# Forum > Discussion > Media Discussions > Movies Avatar: The Way of Water

## Palanan

Just saw this, and for the sheer scope and spectacle its certainly worth seeing in the theater.

As expected, the visuals are superlative.  The new hardware is magnificent, and the marine life even more so.  We see a new Navi culture and people, and their designs are more creative, meticulous and beautiful than anything weve seen before.

But as for the story.



*Spoiler*
Show

I was halfway expecting this to be Avatar again, but wet, and I was willing to run with that for the sake of the visual and ecological immersion.  

It ended up being that, but also _not_ that, and not in the most satisfying way.  Despite the extremely long runtime, the plot felt less involvedand less involvingthan the first movie, to the point that the story itself felt almost threadbare.  The movie took its time, which I dont mind in itself; but there were stretches when it could have used a little more urgency, and moments which could have been used to pencil in some nuances and details which would have paid off tenfold towards the end.

For long periods I felt like I was watching a documentary on marine life, and since I enjoy documentaries on marine life, I was happy enough with that.  The marine ecosystems are breathtakingly beautiful, as are many of the individual species.  Basing the banshee-equivalents on plesiosaurs is a lovely touch, and the mid-range predator was almost line-for-line Dunkleosteus.  The movie didnt ever go much below the surface waters, but even so what we saw was exquisitely designed.

We also have quite an involved set of stories with the kids adjusting to life among the reef people, with bullies, teen romance, cruel pranks and a forbidden friendship.  All this is explored in detail, and it takes up so much time that the movies center of gravity ends up shifting strongly in the teen direction, to the point that Jake and Neytiri start feeling like afterthoughts in their own movie.

The kids themselves are a little uneven, but the standout concept is Kiri, who was (somehow) born from Graces avatar in what is hinted to be a virgin birth.  I did not see that coming, nor the cloned-into-a-Navi approach for bringing back Quaritch.  Kiri's personality was a hoot, and her channeling Eywa was promising; but they never really explored it as much as they could have, and it wasnt as pivotal at the climax as I was expecting it to be.  The movie often telegraphed moments well in advance, most clearly when Blue Quaritch crushed his originals skull, and some of the dialogue was not all it could have been.

I also kept seeing hints and callbacks to other movies, and I dont know if these were intentional or not.  The rollover and submergence of the hydrofoil felt very much like some moments from The Abyss, and when Tuk slipped out of Neytiris grip and down the hatch she looked and sounded _exactly_ like Newt slipping out of Ripleys hands.  Most striking of all was the funeral scene, when the body was lowered into a field of glowing tendrilswhich looked exactly like the golden tendrils in the animated Nausicaä movie.  At other moments the movie felt like Avatar Meets Waterworld Meets Whale Rider, or possibly How to Train Your Dragon.

The final action sequence was tense, but ended up feeling very, very protracted.  Not only the climax, but the entire movie ended up feeling much less impactful than the first movie.  Partly this is because its the setup for additional movies; but even so, theres nothing of the same visual and emotional magnitude as the entire Home-Tree coming down in the original, or immense swarms of wildlife coming to the rescue at the last moment in the final battle.

The closest equivalent here is a truly heart-crushing scene involving the hunting and brutal killing of a Pandoran cetacean and her calf.  Its wrenching and horrific in its inevitability, and the magnitude of the loss is made clear in personal terms for the Tsahìk of the reef people; but objectively its just not on the same scale as events in the first movie.  

Its also not quite clear what audience this is really intended for.  The extended focus on the kids and their stories suggests more of a family-oriented movie, but theres some extremely non-family language and several scenes of near-murder of children, which to me feels a bit much for its rating.  

Theres a lot more to say and to think about.  There are a couple things which leave me quite irked, but best not to get into those now.  Its visually beautiful and almost always engaging, yet often somewhat predictable and quite drawn out.  Its nowhere near the wondrous revelation of the first movie, and its not a sequel that surpasses the original; but its a solid movie in itself, with some genuinely beautiful moments, and a firm setup for the next installment.

----------


## Fyraltari

A gorgeous movie with a passable story, much like its predecessor.

Possibly the most impressive thing about it is that Sigourney Weaver utterly sells her character being a teenager. I noticed the resemblance but just assumed they had found actress who happened to look like her.

----------


## warty goblin

I saw I suspect all but the last 20 minutes* of it, and was fairly positive.

It isn't as good or involving as the first movie - not as weird**, with less conflicted characters, but it's still really good. And it's a proper sci-fi movie with actual worldbuilding as well; things generally follow logically from the understood attributes of the universe as a whole, rather than the heroes and villains just being able to do stuff. It's been a long time since we had something like that on the big screen, and that alone was fun. The attention to detail here was just great, I'd happily rewatch it just to pick up on various bits and pieces I missed. I liked the shift to marine life, and Cameron's general nautical nerdiness certainly showed through here. 

*Spoiler*
Show


I thought this was most obvious when whaling vessel and attendant minisubs started getting sunk. I can't think of another director who would pay that much attention to things like flooding, or the crew being trapped and having to evacuate. 



Visuals were also spectacular. I can't honestly remember the last time I watched a movie and was just blown away by how it looked. But this did, and it was glorious. There was a trailer for the new Ant-Man thing before our showing, and it looked like the worst sort of flat, boring, washed out, plasticy CG crap by comparison. 

*We saw it in 3d Imax, which was great. Until the software went haywire and the left projector started showing green static like a really distant view of the Matrix. Still watchable, just with one eye closed, but less fun. Then it died entirely right at the climax, restarted like fifteen minutes in in 2D, died again, restarted in the middle, and finally died permanently. Then we had to stand in a stupidly long line because they had to refund everybody's card rather than just give us vouchers, since Disney sucks and apparently doesn't allow that. Since the movie theater doesn't suck they also gave us vouchers, but we can't actually use them for Avatar because, again, Disney sucks. Let's all get together and burn Mickey at the stake. 

**Or at least not as visibly weird. Yet. I think there's a lot of foundation being laid, because Cameron is a very detailed and meticulous guy who's had 13 years to work things through. In particular Earth is being set up as a major ongoing problem, and I'm not really sure what's going on with being able to move minds around. Could be interesting.

----------


## Palanan

> Originally Posted by *Fyraltari*
> _A gorgeous movie with a passable story, much like its predecessor._


Im much more favorable to the story of the first movie.  Its more tightly put together than this one, and for me it was far more powerful on first viewing.




> Originally Posted by *Fyraltari*
> _Possibly the most impressive thing about it is that Sigourney Weaver utterly sells her character being a teenager._


She managed to be convincingly teenage without being _too_ annoying, which is a very fine line to walk.  




> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _And it's a proper sci-fi movie with actual worldbuilding as well; things generally follow logically from the understood attributes of the universe as a whole, rather than the heroes and villains just being able to do stuff. It's been a long time since we had something like that on the big screen, and that alone was fun._


Indeed.  Some of the underwater scenes were absolutely mesmerizing.  

*Spoiler: Water*
Show

And there was some solid visual storytelling with Kiris taking so naturally to the water.  She really was her mothers daughter, from the bossy personality to the deeply innate fascination with the living world.  Theres a case to be made that shes the true avatar in this moviethe avatar of Eywa herself.





> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _I can't think of another director who would pay that much attention to things like flooding, or the crew being trapped and having to evacuate._


*Spoiler: Flooding*
Show

If you mean the mini-subs, it seemed in line with typical sub movies to me.  

It also forms part of an overall pattern in the movie, in which there are fewer and less graphic casualties than one would expect.  When Jake dropped a grenade into the missile rack of that chopper, the shrapnel should have killed everyone on the deck, kids and hostiles alike.  And the cetaceans memory of the attack on its pod should have included a lot more torsos and fragments, because thats what depth charges would do at point-blank range.





> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _In particular Earth is being set up as a major ongoing problem._


*Spoiler: Earth*
Show

My eyes just about fell out when I saw that fleet arrive.  One or two ships, I was expectingnot a dozen, and not riding fusion lances down to the surface.  All I can think is that those ships represent a last-ditch, all-out effort by RDA to pacify and colonize Pandora ahead of full-scale human occupation.





> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _...and I'm not really sure what's going on with being able to move minds around._


*Spoiler: Moving Minds*
Show

This leaped out at me as something which naturally derives from the original movies techbut which should have either been a more fundamental aspect of the original movies culture, or specifically noted here as something which was experimental.

Otherwise, if mindtapes are present in the first movies culture, then Jakes brother could have had a backup mind ready to be implanted into his own avatar, thus invalidating the first movies premise entirely.

This could have been clarified with a single lineoriginal Quaritch mentioning in his recording that this is some serious classified military tech and thus not available to anyone else.  That it _wasnt_ clarified seems like quite an omission, and it just leaves me wondering about the prevalence and ethical status of clones and mindtapes back on Earth.





> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _There was a trailer for the new Ant-Man thing before our showing, and it looked like the worst sort of flat, boring, washed out, plasticy CG crap by comparison._


That was in front of my viewing as well.  The designs were genericat one point it looked just like Wakandabut I didnt find the CGI itself all that bad, perhaps because I was expecting MCU style for an MCU movie.  

In fact Im quite looking forward to this one, because against all odds Ant-Man has become one of my favorite MCU characters.  




> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _*viewing disaster*_


Really sorry that happened to you.  Sounds like the theater was packed, so it must have been a serious hit to them.  

But it also sounds like management did their best to go above and beyond for everyone.  At my theater, I had a hard enough time just getting them to turn the sound down a little.

----------


## t209

Part of me feel that somewhere along the production, they changed Spider's backstory from
*Spoiler: Movie spoiler*
Show

Son of researchers/settlers who died in an accident, to Miles' son.
I think I remembered that old storyline...anyway what happened to those who stayed in Pandora again, last time I remembered they allowed peaceful research (possibly with supply runs) allow here.

Also I wonder how movie would turn out if instead of Miles...it is Kushana or Lady Eboshi. Or maybe "what if Ghibli wrote Avatar?".

----------


## Peelee

> Just saw this, and for the sheer scope and spectacle its certainly worth seeing in the theater.





> A gorgeous movie with a passable story, much like its predecessor.


"It's very pretty" has not been a selling point for me to see a movie in a theater ever since Star Wars prequel trilogy came out.

----------


## warty goblin

> Im much more favorable to the story of the first movie.  Its more tightly put together than this one, and for me it was far more powerful on first viewing.


Yeah, I've never gotten the hate for the first movies story. It's pretty tightly written, the characterization is woven into the central conflict, and the climactic twist is both foreshadowed and still very satisfying. 

It's also kinda weird for, literally, the biggest movie ever made. God, or the next best thing, is a scientifically verifiable fact, it's an alien planet that talks through trees, and human society is fundamentally incapable of seeing or valuing this is kinda out there for a popcorn action movie. Sure it's basically the old George RR Martin stories _And Seven Times Never Kill Man_ and _A Song For Lya_ cross-polinated and turned into an action movie instead of horror tinged existentialist borderline nihilism, but those are weird even for literary sci-fi.





> *Spoiler: Water*
> Show
> 
> And there was some solid visual storytelling with Kiris taking so naturally to the water.  She really was her mothers daughter, from the bossy personality to the deeply innate fascination with the living world.  Theres a case to be made that shes the true avatar in this moviethe avatar of Eywa herself.


*Spoiler*
Show


I think that's pretty clear; though I don't think she's Eywa herself exactly, rather something made directly by Eywa, and very connected to Eywa, for purposes yet unknown.

Mostly I'm very curious as to why she looks more human than the actual avatars. I'm very curious as to why.




*Spoiler: Flooding*
Show

If you mean the mini-subs, it seemed in line with typical sub movies to me.  

It also forms part of an overall pattern in the movie, in which there are fewer and less graphic casualties than one would expect.  When Jake dropped a grenade into the missile rack of that chopper, the shrapnel should have killed everyone on the deck, kids and hostiles alike.  And the cetaceans memory of the attack on its pod should have included a lot more torsos and fragments, because thats what depth charges would do at point-blank range.


Yeah, its a PG-13 action movie, not a hard R war is hell movie. Graphic violence, really realism of any sort, is basically a stylistic choice in fantasy cinema. For any number of reasons it's the wrong choice for a movie like this. 

*Spoiler: Earth*
Show

My eyes just about fell out when I saw that fleet arrive.  One or two ships, I was expectingnot a dozen, and not riding fusion lances down to the surface.  All I can think is that those ships represent a last-ditch, all-out effort by RDA to pacify and colonize Pandora ahead of full-scale human occupation.


I think that's pretty much the implication, yes. 




> *Spoiler: Moving Minds*
> Show
> 
> This leaped out at me as something which naturally derives from the original movies techbut which should have either been a more fundamental aspect of the original movies culture, or specifically noted here as something which was experimental.
> 
> Otherwise, if mindtapes are present in the first movies culture, then Jakes brother could have had a backup mind ready to be implanted into his own avatar, thus invalidating the first movies premise entirely.
> 
> This could have been clarified with a single lineoriginal Quaritch mentioning in his recording that this is some serious classified military tech and thus not available to anyone else.  That it _wasnt_ clarified seems like quite an omission, and it just leaves me wondering about the prevalence and ethical status of clones and mindtapes back on Earth.


