Author Topic: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine  (Read 17495 times)

jamesintexas

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
I found myself very much in disagreement with Matty and Adam's reviews of "Avatar."  Yet, I understand their criticisms, though I believe they are far too harsh.  I've seen it twice, in both 3D and regular.  Experiencing "Avatar" on the big screen in all of its grandeur was the experience I kept waiting for with the Star Wars prequels. I saw "Episode 1: The Phantom Menace" over 8 times in the theater, and the second and third films both underwhelmed and disappointed me, the second in particular. They are not movies I want to watch again and again. It was crushing to see George Lucas take my childhood as well as worlds of wonder/beauty (Hoth, Cloud City, Tatooine, Endor), and crush the spirit out of it.

Where those prequel Star Wars movies were disappointing, cloying, and ultimately a failure in terms of integrating mind-blowing effects and telling a politically relevant or just plain interesting story, "Avatar" exceeded all of my expectations, brilliantly set up a compelling frame to the story (much like Cameron did in "Titanic"), integrates the amazing special effects in a close to seamless way, as well as making a powerful statement about the War on Terror/War on Iraq/genocide/turning "the other" into the enemy. 

Who would have thought that James Cameron would have made a $250,000,000 film that addresses militarism, our response to the other, winning "the hearts and minds," as well as what we ruin in our quest for the MacGuffin of "unobtanium" (insert gold, oil, metals, etc...)?  Cameron confidently spirits his camera through swooping tracking shots in the jungle-Endor-like planet of Pandora, focusing lovingly on beautiful, amazing, glow-in-the-dark creatures, terrifying animals, and the Na'avi tribe who live in harmony with nature, not in opposition to it.

I feel that the review oversteps in a couple of places.  Yes, the Stephen Lang character is far too much of a caricature blowhard warmonger; however, is he that much of a stretch from a circa 2004 Vice-President Cheney-esque or Secretary Rumsfeldian outlook on the world?  I too wonder how much different the film would be if the conflict wasn't set up with such an easy target (Lang, Ribisi, gung-ho Blackwater troops)?  I do believe that Lang's character, much like President George W. Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld makes the overtures of peace and negotiation (UN inspectors, sanctions), while planning with certainty the subsequent invasion (making the plans for war farther in advance than the country knew).  The money put into the avatar-program was similar to a State Department program, working to win the "hearts and minds," while simultaneously preparing for war.  Also, I believe that the invasion was planned from the beginning (the assault on home-tree); the military just needed time to get the bulldozers, equipment in place.  The 3-month deadline was imposed by the military in terms of prep-work.   

There were moments in this film that made me want to cheer. It appealed to me on a very childish level, as well as an adult level. As a child, I cheered when the battle scenes combined everything I loved in "Return of the Jedi's" final X-and-Y-wing attack sequences on the Death Star with the brutally violent effects of "Starship Troopers" best alien attack scenes. As an adult, I cheered when Sigourney Weaver showed up as eco-warrior, fighting for understanding the Na'avi, not obliterating them. I cheered for the complexity of the Matrix-like pods the characters used to link-in to their avatars.  I cheered when Cameron allowed his camera to linger on incredible, unique creatures and landscapes, not just whizzing past them, like Lucas on his way to telling his story. Cameron is not afraid to spend time to play in this world. The play is what defines this film as much as the action.

I liked the way Cameron referenced his previous works--hearing elements of the "Aliens" pounding score, the vague references to "The Company" who I believe sent Ellen Ripley back to bring back an alien, the ship crashing like the boat in "Titanic," and having a protagonist hang off of a missile ala "True Lies"--in tiny, revealing ways, as well I liked Cameron's belief that we the audience can draw our own conclusions about what to make of the plot, (i.e. What is the statement being made about America and its incursions into other parts of the world? ) though a few of the "we fight terror with terror" lines were more explicitly drawn than I needed them to be.
The score is moving; the Na'avi creatures are wonderful to look at. The riding scenes are some of my favorites, as well as scenes where characters balance precariously on logs, hopping through this incredible, eye-popping world. The visuals of this film are so colorful in surprising ways, and I love how Cameron hides things in the background and shows the intricacy of this world through a delicate, floating jellyfish style dandelion seed pod that floats through certain scenes.

