Members Adam Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 I saw it last night. Here is my review I posted on imdb.com. I didn't mention anything about the score, but as a sidenote I agree with EricMontreal that Horner's scores all sound the same. It was no different here. The score was one of my favourite things about Titanic, I barely even noticed it during Avatar. Here we are in 2009. It has been 12 years since Cameron last gave us one of his blockbusters in Titanic. With Avatar he set out to change the way we watch movies with his new motion capture technology all in 3D. Did he succeed? Sort of. While no one can deny the visual masterpiece this film is, there are some major problems that hinder Avatar from being one of the greatest movies of our time. The big problem I had with this movie was the story itself. It was redundant, one dimensional and well, boring. There were times throughout the film that I was compelled and on the edge of my seat, but for a 2.5 hrs + film, you need to feel that way 90% of the time. I am not naive, I knew going into a James Cameron film the story and especially the script wasn't going to rivet me out of my chair, but I at least expected to be entertained by it. I wasn't. The commentaries Cameron seems to do on anti-war and environmentalism just did not resonate with me. The dialogue in parts had my eyes in a constant roll. With that being said however, whenever the story was boring me to tears, I could just sit and look what was going on around the story. There was always something to look it, always something to fascinate me. Sigourney Weaver turned in a very decent performance and was the only actor in places to be able to rise above the dialogue Cameron gave them. However, there were times even she could not do it. Sam Worthington I feel was miscast, but he fits Cameron's niche for male leads, a la Arnold. I do believe this film will be showered with technical awards for its revolutionary technology and will get a Best Picture nomination at the Oscars in March. But, we must all remember that if you take away the visuals of this film, it is nothing more than a camp-fest that would go straight to DVD. With most of Cameron's previous movies they were much more layered beyond the visuals and special effects. I feel he got too caught up in wowing our eyes and completely forgot about what's behind them. 6.5/10. **1/2 out of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Adam Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 I saw it last night. Here is my review I posted on imdb.com. I didn't mention anything about the score, but as a sidenote I agree with EricMontreal that Horner's scores all sound the same. It was no different here. The score was one of my favourite things about Titanic, I barely even noticed it during Avatar. Here we are in 2009. It has been 12 years since Cameron last gave us one of his blockbusters in Titanic. With Avatar he set out to change the way we watch movies with his new motion capture technology all in 3D. Did he succeed? Sort of. While no one can deny the visual masterpiece this film is, there are some major problems that hinder Avatar from being one of the greatest movies of our time. The big problem I had with this movie was the story itself. It was redundant, one dimensional and well, boring. There were times throughout the film that I was compelled and on the edge of my seat, but for a 2.5 hrs + film, you need to feel that way 90% of the time. I am not naive, I knew going into a James Cameron film the story and especially the script wasn't going to rivet me out of my chair, but I at least expected to be entertained by it. I wasn't. The commentaries Cameron seems to do on anti-war and environmentalism just did not resonate with me. The dialogue in parts had my eyes in a constant roll. With that being said however, whenever the story was boring me to tears, I could just sit and look what was going on around the story. There was always something to look it, always something to fascinate me. Sigourney Weaver turned in a very decent performance and was the only actor in places to be able to rise above the dialogue Cameron gave them. However, there were times even she could not do it. Sam Worthington I feel was miscast, but he fits Cameron's niche for male leads, a la Arnold. I do believe this film will be showered with technical awards for its revolutionary technology and will get a Best Picture nomination at the Oscars in March. But, we must all remember that if you take away the visuals of this film, it is nothing more than a camp-fest that would go straight to DVD. With most of Cameron's previous movies they were much more layered beyond the visuals and special effects. I feel he got too caught up in wowing our eyes and completely forgot about what's behind them. 6.5/10. **1/2 out of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 Interesting piece at ew.com about how critics seem to praise the piece in spite of its story http://movie-critics.ew.com/2009/12/21/avatar-does-its-story-matter/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Adam Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 I saw it last night. Here is my review I posted on imdb.com. I didn't mention anything about the score, but as a sidenote I agree with EricMontreal that Horner's scores all sound the same. It was no different here. The score was one of my favourite things about Titanic, I barely even noticed it during Avatar. Here we are in 2009. It has been 12 years since Cameron last gave us one of his blockbusters in Titanic. With Avatar he set out to change the way we watch movies with his new motion capture technology all in 3D. Did he succeed? Sort of. While no one can deny the visual masterpiece this film is, there are some major problems that hinder Avatar from being one of the greatest movies of our time. The big problem I had with this movie was the story itself. It was redundant, one dimensional and well, boring. There were times throughout the film that I was compelled and on the edge of my seat, but for a 2.5 hrs + film, you need to feel that way 90% of the time. I am not naive, I knew going into a James Cameron film the story and especially the script wasn't going to rivet me out of my chair, but I at least expected to be entertained by it. I wasn't. The commentaries Cameron seems to do on anti-war and environmentalism just did not resonate with me. The dialogue in parts had my eyes in a constant roll. With that being said however, whenever the story was boring me to tears, I could just sit and look what was going on around the story. There was always something to look it, always something to fascinate me. Sigourney Weaver turned in a very decent performance and was the only actor in places to be able to rise above the dialogue Cameron gave them. However, there were times even she could not do it. Sam Worthington I feel was miscast, but he fits Cameron's niche for male leads, a la Arnold. I do believe this film will be showered with technical awards for its revolutionary technology