*Spoiler*
Show


Why would they back up a dude who didn't do anything dangerous? He got killed in a random mugging, this is like saying RDA not making Tom Sully wear a stab vest everywhere is a plot hole. 






> That was in front of my viewing as well.  The designs were genericat one point it looked just like Wakandabut I didnt find the CGI itself all that bad, perhaps because I was expecting MCU style for an MCU movie.


Yeah, but MCU movies look bad. OK, bad is a strong term, Justice  League looked bad. But boy the MCU is flat and colorless and nothing moves right. 




> Really sorry that happened to you.  Sounds like the theater was packed, so it must have been a serious hit to them.  
> 
> But it also sounds like management did their best to go above and beyond for everyone.  At my theater, I had a hard enough time just getting them to turn the sound down a little.


Fortunately we were sitting right behind an eight year old girl's birthday party, who found the whole thing very exciting. Didn't seem to be phased by the violence in the slightest either, which is about what I'd expect. It's all framed as exciting action, not suspenseful or scary. 

I'd say the management eventually dug themselves out a bit, but their communication up until finally giving up and turning off the projector was nil. 

Also, I found this rather interesting given the meme that Avatar had no cultural impact or fans, we talked to a couple people in line while waiting for our refund. Several different people had driven upwards of an hour to our showing. Sure it's the only 3D Imax around, but you don't do that for something you're just eh about. 




> "It's very pretty" has not been a selling point for me to see a movie in a theater ever since Star Wars prequel trilogy came out.


Eh, it isn't just pretty though, it's actually interesting to look at. Like, you can sketch out phylogenetic trees and ecosystem niches and animal behaviors just watching. Sure it helps that its the best looking thing basically ever, but it'd be worth looking at even if it wasn't. It's kinda like all the detail and world building packed into the props and stuff in Lord of the Rings, there's a huge amount of sense of place carried by that.

----------


## The Hellbug

> Also, I found this rather interesting given the meme that Avatar had no cultural impact or fans, we talked to a couple people in line while waiting for our refund. Several different people had driven upwards of an hour to our showing. Sure it's the only 3D Imax around, but you don't do that for something you're just eh about.


I've found that it's less that it didn't have a cultural impact and more that it didn't have a particularly strong footprint in nerd culture.  It didn't go to the same place on the internet and get talked about in the same way that the umpteenth Star Wars movie was autopsied.  (Speaking of which, I rewatched the first one since I hadn't seen it since it came out, and I actually probably appreciated it more, partially because I'm a decade more removed from being a reactive teenager and partially because, damn, the last decade hasn't provided a movie that leans this much on CGI that looks this good since*).

I saw it, and I really enjoyed it--probably more than the first one, in fact.  My biggest criticism is that the movie struggles to find its footing in the first half hour or so while it tries to bridge the last movie to what it wants to do in this one; it felt a little rushed and clumsy.

Once it gets to what it wants to do, it's fantastic.  It looks great, it draws you in, sure, the writing's not phenomenal but you'll only roll your eyes at the dialogue a couple times (that marine biologist needs to just...reconsider every time he opens his mouth), and the climax has me won over to the 'wow James Cameron can direct a big action scene' camp yet again.  Maybe I'm being a bit sentimental or romantic, but I think, ultimately, it was really refreshing to see a big, spectacular blockbuster that was made because someone _wanted_ to make it, rather than a movie that needed to be made so someone was brought on to make it.  But I'm just rambling now.  :Smile:  

It was good. If you have an opportunity (and there'll be chances--we're almost to the January theater release doldrums), it's great on the big screen.

*Alright, I'm gonna go to the bat for the Legendary Pictures Godzilla movies, but I'm a mark for those so I'm hugely biased.

----------


## Tyndmyr

The good: I didn't pay for this movie, since projector malfunctions at the enjoyable Violent Night resulted in some free passes.

The bad: The visuals. Some were pretty, but the "everyone alters direction two times during their normal movement" is a recognizable pattern now. It's not awful, but once you notice that they insert the realism using pretty much the same tricks every time, it looks a little uncanny valley. Also, the "throwing things at the screen to show off 3d" trick has gotten a lot more overused and annoying since 2009, and I am no longer inclined to be forgiving of it. 

The awful: The plot. Sweet god, the plot. They put together every hackneyed excuse to literally recycle the first movies plot over again, just...less coherent, and also really long. 

The great: I walked out thirty minutes early after my partner asked if we could just bail already. Unfortunate, as she had loved the first movie, and was really looking forward to this one, but this one she hated. I have extremely little hope for the sequels. 

*Spoiler*
Show


I do not mean that the plots are merely using the same themes. I mean that they are the same.

The antagonist is the same. Did he not die in the first movie? Yes. Yes he did. But a previously unmentioned tech was used to scan and clone him. Don't think at all about how convenient that tech would have been in the first movie, it only exists to recycle dead people into the same role. 

Also, Ellen Ripley is back. Sorry, I realize her character probably has a different name in this universe, but I'm sticking with it. Her avatar somehow had a virgin birth, because if there's one old trope every self important science fiction author demands, it's recycling the Jesus mythos. Wooo. So, she's back, but also a teenager. She has superpowers, because...frigging Jesus trope...but because teenager, nobody notices the *extremely obvious* powers or believes in her, so she needs to learn to believe in herself. The movie is now a teenage drama for all of the some time, after taking a decent break to be a nature documentary. Why is this thing three hours long? Oh, yeah, that's why. 

Anyways, there is a water biome that is just like the earth biome, but water. There is a water tree that is the same as the earth tree. Everyone rides these fantasy flying horse creatures that they hair-bond with...okay, they're the exact same thing as in the first movie. But there are also bigger versions that can be bonded with, and are generally not ridden, and one in particular is dangerous. However, the Sully family is special, and so, of course, we, uh, do that plot again too.

The movie sort of remembers it has to get back to telling you that humans and colonization are bad, so we find out that humans need one super special, valuable substance from this planet. No, no, not unobtainium. A NEW special substance in the water area. Uuuugggh. We have a Vietnam sequence because James Cameron is an old boomer, and thus believes that this is still the modern touchstone for combat. Do not bother to try to evaluate any of the combat for realism. It isn't, and cheerfully moves from one hollywood trope to the next, with very little exciting, novel or interesting things along the way. 

