| 
| 
Is it worth $10? Yes
Ordinarily, excess style and little substance would not make a movie a must-see. But “Avatar” plays with a different set of rules. In his first film since “Titanic,” writer/director James Cameron has created one of the most ambitious, visually dazzling films ever made. Does that make it a great movie? No. The script is cheesy, and the story is predictable. But that doesn’t mean it’s not a groundbreaking cinematic event, told with imagination and a vitality that’s missing from most modern science fiction dramas.
The year is 2154, and humans have traveled to a distant moon called Pandora, which is home to the Na’vi tribe. The Na’vi have blue skin, are ten feet tall and have tails. Because the planet is inhospitable to humans, Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) has created the Avatar program, in which humans are linked to a Na’vi body while their human bodies sleep in coffin-like cells.
What this means is that a Marine named Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), who is paralyzed from the waist down, is able to be a fully functional Na’vi on the surface of Pandora. His mission is to extract information about the tribe so Colonel Quaritch (Stephen Lang) can exploit their weaknesses and forcefully obtain a precious mineral that sits deep below the surface. After a few rough spots Jake succeeds at infiltrating the tribe, but things become complicated when he falls in love with his Na’vi teacher, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana).
If you’re lucky enough to live near a theater offering the film in 3-D, be sure to see it in that format. The visual effects are clear and stunningly vivid, so much that you feel like you’re flying through the sky with Jake and Neytiri. What’s more, the Na’vi look like real creatures inhabiting a real place, and there’s nothing cartoonish or fake about them. Only time will tell if “Avatar” will change the way movies are made and seen, but it’s safe to say at least some aspects of Cameron’s creative process will become commonplace.
Given that the actors were shot against a green screen (similar to how “300” was created), this marks a notable advancement in visual effects technology. For their part, Worthington, Saldana, Weaver and Lang breathe as much realistic life into the estimated $400 million production as possible, which is an accomplishment given the sentimental dialogue and lumbering storyline.
The likely divide between lovers and detractors of “Avatar” is simple: Those who value eye candy and action will not mind the 160-minute running time, while those more concerned with plot and narrative will find it tiresome and leave with a headache. You know who you are, so don’t say you weren’t warned.
Did you know?
One innovation created for “Avatar” was the Virtual Camera, which allowed Cameron to see the Na’vi during production. For example, although Saldana and Worthington were wearing motion-capture suits, Cameron was able to see their giant blue avatars on monitors, complete with tails and huge golden eyes.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
ruthcotto
said:
 |
... Avatar was such an amazing movie! One of my favorites! The scenery was amazing, it made it look so real. I wanted to be in the movie, I would love to be an Avatar for a day. They are just beautiful. Best movie yet! |
karinajean
said:
|
... Awesome 3D movie! James Cameron had a vision and made it come to "life". Like you said, yes it was worth paying to see it in the big screen. |
lilamor
said:
|
... Great movie, greats scenarious, great picture and the best 3D movie in years. I love it. |
RAFAMIA
said:
|
... This is my favorite "action" movie because it was different and unusual. A lot of action AND a social message. |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