In conclusion, Cameron's eye for visual effects and for crafting a story that uses those effects in a compelling way worked in a way I haven't seen in a film in a long, long time, maybe since "Titanic" and "Return of the Jedi." If I was a ten-year old kid, this movie would have completely blown my mind. As a 31-year old kid, this movie filled me with wonder and amazement.  With its flaws, it still makes my best of the year list.

And Adam and Matty, I understand and appreciate your criticism of the film.  Anyone who stops listening to Filmspotting because of a disagreement with your thoughtful, well-crafted criticism is an idiot.

Keep up the great work, guys. 

doughboy

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 65
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #51 on: January 03, 2010, 10:48:04 AM »
Thanks to Transformers 2, we can no longer use the box office take as a defense of a film's quality.
I thought this was kind of funny. Are you saying that people can say "Well, it made x millions of dollars, so it must be good."? Box office take and a film's quality are too very separate concepts that only occasionally overlap.

doughboy

  • Junior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 65
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #52 on: January 03, 2010, 11:29:30 AM »
Just a few of my thoughts about Avatar and the FS review (and other reviews):

1. Michael Phillips said that it was James Cameron the writer undermining James Cameron the director, and that is about the most succinct, accurate way of summarizing this film.

2. I think it was Matty who spoke in disbelief that the Navi would be sitting on this unobtanium (which, yes, is one of the worst fictional names ever) without using it or realizing its value or something like that. To me, though, I can totally believe that one society would have something another society wants without realizing its value. Just look at the early days of oil mining.

3. No one (I think) disputes the amazing look of this film. I think that some people (cough, Adam and Matty, cough) are too quick to dismiss the look of the film as being a secondary factor to the film's quality. For me, the look of the film contributed to the magic and wonder of the planet, which made me care for the indigenous population. Cameron asks us to approach the planet from the perspective of Jake Sully, who is really seeing this world for the first time. And I found it very easy to adopt his sense of wonder and amazement. Dances with Wolves made us care for the Native Americans the old fashioned way - character development and genuine interactions, and yes, DwW is the better film for it. But for what Avatar was trying to do, I bought into it.

4. Despite my obvious enjoyment of the film, I totally agree that there are huge shortcomings, like the pedestrian dialogue and plot difficulties. However, I was able to forgive the film those things and have a really good time.

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 16585
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #53 on: January 03, 2010, 02:00:14 PM »
Not having seen either film, I'm far more shocked that Adam would defend Nine than the idea that the plot and dialogue in Avatar is kinda dumb.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people?"

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #54 on: January 03, 2010, 10:59:29 PM »
Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinaly, film critics I respect that aren't gushing over this film (or at least liking the film just for the eye candy)! Adam and Matty have single-handedly (even though there are four hands between the two of them) restored my faith in film criticism. There are still critics out there that respect story and aren't enticed by all the pretty CG dangled before them. Crazy. What is this world coming to when critics demand that their cinematic blockbusters have good stories?

Keep up the good work.


joker

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1957
  • CINECAST! off
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #55 on: January 04, 2010, 08:42:16 AM »
Well, Avatar was an absolutely amazing experience for me, and I'm sorry you didn't share that. I guess that's all I can say.



same for me man.. honestly.. I feel as the people who didn't like it... take films WAY to seriously... but hey, that's just me...
"This movie made me laugh so hard, I had mild headaches. So I went to the doctor to get checked out, I'm currently awaiting results"
-Gene Siskel

joker

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1957
  • CINECAST! off
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #56 on: January 04, 2010, 08:43:25 AM »
Not having seen either film, I'm far more shocked that Adam would defend Nine than the idea that the plot and dialogue in Avatar is kinda dumb.

coming for two guys that gush over anything QT writes as dialouge... I would consider it a compliment....  ;D
"This movie made me laugh so hard, I had mild headaches. So I went to the doctor to get checked out, I'm currently awaiting results"
-Gene Siskel

edgar00

  • 00 Agent
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *
  • Posts: 12131
  • corndogs are better than Die Another Day
    • Between The Seats
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #57 on: January 04, 2010, 09:29:34 AM »
How can Matty's personal acknowledgment that he struggled with the 3D watching Avatar -- glasses over glasses did not work for him -- be "inaccurate" or "lame"? I seem to recall him very directly stating he didn't want to dwell on his 3D bias because he knows it was a very subjective experience.