So, big human ship surrounded by a bunch of little human ships go off to fight the big climactic finale, but presumably its okay because the blue people have arrows or something, IDK. That's the part where I headed out. I hear they've already confirmed the same villain for the next however many sequels, so I guess they're gonna just start cloning these in slightly different biomes or something. 

It probably could have been a reasonably good film if it had stuck with one of the other ideas it had, rather than just using them as tired props for the overarch. A good exploration of what it is to be a clone or what not? Heck, I enjoyed 6th Day, that can be done well. Just making a movie around the teenage troubles, and being that kind of film? Unusual, but would work. They honestly have most of the pieces there for that if you just ended out unrelated things. Just making a fictional nature documentary? Wild, but there's a fair chunk of that. Avatar is mostly known for its world/visuals. If you wanted to just run with that, it'd probably be alright. Unfortunately, they tried to cram everything into the same film to recycle the same basic plot from the first one, and it became a bloated mess. 

Very skippable.

----------


## Palanan

> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _Like, you can sketch out phylogenetic trees and ecosystem niches and animal behaviors just watching._


YES.

*Spoiler: Alien Design*
Show

I was just thinking about the riding-plesiosaurs, and how much research must have went into developing their musculoskeletal structurewhich was then translated into rigging for that final, infinitely fluid look when theyre spiraling around each other.  The degree of thought put into this is just boggling.





> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _Why would they back up a dude who didn't do anything dangerous? He got killed in a random mugging._


He didnt know he would be mugged, but he did know he was about to embark on an interstellar mission to a notoriously deadly world to interact with natives known for their poison-tipped arrows.  Thats probably more cause to need a backup than most other people would have.




> Originally Posted by *The Hellbug*
> _My biggest criticism is that the movie struggles to find its footing in the first half hour or so while it tries to bridge the last movie to what it wants to do in this one; it felt a little rushed and clumsy._


Id say youre not wrong here.  Based on one viewing, Id say it struggles to find its footing several times.  I enjoyed it greatly nonetheless, but tone and pacing did have their issues.

Even so, all yesterday afternoon and evening I found myself craving a second viewing on the big screen.  Can't wait for this to become available for rent.




> Originally Posted by *Tyndmyr*
> _*snip*_


Ordinarily you and I are right there on the same page when it comes to movies (Eternals, WW84, etc.) but...lets just say we have different perspectives on this one.




> Originally Posted by *Tyndmyr*
> _I hear they've already confirmed the same villain for the next however many sequels._


The reasons for this were made apparent in the last half-hour or so.

----------


## Peelee

> Eh, it isn't just pretty though, it's actually interesting to look at. Like, you can sketch out phylogenetic trees and ecosystem niches and animal behaviors just watching.





> YES.
> 
> *Spoiler: Alien Design*
> Show
> 
> I was just thinking about the riding-plesiosaurs, and how much research must have went into developing their musculoskeletal structurewhich was then translated into rigging for that final, infinitely fluid look when theyre spiraling around each other.  The degree of thought put into this is just boggling.


Ok? It sounds interesting. It still doesn't make me want to pay for a ticket just because it looks really really cool.

----------


## Cikomyr2

I had a lot of fun watching Moana-vatar. They repeated a lot of the beats of the first movie, but better and in water.

----------


## animorte

> A gorgeous movie with a passable story, much like its predecessor.


This is what most video games/movies/shows are about anyway. Create the most spectacular graphics you can, first and foremost. I honestly think thats where most of the budget goes.

----------


## gbaji

> *Spoiler*
> Show
> 
> 
> Why would they back up a dude who didn't do anything dangerous? He got killed in a random mugging, this is like saying RDA not making Tom Sully wear a stab vest everywhere is a plot hole.





> He didnt know he would be mugged, but he did know he was about to embark on an interstellar mission to a notoriously deadly world to interact with natives known for their poison-tipped arrows.  Thats probably more cause to need a backup than most other people would have.


Yeah, this. But even setting aside his reasons for doing so, the company funding the expedition certainly would have, if the tech were available to them. The whole core plot point of the first film was that creating the Avatar body was incredibly time consuming and expensive, so much so that they needed to move forward with finding a replacement to use it, no matter how difficult that was to deal with, rather than picking someone else better suited/trained for the mission, and building/growing/whatever a new one. It's the base assumption for hiim being in the story in the first place.

Given that presumed extreme time/expense, if they had the tech to backup his brother's mind, wouldn't they have? Heck, You're already transferring people's consciousnesses around with the tech you have. It's not much of a leap to go that extra step, and it would seem like a logical thing to do.

And yeah, unlike most apparent plot holes, this one actually could have been plugged up with a simple line or two of diaglogue. Of course, I'm head canoning it that they had this tech all along, but that we're going to assume some hippy-dippy bit about a "soul" or whatever that transferrs along using the tech, and making a copy of that just results in some souless person in a cloned/whatever body. Which works fine for the bad guy, but maybe not so much for our heroes. Or we can just go with "they wanted him back for a sequel, so they contrived a way" and to heck with it making sense.

----------


## Cikomyr2

> Generally yes, but story felt a bit more cohesive this time. Visuals are over the top once again.


The story being spread across multiple POV character rather than focusing on Jake really helped it breathe.

The story being about a family of Navi learning the ways of another tribe worked a lot better than the story of one white guy learning the ways of an alien culture.

Like i said, they repeat a lot of the beats of the first movie, but they managed to make them work a lot better. In my opinion, the story ***structure*** is objectively superior, as Cameron learned a lot from the feedback of the first movie.

----------


## Clertar

I can just assume that those who go all savvy with the "meh it's basically the same story" spiel never saw another Marvel movie after Iron Man  :Small Big Grin:

----------


## Lurkmoar

> I can just assume that those who go all savvy with the "meh it's basically the same story" spiel never saw another Marvel movie after Iron Man


There's a difference between a cover band playing a favorite song and a blues player writing predominately with the A or E key. Execution is important in both, but expectations are different.

Saw it, visually spectacular, but the only character I enjoyed was

*Spoiler*
Show

Quaritch, the only memorable character to me, and he's just a Colonel Kurtz knock-off. *Spoiler*
Show

Neytiri's actions to Spider make some degree of pragmatic sense, still leave a bad taste in the mouth. Was Cameron worried that her killing Spider would make her too unsympathetic?

 

It was worth watching to me, but I don't feel a need to re-watch it.

----------


## Palanan

> Originally Posted by *Lurkmoar*
> _It was worth watching to me, but I don't feel a need to re-watch it._


Meanwhile, Ive been craving to see it again, pretty much from the minute I walked out of the theater.

