many ways). I didn’t care for true Lies at all, but, despite the mawky sentimentalization, I liked Titanic (which is really about the love affair between Cameron and the doomed ocean liner – forget about Leo and Kate).

Right. Terminator, T-2, Aliens (and A2, if that was Cameron) were all incredibly good movies. I remember expecting NOT to like Terminator (don’t remember why, probably friends) and really liking it.

Titanic was a different story – or rather, not much of a story. The enfolding story was great. The tech was perfect. The segues were beautiful and appropriate. The whole setup of the film perfectly matched the mythic nature this story has for most Americans. The little love story was rather pathetic, and the annoying rich guy was a laughable caricature. While the love plot in Avatar is a weak element, it’s nowhere near as lame as the one in Titanic.

Roger Dean-esque imagery*

Yeah, I thought of Roger Dean too, especially Yes album covers. I don’t think he has much of a legal leg to stand on, though. If they can find any other art with floating islands …

What’s the Harlan Ellison reference?

[levdrakon]

One of the first things I heard about *Avatar *was that it was a story that Cameron had been holding onto for many years, waiting for the technology to do it justice.

What?? That story doesn’t require amazing visuals to do it justice. It could be a kids’ comic book. I don’t think it’s wrong to expect an exceptional story when the creator waited so long for the state of the art to do it justice.

[Bryan_Ekers]

On reflection, I guess my main reason for disliking Avatar was it chose to play safe (giving everyone a bland easily-understood story) and not risk a few plot twists that could have made it great for some of the audience and incomprehensible for some of the audience.

[Marley23]

@CalMeacham

4.) The visuals and the world-building (in its fullest sense, the Earth people as well as the Na’avi, the technology and Pandora) was really well done. the visualization of alien biology (based on sea life, the six-legged framework) was well thought out.

5.) And the film was conceived as 3D and executed with an eye to exploiting that feature throughout – a detail that usually gets lost or ignored in discussions of the film. I’ve always felt that 3D ought to be a real feature of the movies, and properly used – something that hasn’t always happened. but Cameron’s film isn’t a gimmick-fest.

I agree. That said, like the movie was a huge sensation for a few months and then it felt everybody immediately forgot about it, and that seems fair. It had no other substance and if you’re not in the theater staring at those designs, there’s no reason for it to stay on your mind. It’s almost weird to me that they’re going to break the bank and make two sequels all this time later. I wonder if there will be enough hype to make people come back to it. I guess they’ll make their money.

[Lucas_Jackson]

@Rachellelogram

This one time, I didn’t watch a popular tv show (Game of Thrones, to be specific). I didn’t make a forum thread about it, though, because it was such a nonissue.

This one time, I didn’t post in a popular thread (cat cuteness, to be specific). I didn’t thread-shit in it, though, because it was such a nonissue.

[njtt]

@yellowval

I’ve never seen it, either. The first time I saw a preview for it, I actually thought it was a joke. Some sort of fake, bad on purpose, movie within a movie type of thing.

I really do not understand why anyone would think that (unless you just hate all science fiction). The problem with it is not something that can be discerned in individual short clips, which, indeed, are well suited to showing off the spectacular effects and worldbuilding. The problem with it is in the weak, clichéd, unsubtle plot and cardboard characters, which is something you can only discover by viewing it for a while. You do not have to watch it all through to know it is a bad movie, but I would say it takes a good twenty minutes before you can really know.

[Rodgers01]

I thought “Avatar” was just about terrible, particularly in the acting/screenplay/plot departments, but I also wasn’t overly impressed with the visuals. It all looked very Nintendo Wii to me. No, I didn’t see it in 3D.

But to answer the OP’s question about whether anyone liked it? Sure, tons of people did. In spite of majority opinion in this thread, the movie still has an 8.0 rating on IMDB and most critics loved it.

[Strangeland64]

Agreed, tons of people seem to absolutely love it. For me it was not impressive. Not even what I would call a good film. But I also wonder sometimes what it takes to really impress me with movies too. lol I’m not exactly a movie buff.

I think maybe people were paying more attention to the special effects, and those were okay. But it had such a typical plot, it didn’t grab me.

[Isamu]

I liked it.

Saw it at the theater, in whatever they call those fancy curved screen cinemas.

