Avatar

The story is very pedestrian, but who cares. Thanks to James Cameron, I was again that little boy who during the deep totalitarian era, with my mouth wide open, devoured a Polish channel on a grainy black-and-white television, including the first Star Wars, or Zeman's A Journey into the Primeval Times. I devoured Avatar similarly, experiencing partly the joy of exploring the fictional world of Pandora and partly the fascination with 3D technology, which I was a virgin to this day. I really couldn't get enough of that three-dimensional image!! I have some reservations, of course. Cameron put a lot of effort io clothing his film in a 3D garb, but much less on the originality of the emotions of the characters or giving them a compelling ambiguity. All the characters are so naively one-dimensional, just like in fairy tales, but I found it endearing in a way. I hereby forbid the use of the world “cliché”, because the great James doesn’t deserve it. He doesn't deserve it because he invited me to his house for two and a half hours and shared all his hi-tech toys with me. Thanks Jim. (18/12/2009)

I do appreciate Cameron's dedication, which meant years of waiting for proper technology and the employment of two special effects giants. The result definitely marks a significant shift for cinema as a whole. Yet that's where the positives end for me... because then we get almost three hours of a shallow story (which could still be tolerated - okay, it’s a fairy tale), dull emotions, the most stupid military lines in history, and blue-green agitation so vigorous that even Greenpeace pales compared to it. The three-dimensional effect is great (Cameron knows how to work with space perfectly), but underneath the fancy tinsel I couldn't find anything more and about halfway through I wasn't even entertained. Sorry, but I was bored shitless with this film. Three stars from me. (20/12/2009)

Avatar is an ultra-mainstream adventure movie for the whole family. In a filmmaking package so perfect it could give you an orgasm, James Cameron self-confidently delivers a super-hackneyed story that won’t surprise you with anything. Apart from his comedies (True Lies), Cameron’s films always contain a hint of existential food for thought alongside all that technical brilliance. But only a hint. They have ideas on which other filmmakers built their movie worlds. Avatar, however, does not contain anything of the sort, and its message begins and ends with a bit of simple ecological agit-prop. It is Cameron’s first film composed solely of things we have seen elsewhere (whether in his films or somewhere else), which he merely delivers in an even more elaborate and beautiful wrapper. Every shot, every cut, every tone of James Horner’s soundtrack contributes to the absolute perfection of the final product. But what good does it do when we always know what happens ten minutes in advance? (15/12/2009)

In terms of film-craft this is the most precise work that can be achieved under current conditions, but above-average film-craft defining new standards alone doesn’t necessarily make a good movie. Luckily, Avatar is good, but unfortunately no more than just good. It’s like despite all the attention that Cameron devotes to polishing everything down to the last, tiny detail, he forgot about the movie as a whole. Who cares that it suffers from all imaginable maladies of “blockbusters", if only Cameron had managed to enthrall us, draw us in, simply forget that this is still just a movie (it only happened to me in one scene). And the saddest thing about this is that, despite the message, in the end it will be Cameron who causes mass deforestation on out planet due to the mountains of wood needed to produce the paper on which the millions of movie theater tickets sold around the whole world will be printed, and this thought chills me more than any of the best scenes in Avatar. And all of the above applies to the extended version which didn’t concentrate primarily on emotions and characters, but again on technical brilliance. P.S.: This review was written after seeing the regular version; my subsequent visit to see the IMAX version neither improved or impaired my impression of the movie (and why should it, it’s the same movie, isn’t it?), but it did enhance the brilliant effects. ♫ OST score: 3/5 (17/12/2009)

The first time my eyes saw the effects, they stayed still and gaped. Yes, artistically, the film may well be above reproach. A feast for the eyes. The effects simply must win an Oscar, I can't see it any other way. But after a while I got used to them, and they didn't dazzle me so much. For a film that runs 162 minutes, it has an incredibly weak plot. I'm truly sorry, but the effects just didn't hold my attention the whole time, after a while I started fidgeting, looking around at others, taking off and putting on 3D glasses, taking off, putting on a sweatshirt – I was bored. For me, there were just empty spaces. And don't let anyone try to tell me that through all the fabulous, nature-celebrating effects and digital advancements, Cameron can't offer a better story. He can – see, for example, Terminator. Plus, there were those awful pathetic "as if to the American people who are rising up, shouting, cheering, crying for glory, and rushing into battle to be slaughtered" speeches again – and I'm allergic to those, I just cringe. But one big plus for me is that he let the Pandorians have their own language, that he didn't force them all into English. I don't know, perfect effects aren't reason enough for me to give a better rating when I was bored and wishing they'd finally kill each other and live happily ever after. Ciaossu. Very, very interesting commentary: IMPAIRED (agree with almost all of it :-)) (08/01/2010)