----------


## Lurkmoar

> Meanwhile, Ive been craving to see it again, pretty much from the minute I walked out of the theater.


I'm happy that you're happy, have a rocking week!

----------


## Palanan

So, re-watching part of the first Avatar last night reminded me of a small perplexity midway through the movie.

This is when Grace is moving them to Site 26 and theyre flying through the Hallelujah Mountains.  Grace, Norm, Jake and Trudy are in the pressurized cockpit, while Grace and Jakes avatars are flying unconscious in the open midsection.

But _why_ are they flying the avatars up to Site 26?  Since the other Navi can reach the Hallelujah Mountains overland, why wouldnt Jakes avatar go with them?  And why does Graces avatar need to come along at all?  The dialogue makes it clear why Grace is moving the human team to Site 26, but Im still a bit puzzled why they had to fly their avatars to a region the Navi could reach perfectly well on their ownand especially when Jakes avatar is still back at the Hometree in the following scenes.

----------


## Fyraltari

> So, re-watching part of the first Avatar last night reminded me of a small perplexity midway through the movie.
> 
> This is when Grace is moving them to Site 26 and theyre flying through the Hallelujah Mountains.  Grace, Norm, Jake and Trudy are in the pressurized cockpit, while Grace and Jakes avatars are flying unconscious in the open midsection.
> 
> But _why_ are they flying the avatars up to Site 26?  Since the other Navi can reach the Hallelujah Mountains overland, why wouldnt Jakes avatar go with them?  And why does Graces avatar need to come along at all?  The dialogue makes it clear why Grace is moving the human team to Site 26, but Im still a bit puzzled why they had to fly their avatars to a region the Navi could reach perfectly well on their ownand especially when Jakes avatar is still back at the Hometree in the following scenes.


Are you sure it's Jake's avatar and not Norm's?

Edit: Also, I think I remember there was a plot point about the humans hiding from the Na'vi the fact that the avatars are "fake" bodies controlled from a distance rather than individuals.

----------


## Palanan

I did wonder where Norms avatar was, so that might be it.  Grace and Norm are sampling around Site 26 with their avatars, while Jake is back at Hometree.

As for the nature of the avatars, it seems pretty clear that by the time of the movie, the Navi are aware that the avatars are controlled by humans.  Tsutey mentions that Jakes avatar is a false body inhabited by a demon, and both the Olo'eyktan and the Tsahìk seem to have some sense of this as well.

----------


## Fyraltari

> I did wonder where Norms avatar was, so that might be it.  Grace and Norm are sampling around Site 26 with their avatars, while Jake is back at Hometree.
> 
> As for the nature of the avatars, it seems pretty clear that by the time of the movie, the Navi are aware that the avatars are controlled by humans.  Tsutey mentions that Jakes avatar is a false body inhabited by a demon, and both the Olo'eyktan and the Tsahìk seem to have some sense of this as well.


It's been a long time, but doesn't Tsu'tey only accuses Jake of being a demon in a false body after he is forcefully ejected and faints before the whole tribe? Neytiri spends a whole scene trying to wake Jake up, which she wouldn't do if she knew he needed his human body to be plugged in to function.

----------


## Palanan

> Originally Posted by *Fyraltari*
> _It's been a long time, but doesn't Tsu'tey only accuses Jake of being a demon in a false body after he is forcefully ejected and faints before the whole tribe?_


Tsu'tey treats it as proof of the concept, but it seems clear the concept was already there.  The idea didnt occur to Tsutey right at that moment, but seems to have been his assumption when he first meets Jake.  

When Neytiri is first leading Jake to Hometree, and Tsutey bolos Jake to the ground, he declares, These demons are forbidden here, which parallels his later comment about Jake being a demon in a false body.  Remember that Tsutey speaks English and likely attended Graces school, so hes been exposed to avatars before.

Once Jake is brought before the Omaticaya, the Olo'eyktan says, I have said no dreamwalker will come here.  _Dreamwalker_ sounds like a Navi attempt to summarize a simplistic explanation of how avatars operate.  The Tsahìk also speaks English and likely has some understanding of the process directly from Grace, so her conception is more sophisticated than Tsuteys, who thinks in terms of possession by evil spirits.

But they both seem to have the general idea that the avatar body is controlled by an outside intelligence, and they already had this idea in place at their first meeting with Jake.

.

----------


## KorvinStarmast

I did not go. I had no interest in a rehash of "Pocahontas in Space" with great visual effects.
My son and my wife went. (Both adults, with very different tastes in movies). 

The both walked out about 2/3 - 3/4 of the way through for this reason: bored. 
Neat SFX (which they both praised) were not sufficient to keep their interest.   Comment from my son, who is the one who got me interested in_ The Witcher_ and _Mandalorian_:

"If you are going to spend that kind of money on those amazing SFX, write a story to go with it.  Don't skimp on that creative aspect."

----------


## warty goblin

Rewatched/finished the movie on Friday. It definitely improved on a second and complete viewing. For one thing we weren't as close to the end as I had thought, and the end did I thought a good job of pulling the story into a more coherent whole. 

The details remain intensely impressive. Natiri's copper earrings tarnish over the course of the movie, and nobody sinks a ship like James Cameron. Since I like some good old fashioned nautical mayhem, that was a lot of fun.

*Spoiler*
Show

The Titanic parallels are inevitable and actually kind of interesting. Titanic worked as a movie about a big ship sinking because it made the ship itself a very familiar and at times joyful place, one you were sad to see perish. It also did a lot of work to highlight secondary and sometimes even tertiary characters, which made the entire tragedy feel sufficiently big. Yes it was primarily a Jack/Rose love tragedy, but the movie was very careful to not have it be _just_ that. The other people on the ship, while not the focus, clearly also mattered.

This went exactly the opposite, doing a lot of work to make you hate the ship and everybody on it. At which I think it succeeded quite well. But the actual sinking was still intense and, for a PG-13 movie, relatively scary. And to the movie's credit, it was a fairly believable sort of ship sinking as well, with the sudden and violent inversion, survivors trapped in air pockets, and creepily floating corpses. 

Also while we're talking spoilers, this really is _A Song for Lya_ but action movie. The shot of Jake meeting his time-shifting son in the afterlife/Ehwa pretty much makes it obvious. The Navi have the only god in the universe. Get with it.  


