You can say that again and again; but he had to be dumb or he would have negotiated repair of his legs as a precondition for taking over the expensive avatar that had been specially constructed for his identical twin brother. And then Cameron would have been unable to add the “I am differently abled, hear me roar and see me triumph” trope to the movie.

That said, it was an amusing couple of hour romp, which is all one can reasonably expect a movie to be. And the settings, with their (Larry) Nivenesque rounding out of credible plant and animal inhabitants of the ecosystem were as good as any movie I’ve seen.

I’d have to say Jake Sully might have been the least-macho (certainly the most boring) action character I’ve seen in some time. He was definitely the dumbest. The Prius owner can do much better than this stiff!

And the Colonel was so funny because his actions were utterly moronic, especially when juxtaposed with the SERIOUSNESS of the movie.

Did RAMBO 3 feature cartoonish villains? Oh yeah, but that was a movie where a tank and a giant helicopter rammed each other, not an extended lecture on the evils of imperialism and human encroachment into the virgin forest.

1) I’m probably more liberal than James Cameron and I thought this film did a disservice to the message it tried to illustrate. As a film, it was cliched, unimaginative, and pretty dull.

2) I’m glad the other people connected to this website are loyal to one of their own, but is the reader comments section the place to be badmouthing (is that too strong a word? we seem to be averse to strong comments here, unless they appear in a review) the people who take the time to respond with reader comments? I’m pretty sure the reviewer can handle all the backlash or he wouldn’t be putting his name on the review. And to David Johnson, I address this comment: keep doing what you love. I enjoy the podcasts a lot. I wonder though if this film got under your skin because it took a macho type that you seem to love in other films and placed him in the service of a Prius owner’s message. Why is Colonel Whatshisname so cartoony here but acceptable, if not laudable, in a Rambo film, for instance?

As Larry King used to say, “Your thoughts.”

I have to say that considering the length of time I was waiting for a James Cameron film I was a little disappointed. Yes it was visually spectacular but it was also desperately predictable. I mean it is basically Dances with Wolves meets Apocalypto but not as good as either of those.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge Cameron fan and Titanic is my all time favourite film but whereas as in Titanic the effects served the main story, i.e. that of the sinking ship, in Avatar they controlled the story. You felt James thought of the 3D technique and then thought what would show it off best.

I remember some saying ‘why would I want to see Titanic when I know what will happen’ but Avatar was so much more predictable ticking all the big budget family action films. Half way through I was still being entranced by all the wonderful neon colours and far reaching vistas but then you felt the air of predictability setting in.

The ostracisation of the main character, him having to win everyone back by taming the wildest horse (sorry dragon thing), doing the ‘Braveheart’ motivational speech that lacked a little oomph, then the battle which unlike the ones in Braveheart or Last Samurai lacked tactical invention, the 2nd in command buys it, the main female lead gets into trouble, the animals come to the rescue in a Jumanji meets the stampeding cows from Zulu and you get a final standoff between the two main adversaries

It felt so Disney with the age classification really preventing you witnessing anything that might shock you or keep you on the edge of your seat. Who would live, who would die? – You pretty much knew what was happening right up to the sugar coated ending.

I think what happened was that Cameron was surrounded by too many ‘yes’ men. It’s understandable really. When you’ve had the fight that he had with Titanic and been proved so comprehensively correct nobody dared challenge him or question any of the story elements for Avatar. And that’s the problem. Having a single minded idea is fine but without refinement or additional input it can be either spot on or wide of the mark.

No different really from George Lucas with the three Star Wars prequels, Quentin Tarantino after Pulp Fiction or Peter Jackson after Fellowship of the Ring dropped.

It’s like Cameron hasn’t been watching films or playing games for the last twelve years. Even worse he assumes that his audience hasn’t done the same.

When you’ve got the likes of Moon and District 9 pushing sci fi in interesting fresh angles, King Kong doing the whole ‘fantasy island with amazing flora and fauna’ rotuine and computer games such as Halo and Mass Effect weaving fleshed out futuristic stories, then Avatar doesn’t come across as that ground breaking.

An example would be the heavy handed environmental angle. 5 – 10 years ago it might have seemed fresher but with Hope-enhagen in the news all the time and every negative rain drop attributed to climate change, one does get a little tired of the endless tree hugging. Being one with nature and respecting the fallen animals is nothing new and once again was covered in Dances with Wolves but without the hammering environmental guilt.

Ultimately it was an entertaining film. The 3D was good and the CGI was impressive but it wasn’t the revelation that I’d been expecting or had been mooted. The idea that it will revolutionise cinema attending and that Lucas wants to re-do some of the Star Wars films with this technique leads me to think, don’t bother.

It might be interesting but it doesn’t elevate it to the next level and is only immersive whilst you are looking at the screen. Yes, it’s nice to look at but an OK film isn’t elevated to brilliant when shown in HD and likewise this technique doesn’t patch over a poor story.

For me Avatar was nothing more than a glorified Disney film that could have been made by any number of other directors.

The mantle of best sci-fi film (and overall film) of the year for me is now securely in the hands of
District 9 for it’s creativity, freshness and excitement and Avatar unfortunately slips way down the league of Cameron films.

I’ve now seen Avatar twice, once in ‘normal’ size 3D and once in IMAX 3D. In the latter format this is certainly some of the most impressive eye candy ever. And I agree with Clark that on one level it was pretty compelling viewing. But yes, it is terribly simplistic for a James Cameron film.

People are saying its a sci-fi ‘Dances with Wolves’. But the film it most reminded me of story-wise was ‘The Last Samurai’.

It is a game-changer? We will see. I’m not personally persuaded of it at this time.

If it makes money, it can’t be mediocre right? Beanie Babies, Pet Rocks and Crocs must reflect some sort of transcendental milestone of human progress given how marketable those products were and the profit to investment ratio of their manufacture. You’re right “Surgikal,” I was a fool not to have seen it sooner, any movie which makes this much money cannot possibly be crippled by numerous flaws.

I mean, look at what else is listed in the top ten all time highest grossing films. Shrek 2! Star Wars: The Phantom Menace! Transformers 2! How could I possible have thought movies so successful might be populist rubbish!