I don't know. The "glasses over glasses" argument doesn't seem to work. My friend had to do that and it didn't bother him in the slightest and liked the 3-D. Maybe there are certain circumstances but still.
Guys, glasses over glasses isn't an "argument." It's the reality of Matty's experience, and I'm sure he's not the only one to find it cumbersome. Not as if he's blaming Cameron for it.

I finally listened to the show last night. Matty, after saying he didn't like the 3-D, immediately said that wasn't the aspect that sunk the film for him. Let's give the guy a break.
-Le Chiffre: You changed your shirt, Mr Bond. I hope our little game isn't causing you to perspire.

-James Bond: A little. But I won't consider myself to be in trouble until I start weeping blood.

https://twitter.com/Betweentheseats
http://crabkeyheadquarters.wordpress.com/

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #58 on: January 04, 2010, 11:38:48 AM »
How can Matty's personal acknowledgment that he struggled with the 3D watching Avatar -- glasses over glasses did not work for him -- be "inaccurate" or "lame"? I seem to recall him very directly stating he didn't want to dwell on his 3D bias because he knows it was a very subjective experience.

Because his bias seems to be getting in the way of actual fact. Unless his eyesight has some issues I just don't know about. Literally nobody I know has complained about the 3D looking like cut-outs. So unless he saw a different 3D than everyone else, or something was wrong with his screening, or something is the matter with his sight, it simply sounds incorrect to me and a lazy way of making his point. If he didn't like the immersion of 3D there were better ways to articulate his feelings about it. Rian Johnson did so very nicely on the /Filmcast. It just struck me as unusual and uncharacteristic for one of you to make that kind of poor criticism.

In hearing Matty complain about the 3-D that was my first thought-- that he might not have the same experience as others.  Perhaps it has something to do with how his brain works (we know it works just that little bit differently ;)  or perhaps its simply because he can't get over the fact that he's wearing glasses over glasses.  

But, Froham, it is Matty's personal experience/opinion.  Isn't that what Filmspotting is about?  They don't have to be nicey-nice, because it's just a conversation.

I don't really get this conversation, really.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2010, 11:44:44 AM by stevekimes »
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: FS Reviews: Avatar/Nine
« Reply #59 on: January 04, 2010, 11:58:24 AM »
How can Matty's personal acknowledgment that he struggled with the 3D watching Avatar -- glasses over glasses did not work for him -- be "inaccurate" or "lame"? I seem to recall him very directly stating he didn't want to dwell on his 3D bias because he knows it was a very subjective experience.

Because his bias seems to be getting in the way of actual fact. Unless his eyesight has some issues I just don't know about. Literally nobody I know has complained about the 3D looking like cut-outs. So unless he saw a different 3D than everyone else, or something was wrong with his screening, or something is the matter with his sight, it simply sounds incorrect to me and a lazy way of making his point. If he didn't like the immersion of 3D there were better ways to articulate his feelings about it. Rian Johnson did so very nicely on the /Filmcast. It just struck me as unusual and uncharacteristic for one of you to make that kind of poor criticism.

In hearing Matty complain about the 3-D that was my first thought-- that he might not have the same experience as others.  Perhaps it has something to do with how his brain works (we know it works just that little bit differently ;)  or perhaps its simply because he can't get over the fact that he's wearing glasses over glasses.  

But, Froham, it is Matty's personal experience/opinion.  Isn't that what Filmspotting is about?  They don't have to be nicey-nice, because it's just a conversation.

I don't really get this conversation, really.

Don't worry. I already put it to rest. At least on my part. I made a bigger deal of it than even I thought it was.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

 

love