Having seen the entire thing, I'd rate it an easy 8/10. The first one is 9/10 for me, due mostly to being a complete and satisfying story on its own, with I think stronger character arcs overall, particularly for Jake and Natiri. But since this one doesn't try to be a satisfying stand alone, it, on its own, leaves things hanging. Which is good, I'm pumped for a sequel. 

I didn't see a lot of stuff in theaters this year. The only other big budget thing I saw was The Batman, which I quite liked. But I think this was, although somewhat unsatisfying as a piece of a whole, the stronger movie. That movie was very compromised by needing to sit in the entire Batman universe and honor the IP and yadda yadda yadda all of which just hurts its ability to tell a good story. To wit, if Batman wasn't a billion dollar IP that will only die when the sun explodes and vaporizes every last Warner Brothers shareholder, the natural conclusion of the story was Batman stops being Batman. Avatar, Way of Water is part of a larger story, and so incomplete, but the conclusion of this part of that story felt reasonable. A battle is won, but the fundamental problems persist, hence the war is ongoing.

----------


## Bohandas

> I did not go. I had no interest in a rehash of "Pocahontas in Space" with great visual effects.
> My son and my wife went. (Both adults, with very different tastes in movies). 
> 
> The both walked out about 2/3 - 3/4 of the way through for this reason: bored. 
> Neat SFX (which they both praised) were not sufficient to keep their interest.   Comment from my son, who is the one who got me interested in_ The Witcher_ and _Mandalorian_:
> 
> "If you are going to spend that kind of money on those amazing SFX, write a story to go with it.  Don't skimp on that creative aspect."


That matches my expectation of it almost exactly. The only surprising part was that anyone went to see it in the first place. The first movie in the series was a sensational fad but a fad nonetheless, and hasn't been relevant for years





> This is what most video games/movies/shows are about anyway. Create the most spectacular graphics you can, first and foremost. I honestly think thats where most of the budget goes.


This technique does certainly do a good job of fooling people.

People still remember _2001 A Space Odyssey_ as an artistic masterpiece and _Half-Life 2_ as one of the greatest videogames ever despite the fact that the former was just a bunch of kaleidoscopes and people floating around in space and the latter was just an infomercial for the Source engine which had much shallower gameplay than its predecessor and a premise that was an ass-pull diabolus ex machina

----------


## Palanan

> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _It definitely improved on a second and complete viewing. For one thing we weren't as close to the end as I had thought, and the end did I thought a good job of pulling the story into a more coherent whole._


Glad you were able to get a second viewing.  Still waiting for the opportunity myself, not to mention a break on prices.  

Im also wondering how the pacing will feel, now that I have a better sense of how the movie is structured.  




> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _Natiri's copper earrings tarnish over the course of the movie._


A detail only a metalworker would have noticed.        :Small Tongue: 

But it speaks to the attention to fine details throughout.  And also leaves me wondering if this is Navi work, and if so whether they have basic metallurgy.  It would make sense to leave this off-screen in the first movie, to emphasize the difference between cultures, but now Im wondering if there arent Navi smiths out there somewhere.




> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _But since this one doesn't try to be a satisfying stand alone, it, on its own, leaves things hanging. Which is good, I'm pumped for a sequel._


Same here.  Im wondering if theyll age everyone by a few years, or if the sequel will pick up the next day.  I could see it working either way, depending on how long it takes for Blue Quaritch to recover and regroup.




> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _The only other big budget thing I saw was The Batman, which I quite liked._


Saw this at home, in retrospect could have done without it. 

Much as I love the Avatar-verse, I also wish we could have a big-screen vision of non-FTL exploration of nearby stars.  Avatar has a very specific message, and while I dont disagree with that message, I also feel theres enough spaceboth cosmic and conceptualfor other stories involving other approaches to exploration and settlement.

----------


## warty goblin

> Glad you were able to get a second viewing.  Still waiting for the opportunity myself, not to mention a break on prices.  
> 
> Im also wondering how the pacing will feel, now that I have a better sense of how the movie is structured.


I thought it much better paced the second time through. It felt much more coherent and unified overall. 




> A detail only a metalworker would have noticed.       
> 
> But it speaks to the attention to fine details throughout.  And also leaves me wondering if this is Navi work, and if so whether they have basic metallurgy.  It would make sense to leave this off-screen in the first movie, to emphasize the difference between cultures, but now Im wondering if there arent Navi smiths out there somewhere.


I was really impressed when I saw it. I also thought it was a really nice bit of subtle character development for Natiri, who is clearly not thriving or engaging with the ocean tribes like Jake and the kids are. Copper will naturally green up regardless of the environment, so her earrings going green is as much a statement that she isn't caring for them as it is about where she is.

There's a reasonable amount of Navi metalwork throughout both films if you look closely, though it's all jewelry as far as I can tell. My guess is that this is native work, using naturally occurring copper ingots. It's a big jump from that to smelting metals from ore, and I can't think of any Navi uses of fired pottery, which is generally thought to be the stepping stone to smelting. 




> Same here.  Im wondering if theyll age everyone by a few years, or if the sequel will pick up the next day.  I could see it working either way,


I'm guessing a pretty immediate weeks to months gap myself. They've already filmeda bunch of the next movie, and there's no need for a big time gap now. The humans are still very much on Pandora, and unlike the first movie they haven't really even taken a major loss.  





> Much as I love the Avatar-verse, I also wish we could have a big-screen vision of non-FTL exploration of nearby stars.  Avatar has a very specific message, and while I dont disagree with that message, I also feel theres enough spaceboth cosmic and conceptualfor other stories involving other approaches to exploration and settlement.


I'd definitely be down for more hard-ish sci fi at the movies. Seems unlikely to happen anytime soon though.

----------


## Palanan

> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _There's a reasonable amount of Navi metalwork throughout both films if you look closely, though it's all jewelry as far as I can tell. My guess is that this is native work, using naturally occurring copper ingots. It's a big jump from that to smelting metals from ore, and I can't think of any Navi uses of fired pottery, which is generally thought to be the stepping stone to smelting._


I know less than I should about copperworking, to the point Im not sure of the proper term for hammering ingots.

As far as pottery, the Navi seem not to have agriculture, not even so much as a vegetable garden, so they wouldnt have much need for a storage solution.  




> Originally Posted by *warty goblin*
> _I'm guessing a pretty immediate weeks to months gap myself. They've already filmeda bunch of the next movie, and there's no need for a big time gap now. The humans are still very much on Pandora, and unlike the first movie they haven't really even taken a major loss._


Makes sense, and RDA will be reacting to its losses sooner rather than later.  Given the value of amrita, it seems clear losing even one harvester will have an impact, to say nothing of an elite combat squad.

