tarheel91 said:
Reasonable said: Avatar manages to be the most impressive, beautiful use of CGI to create another world, coupled nicely with the lowest level of narrative ambition.
It's not bad, but in a way that almost seems worse it's simply bland. All that effort, all that expense, for something so familiar and obvious. Couldn't Cameron have actually married the ability to deliver a new world with something new to say or show?
What struck me was how much Avatar resembled the latest version of a AAA videogame. The plot's the same, the weaknesses are the same, but the graphics have been improved.
7/10 and the likely candidate for testing your new 3D TV and BR player, but not a great film nonetheless.
What particularly struck me, was how little it did with so much expense, while a film like Moon did so much with so little expense.
|
*facepalm* If you think ANY story is original, you simply haven't read/watched enough. Every story has been done before. What makes individual stories remarkable is the way they're told. I thought this one was told wonderfully.
|
I somewhat agreed that there aren't many original stories anymore, but I do think Cameron could have don't a better job adding some original flair. First off, all you have to do is look at the OP title to see what I thought of the movie, as I think Cameron derserves Oscars for not only sFx, but cinematography and quite a few others....hands down. With that said, the story was basically Pocahantas in Space...nothing wrong with that, but I think more original though could have bee applied to adding more variety than an American History class.
"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."
- From By Schism Rent Asunder