The 3D effect was really impressive. The actors were great. The planet environment felt alien and scary - who didn’t sit up a bit when they first landed on the planet and were met my the local wildlife? There was mechwarrior fan-service (lol), and hardly a boring moment in the screenplay.

The only weak point was the story itself, which, admittedly, is a pretty major point. The problem was that it was cringeworthy - in that it was a re-hash of all those movies where the guy from the most ‘advanced’ race blunders in to the ‘lesser’ race’s village and wins the heart of their prettiest girl. :rolleyes:

However, while cringeworthy in content, the story was well told, clear and consistent, so I think it was pretty solid. It’s just that this kind of story is no longer interesting for audiences. It’s almost anti PC these days, isn’t it?

But! But. But. Hurt Locker beat this film in the oscar awards in 2010. That is some serious fucked up shit. No excuse.

[Shawn1767]

I went to see it in 3D to see if it lived up to the 3D hype and it, for the most part, did. It was not an annoying 3D, but an immersive 3D. I was really impressed because typically I hate 3D. But yeah, it felt like a good use of 3D.

As far as an action movie, I enjoyed it.

[marshmallow]

If you were expecting a penetrating insight into the human condition you’d be pretty let down. It’s basically a giant theme park ride and it does that well, though it dragged a bit in the middle from what I remember. I haven’t seen it outside the theaters, so I can see it being a little lame on a normal TV.

I can barely remember any of the characters, which is probably a bad sign. There was the roided out bad guy general, the generic protagonist/love interest, and Sigourney Weaver playing herself.

[E-DUB]

Dances with Giant Smurfs. Look, I probably agree with Cameron politically, but I don’t care for heavy-handed “allegory”. Make your point, don’t beat people over the head with it. And for the record, he didn’t rip off Harlan Ellison, he ripped off Poul Anderson.

[Rhiannon8404]

Didn’t see it. No desire.

[Dave_Hartwick]

I saw it in the theater and didn’t expect to like it. I don’t like most science fiction TV shows and movies. They tend to be either adventure fantasies or slow cosmic baloney.

Avatar surprised me. The ship isn’t on screen for very long, but it didn’t look like the sort of designs Star Wars loves to use. It didn’t have wings. It didn’t look like a boat. It looked like it was built in zero G, for use solely in zero G. It didn’t go “shwoosh”.

The character wakes up from suspended animation in, of course, zero G. That might not seem like a big deal, but how many movies can’t be bothered to try to portray zero G? In Pitch Black, the pilot wakes up to an emergency that most likely means he’s going to die and says, “who turned on the gravity?” Bless you for trying, underfunded screenwriter.

They arrive at Pandora and the look of the set is unusual. The gear looks like it’s meant to be used, like it has been used. It doesn’t just have random crap painted grey and glued to it like the background where Joel and the robots did their bits.

And then, in the biggest, broadest wink you could imagine, they actually called unobtainium “unobtainium”. I was flabbergasted, or at least gasted.

It all went to hell after that but by then I had settled in with my popcorn and had a nice time at the movies. It was just so wonderful to see a big budget “science fiction” movie pay, at least for 15 minutes, service to science fiction. Just wonderful.

As for the 3D, it didn’t make much of an impression on me. There was a scene or two where I thought “oh, that’s neat” but I really don’t think it had much to do with my enjoyment.

I tried to watch it again on TV, quite a nice one with good sound and all that, but fell asleep. I don’t think I’ll watch it again, at least not all the way through. Maybe that first bit.

[DragonAsh]

@Marlonius

The plot was entirely predictable. I had the entire outcome pegged **30 minutes **in. There was not even a single twist.

You’re joking, right? There’s like no way it could have taken you that long - I had the entire story pegged *from the effin’ trailers.
*

@Isamu

But! But. But. Hurt Locker beat this film in the oscar awards in 2010. That is some serious fucked up shit. No excuse.

Dear god please tell me this is a whoosh…also, it was 2009 (I remember 2010, because Toy Story 3 should have won instead of King’s Speech, which I hated. Also, Hugo in 2011 instead of The Artist, and Lincoln in 2012 instead of Argo, which was truly, horribly awful. How Argo even got nominated is beyond me).