*Spoiler*
Show

Did any of Blue Quaritchs team survive?  Offhand I cant recall, but it makes me wonder what hes going to do for a squad when he comes looking for payback.  Given the expense of growing avatars, it seems unlikely theyd have backups for the backups.

----------


## warty goblin

> I know less than I should about copperworking, to the point Im not sure of the proper term for hammering ingots.
> 
> As far as pottery, the Navi seem not to have agriculture, not even so much as a vegetable garden, so they wouldnt have much need for a storage solution.


Copper, along with silver and gold, occurs naturally in essentially pure form; there are places where you can literally just pick up lumps of nearly pure metal. This stuff is entirely workable as-is, and a where available otherwise stone-using societies generally developed metalworking. Thus for instance Aztec gold, but also copper spear points around the Great Lakes.

There are basically three modes of working copper, silver and gold. Cold hammering, use of heat to soften the metal, and full liquification and casting. Copper in particular work hardens quite a lot, so it's extremely useful to be able to anneal the metal and draw down the hardness, this can be done by heating to a dull red, cooling to below visible radiance, then quenching in water. Since fully annealed copper is extremely soft, there's not a lot of reason to deal with forging it hot. 

Fully liquifying any of these metals is difficult,  you need temperatures of about 2000 F. This can be achieved with charcoal and good draft control, but you also need vessels to contain the metal, which have to be ceramic or stone, nothing organic survives those temperatures. Metal casting is therefore a later development, although one that allows creation of more complex forms. 

My guess is that the Navi are using naturally occurring copper ingots, and cold-hammering them into ornaments. This would be a quite sensible use of small pieces of elemental copper, and I suspect the results would be extremely valuable, which is why you only really see them worn by people of rank. On Earth people also made spear points and other hunting tools or weapons, but given how soft even work hardened copper is, and the well armored nature of Pandoran wildlife, the sharper points attainable with stone probably just work better.

Food storage is a problem that predates agriculture, any place that experiences substantial fluctuations in available food will incentivize storing excess. But the Navi, or at least the tribes we've seen, live in tropical areas where there doesn't seem to be much in the way of seasonal fluctuations. And they clearly have a highly sophisticated basketry tradition. 




> Makes sense, and RDA will be reacting to its losses sooner rather than later.  Given the value of amrita, it seems clear losing even one harvester will have an impact, to say nothing of an elite combat squad.
> 
> *Spoiler*
> Show
> 
> Did any of Blue Quaritchs team survive?  Offhand I cant recall, but it makes me wonder what hes going to do for a squad when he comes looking for payback.  Given the expense of growing avatars, it seems unlikely theyd have backups for the backups.


I think they all died.

----------


## The Hellbug

> *Spoiler*
> Show
> 
> Did any of Blue Quaritchs team survive?  Offhand I cant recall, but it makes me wonder what hes going to do for a squad when he comes looking for payback.  Given the expense of growing avatars, it seems unlikely theyd have backups for the backups.


*Spoiler: Just my personal prediction*
Show

I don't think Quaritch will be the primary antagonist going forward, not for the next movie at least.  His conflict with the main cast is essentially entirely personal, and I bet that the higher-ups over at colonization-hq will probably decide to at least leave him on the bench (if there isn't greater disciplinary action coming his way) that based on this disaster.  He'll continue to be an antagonist, but he'll need to figure out a way to consolidate power for himself again before he can resume his crusade against Sully and co.  In fact, based on his relationship with Spider so far, I wouldn't be surprised if, by the end of it all, he doesn't end up unintentionally doing some sort of good for the protagonists.  Not redemption, per se--the guy's a terrible, vindictive, violent person and that'll never change--but I wouldn't put it past this kind of story to have him leaving a small positive mark (not enough to balance all the bad he's done, mind) on the world in some way, even if it's just through Spider.

----------


## gbaji

> Much as I love the Avatar-verse, I also wish we could have a big-screen vision of non-FTL exploration of nearby stars.  Avatar has a very specific message, and while I dont disagree with that message, I also feel theres enough spaceboth cosmic and conceptualfor other stories involving other approaches to exploration and settlement.


I also prefer hard(er) sci fi. It's tricky to do this outside of interplanetary stuff though. And honestly, even that is rarely done "well" on the big screen. Most treat the science as a side thing to be cast aside when inconvenient. I could write an entire (verbose of course!) post just comparing "Red Planet" and "Mission to Mars" (which both came out around the same time IIRC). Then you have stuff where the story takes place in space, but really isn't about it. Solaris, Event Horizon, and that awful one where they're trying to restart the sun or somesuch. And yeah, even more if we're just talking Earth/moon region.

The problem with interstellar stories without some form of FTL is that you are pretty much forced to either do a story about something happening on the ship along the way (Passengers, Pandorum for a couple right off the top of my head), or you have to have the entire story be "when we get there". And honestly, I'm struggling to think of even one big screen film using that as a premise at all. When it takes decades (or longer) to get somewhere, it doesn't make for a great story. At least, not the journey itself.

And frankly, both of those forms of story are going to tend towards focusing on whatever action/events are going on within the environment and not much about the method by which they arrived there. It would be great to see something like this, but I can totally see why film writers and producers would tend to shy away. The very thing that makes it great science, is what makes it poor fiction. You can do the same "on the way" story using FTL, if it's "slowish" (like say Alien), or if there's some accident that strands them, while leaving you as a writer with options for future stories with the same characters if you want to (never underestimate the economic math of film production and contracts). Same deal with a "when they get there" story.

I would personally love to see a film (or series) version of Forever War. Technically FTL, but also kinda not (no time passes for the people traveling, but time does pass for everyone else). You'd have to modify some of the outmoded science in there if you wanted to make it actually pass hard science muster (there's some serious problems with the whole method of travel as written). But they could easily get around that. Unfortunately, it looks like that's been stuck in development for 6 years or so. I'm also a bit jaded, so basically assume they'll probably do to it what they did to Starship Troopers or something worse. I've just learned to never underestimate the ability of Hollywood to totally screw up any source material they start with to fit some egotistical "vision" that doesn't make a lick of sense.

Eh. The Expanse was good though. Not a film. And not interstellar travel. But quite good from a hard(ish) science pov (alien tech doesn't follow rules, but all the human stuff does, and is done well, except for a couple of mistakes along the way).

----------


## Captain Cap

> The problem with interstellar stories without some form of FTL is that you are pretty much forced to either do a story about something happening on the ship along the way (Passengers, Pandorum for a couple right off the top of my head), or you have to have the entire story be "when we get there".


