Saw it in digital 3D. I liked it. The direction was intelligent and the visuals superb. I felt like I was in a real rainforest more than once, and caught myself forgetting Pandora isn't a place we've already been to. The story has a "been there, done that" feel to it, and the human characters get so one-dimensional at times I rolled my eyes at how standard their behavior was. But all of the acting is top-notch and made up for that; by the third act, I admit my emotions were "linked in." People saying the music sucked have come down with the madness. It has a designer leitmotif, a chorus in a foreign language, and some sappy love/war story flourishes...like many other movies no one complained about.
I initially agreed with Armond White's Avatar review, on the point of Cameron's perceived hypocrisy:
Quote from: Armond White, "Blue In The Face" p. 3Cameron's superficial B-movie tropes pretend philosophical significance. His story's rampant imperialism and manifest destiny (Giovanni Ribisi plays the heartless industrialist) recalls Vietnam-era revisionist westerns like Soldier Blue, but it's essentially a sentimental cartoon with a pacifist, naturalist message. Avatar condemns mankind's plundering and ruin of a metaphorical planet's ecology and the aboriginals' way of life. Cameron fashionably denounces the same economic and military system that make his technological extravaganza possible. It's like condemning NASA—yet joyriding on the Mars Exploration Rover.
But after mentally reviewing the film, I argue White has his analogies mixed up. His complaint only works if you think Cameron as a filmmaker stands in Selfridge's shoes. He doesn't; Cameron's "Avatar" is Grace. She argues with the "corporate goons," who are too simple-minded know what it's like to immerse yourself in another world. She only uses their tools to further her own personal ventures, and has no concern for the material wealth the corporation desires a part of as a result of her discoveries with their backing. Greed's a consequence, yet not one that offsets or invalidates the breakthrough made. How many times have ulterior motives led to social benefits, in spite of the road traversed, just in the field of science? Cameron's not just raging against the machine, he's urging filmmakers and audience members alike to open their eyes- like Jake- to new territory, irregardless of the real world birth pangs that brought us to this point. I don't think that's naive, hypocritical, or stupid. Just optimistic.
Anyways, that's what I thought. If I had to rate it, a 4 out of 5.
