Cameron's Big Blue Ego Trip ... Eric Shapiro - Skidmore News 2/5/10
On a visual level, "Avatar", James Cameron's latest epic, is close to perfection. He and his crew have taken computer animation to the next level, crafting a world more realistic, distinctive and downright gorgeous than any other animated film, period. This world will suck viewers in the moment it jumps out of the screen (for once, shelling out a few extra dollars for 3-D glasses is worth it, even essential). For this reason alone, "Avatar" deserves most of the flattering adjectives lobbed its way by critics; it is indeed a groundbreaking.
But is it a classic? Well, that depends on how you define the term. Will Avatar be remembered as the film that opened the door for a whole new level of polish and attention to detail in animation? Certainly.
But will it be taken in, savored and regurgitated an infinite number of times by legions of rabid, slavering fans? Will every movie critic worth his pen (or laptop) fawn over it in the same way as they do films like "Star Wars" and "Blade Runner?" Well, perhaps the former will come to pass; fanboys (and girls) aren't always so discerning. Cinephiles, on the other hand, with time, should recognize "Avatar" for what it is: historically important for its technological breakthroughs, but not a particularly good movie.
Chances are, in the not-so-distant future, films as highly advanced (if not as brilliantly crafted) will be a dime a dozen and, alas, "Avatar" lacks the substance to compete with the inevitably better future films that will make use of the same technology, possibly with even more breathtaking results.
Unlike, say, George Lucas, James Cameron didn't bother coming up with interesting characters and concepts to flesh out his painstakingly crafted world. Instead, he relies on tried-and-true clichés. Indeed, some of the human ships and creatures look like they could have been ripped straight out of other works.
Did anyone else notice the similarity between the human gunships in "Avatar" and those in "Halo"? You know, the ones with the rudders? A little derivativeness doesn't harm a film if its characters are memorable. This is not the case with "Avatar." Cameron falls back on stock characters about as believable as those on a low-end Saturday morning cartoon show.
Occasional attempts at social commentary (he references--what else?--the war on terror) don't go beyond the usual liberal talking points that are so ubiquitous in Hollywood these days. "Lets fight terror with terror," says the tough-as-nails military brute that heads the equivalent of an intergalactic Blackwater, to the cheers of his redneck soldiers.
Film critics would no doubt be a lot less forgiving of Cameron's juvenile political posturing if he were spouting conservative ideas. Cameron also, perhaps deliberately, botches every opportunity to add any sense of real drama or complexity to his film.
If he had any sense in either department, he would portray the protagonist's fellow humans as a bit more relatable so his choice to join the Native Americans- sorry Na'vi (who, coincidentally, are as pure and innocent as the smurfs they resemble) wouldn't be such a given. This is only one of many opportunities the director/screenwriter bungles to add a real sense of tension and suspense to a narrative that is for the most part utterly predictable.
The Disney version of "Pocahontas" has a lot more to say about culture clash than "Avatar," as do many other movies from which Cameron clearly drew inspiration ("Dances With Wolves" comes to mind).
All criticism aside, film is obviously a visual medium and films that break new visual ground deserve recognition; just not necessarily as all-around classics.
But is it a classic? Well, that depends on how you define the term. Will Avatar be remembered as the film that opened the door for a whole new level of polish and attention to detail in animation? Certainly.
But will it be taken in, savored and regurgitated an infinite number of times by legions of rabid, slavering fans? Will every movie critic worth his pen (or laptop) fawn over it in the same way as they do films like "Star Wars" and "Blade Runner?" Well, perhaps the former will come to pass; fanboys (and girls) aren't always so discerning. Cinephiles, on the other hand, with time, should recognize "Avatar" for what it is: historically important for its technological breakthroughs, but not a particularly good movie.
Chances are, in the not-so-distant future, films as highly advanced (if not as brilliantly crafted) will be a dime a dozen and, alas, "Avatar" lacks the substance to compete with the inevitably better future films that will make use of the same technology, possibly with even more breathtaking results.
Unlike, say, George Lucas, James Cameron didn't bother coming up with interesting characters and concepts to flesh out his painstakingly crafted world. Instead, he relies on tried-and-true clichés. Indeed, some of the human ships and creatures look like they could have been ripped straight out of other works.
Did anyone else notice the similarity between the human gunships in "Avatar" and those in "Halo"? You know, the ones with the rudders? A little derivativeness doesn't harm a film if its characters are memorable. This is not the case with "Avatar." Cameron falls back on stock characters about as believable as those on a low-end Saturday morning cartoon show.
Occasional attempts at social commentary (he references--what else?--the war on terror) don't go beyond the usual liberal talking points that are so ubiquitous in Hollywood these days. "Lets fight terror with terror," says the tough-as-nails military brute that heads the equivalent of an intergalactic Blackwater, to the cheers of his redneck soldiers.
Film critics would no doubt be a lot less forgiving of Cameron's juvenile political posturing if he were spouting conservative ideas. Cameron also, perhaps deliberately, botches every opportunity to add any sense of real drama or complexity to his film.
If he had any sense in either department, he would portray the protagonist's fellow humans as a bit more relatable so his choice to join the Native Americans- sorry Na'vi (who, coincidentally, are as pure and innocent as the smurfs they resemble) wouldn't be such a given. This is only one of many opportunities the director/screenwriter bungles to add a real sense of tension and suspense to a narrative that is for the most part utterly predictable.
The Disney version of "Pocahontas" has a lot more to say about culture clash than "Avatar," as do many other movies from which Cameron clearly drew inspiration ("Dances With Wolves" comes to mind).
All criticism aside, film is obviously a visual medium and films that break new visual ground deserve recognition; just not necessarily as all-around classics.