and will get a Best Picture nomination at the Oscars in March. But, we must all remember that if you take away the visuals of this film, it is nothing more than a camp-fest that would go straight to DVD. With most of Cameron's previous movies they were much more layered beyond the visuals and special effects. I feel he got too caught up in wowing our eyes and completely forgot about what's behind them. 6.5/10. **1/2 out of **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Adam Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 I've been reading those thoughts too, apparently the academy screening LOVED it.... I am not sure how any film can succeed the way they talk without at least some sort of an at least average story. Maybe I am the narrow-minded one here. The friends I saw it with are claiming it to be among the best films they've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Adam Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 Ok, I am not sure what is going on (why my review has been posted multiple times). I apologize, could a mod delete all but one please. Tahnks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 Isn't this one clear enough? Avatar, of course!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 HAH I think I thought you were gonna post a link to something and forgot... Ummm I see You is certainly the most bombastic of these Horner movie themes--and I think it has even more vague/random lyrics (I love how they are just a string of cliches that don't really actually say anything deep or interesting) But I admit I don't mind it if in the right mood--Leona does show that she needs a bit more training at how to *read* a song--I much prefer the sound of her voice to Celine Dion's but despite English being her secnd language, Celine gives a much better read of the lyrics to her song, for example--not just starting full voice and randomly going softer with no relation to the lyric... On an earlier thread you said that ti seems like some of the melody line is done by Horner purposefully to add weird twists to a melody that otherwise might be too familiar--I agree there's something odd about it but maybe I just need to hear it more (funny Warner Music Group seems to have gone agro deleting all copies of the actual music video from youtube--I wonder why they care and don'\t see it as promotion?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted December 22, 2009 Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 I know I am in for a tonguelashing from Sylph(who is excited about this movie and has warned everyone about being too overly critical of the movie on anything other than an aesthetic level), but I have to say, this is probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I went into the theater with my 3D Glasses and an open-mind. I knew this probably wouldn't be a dialogue movie or all that much of a plot movie, but boy, was I and everyone else ever so right. Laughable, downright cliche dialogue that give "I wish I knew how to quit you" a run for its money. "WE CANNOT DESTROY HOMETREE!," "Her wounds were too deep," "I have already chosen her, but she has to choose me too," "How does it feel to betray your own RAYYYCE!," and "Make this quick. Papa wants to be HOME for DINNER!" With all the money you spent, you mean to tell me you couldn't pick someone to clean up your dialogue and make it tighter, less cheesy? The plot left lots of glaring holes. And then the so called revolutionary music and 3D Technology. What's so damn revolutionary about recycling or ripping off Titanic and Russ Landau's Survivor cues and using them in the movie?! The 3D Technology left alot to be desired. There was more 3D Depth in the trailer of Piranhas 3D than in Avatar. And that was Live Action Cheese With No Budget! Nothing really jumped out or popped out in terms of depth except those jellyfish that were moving about. I wonder if part of that $750 Million was used to pay critics to say that this was a great movie?! I can only imagine. Avatar was bloody awful. But watch this sh*t win Best Picture at the Academy Awards. It'll make me angry as hell too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 No, because that's what I said. The script is so bad, the only thing worth seeing are those effects. Which will be obsolete in 2 years. And I didn't warn. Where did I warn? I warned people not to expect a masterpiece script, that's what I said. It's a complete bullsh!t movie, I saw it. But I didn't post 'cause there's nothing to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 I can almost bet someone was, but was uncredited. Cameron just wrote your old, clichéd love tale only set on some moon of some planet called Polyphemus 4 light years away. Or whatever. Where people are basically Native Americans, only 9 feet tall, blue and noctilucent. Yes, again. This is a classic tale of plot holes so big you can drive a truck through. Not to say anything about sh!tty stuff like, for example, that people are wearing the same cheap lipstick in the year 2154 and use the same cheap hair dye. Sigourney Weaver can't act. The villain is a cardboard character, as is everyone. Hologram computer screen. Seen that. The uniforms the Marines use are the same. The choppers are the same. The creatures are the same only they glow in the night. And they aren't actually medusae, but seeds of the Sacred Tree. Critics love it and what's funny it turns out — it cost the same as Prince of Persia! Yeah, right. If it goes well, Cameron announced two sequels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 The music wasn't even heard in the movie, which might actually be a good thing given how bad it is. It's basically Horner's past scores mashed into one. Lots of these ethnic flutes, creepy male vocals from Apocalypto, boy soprano, shamanic female chants, the overbearing choir singing in Na'vi, synth washes... A mix between New Age stuff, Native American, Andean, gamelan music (a bigger master of which is this guy)... Bad, pathetic brass writing and equally weak strings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted December 22, 2009 It's not even bombast. I wish it was! Leona can't sing. I like Céline more. Leona just overdoes it, badly. The song is kind of cute trash. It's basically Titanic theme re-written. It has the same melodic lines. And yes, the songs just goes right into some basic chord progressions and every time Horner notices this, he changes course. Instead of turning right, he turns left. It would have been a lot less pretentious and better had he left it in it's intact, basic chords mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 23, 2009 Author Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 ‘Avatar’ could get nine Oscar nominations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted December 23, 2009 Members Share Posted December 23, 2009 Is there another Avatar thread I haven't read? One where Sylph is excited and thinking this will be a great movie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.