*Spoiler*
Show

Well, technically Pandorum is more akin to the second kind  :Small Big Grin:

----------


## Bohandas

> The problem with interstellar stories without some form of FTL is that you are pretty much forced to either do a story about something happening on the ship along the way (Passengers, Pandorum for a couple right off the top of my head), or you have to have the entire story be "when we get there".


As opposed to?

"along the way" and "when we get there"  pretty much covers the entire scope of possibilities (unless you also include "before we leave" and "after we get back)





> I would personally love to see a film (or series) version of Forever War. Technically FTL, but also kinda not (no time passes for the people traveling, but time does pass for everyone else).


I'm pretty sure that that's basically what would really happen if you were traveling at near light speed (altgough reaching that speed in a timely manner without being crushed by g-forces would be a problem)

----------


## gbaji

> *Spoiler*
> Show
> 
> Well, technically Pandorum is more akin to the second kind


That's true. Though I guess the viewer doesn't know that, and honestly it kinda doesn't matter (it's still more or less a "while we're on the ship" story).




> As opposed to?
> 
> "along the way" and "when we get there"  pretty much covers the entire scope of possibilities (unless you also include "before we leave" and "after we get back)


As opposed to "go here and do X, then fly over to somewhere else and do Y, then stop off at yet another location for Z". With FTL in a story, the characters can easily move from one world to another, all in the same story, during the same film. They can be on the ship. Then off the ship at some world. Then back on the ship traveling. Then back off the ship at yet another world. You can't do that once you slow things down. I was answering the question as to why so many films which feature interstellar travel also include some form of FTL. Right?

If you don't have FTL in your story, you are limited to "on the ship" and "when we arrive" stories, just due to time involved. The time frame involved precludes any single story that includes people getting on a ship, travelling somewhere, then getting off the ship and doing things there. You can do that, but it's in "jumps", with some form of sleep pods or something involved (ie: nothing happens in between "got on the ship" and either "got off the ship" or "something happened on the way"). I didn't include "before we leave" because if that's the story, then the ship isn't really a part of the story, but just an endpoint.

I mean, you *can* do these sorts of stories, but it's difficult and thus why it's not done often.




> I'm pretty sure that that's basically what would really happen if you were traveling at near light speed (altgough reaching that speed in a timely manner without being crushed by g-forces would be a problem)


Yeah. And while Haldemen is vague about the specifics, it's pretty clear that by using normal thrust to achieve near light speed, they "jump" to another location at great distance. One of the technical problems is that the relativistic effects are stated/assumed to be from the time spent accelerating to and from near light speed (the actual jumps are by entering the gravity well of a "collapsar" at just under light speed, so black hole sort of thing?). The problem with the stated explanation is that time dilation effects should be constant no matter how far you "jump". Yet, that doesn't seem to be the case in the story itself (farther jumps cause more time differential). So I've always interpreted it that the actual jump itself just propelled the ship to actual light speed, meaning zero time passes between point A and point B for those travelilng, but for everyone else, it takes time based on the speed of light travel between the points.  And of course, if you don't aim yourself just right to intersect with another "collapsar" somewhere else to brake you back to "normal" speeds, you're particles zipping along for eternity I guess.

It's an interesting form of FTL (ish?). And the core aspect is that time keeps moving, so those on the ships always arrive back at a homeworld that is constantly changing over the increasingly long time periods involved as the war moves ever more distant. Not surprising to have this theme given Haldeman's experiences during the Viet Nam conflict (lots of culture shock for returning vets). Also introduced is the concept that the farther from your home planet you fight at, the closer to the enemy's home planet you are, so they've had more "time" to advance technologically. Not surprisingly (again, given his experience with war), Haldeman introduces this as a more or less "unwinnable war" because of this effect.

The only problem from a pure science technical pov, is that these jumps required "collapsars". So it's unclear where these actually are. Black holes (which is what I'm assuming they're supposed to be, although again the descriptions aren't quite an exact match) aren't that common, yet they seem to jump out of our solar system and into other solar systems, as though just about every system has one of these (or one close enough to get there in a reasonable time). There also seems to be some alignment requirements and restrictions, so it's somehwat like a network of connected jump points one has to learn to navigate over time (which is also an interesting way to include FTL, while also limiting it in ways that warp drive and hyperspace models don't, which I like from a storytelling/worldbuilding pov).

The best solution (but also not a "hard science" one) is to change the jump points to something else, naturally occuring in space, not something with other effects like a black hole, but floating around outside normal solar limits in most systems. It's workable, with a little tweaking.

Yeah. I've spent a little time thinking about how this could be made into a reasonable film/series, while preserving the core themes, but fitting better into more modern understandings of physics. Heck. Even just the setting is interesting enough to warrant examination from a sci-fi point of view. Again though, I cringe when I think about how Hollywood would most likely treat the material.

----------


## Ramza00

The movie is actually good in a consistent heavily processed kind of way.

----------


## Murk

I managed to see this as well and I was very disappointed. 

I feel this one focused way too much on the story. And the story was lacking. 

I say that as someone who very much enjoyed the first Avatar. That one also lacked a good story, but for me that was _the point_. It was a beautiful world and everything else - plot, characters, music - was purposely toned down so as not to distract from the thing that really mattered.

I saw a solid youtube video (from channel _sideways_) about the original Avatar soundtrack - how the soundtrack team was told to make alien sounding music and given a massive budget. So the team dived deep into music theory and took inspiration from less common musical cultures and they came up with a very unique otherworldy soundtrack, and James Cameron listened to it and said "Very nice, now make it simpler." 
And that seems to have been the method used for all of the first Avatar. They also had a ridiculous amount of worldbuilding done with no impact on the movie whatsoever, because they made a conscious choice to make everything simpler and more standard. They focused on the visuals and toned everything else down. 

For me that's not a criticism. I think it worked out well. The plot and characters and worldbuilding and soundtrack were all _passable_. They weren't bad enough to annoy. But they also weren't good enough to distract from what was great. So I left the theater with my head full of beautiful visuals without any of my thoughts being taken up by less important things. 

I remember later thinking _Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them_ should have used this strategy: to focus on amazing fantasy creatures and have a simple, passable story on the side.
Instead, that franchise put the focus on their (mediocre) plot and (mediocre) characters, which distracted from the fantasy creatures so much that the whole thing sucked. 

And Avatar 2 did the same, unfortunately. They took their passable characters and passable plot and made it the focal point of a movie. Instead of a great world with beautiful vistas I got to watch an hour of unimaginative no-stakes gun fights, teenager bully drama, and like half an hour of unimaginative no-stakes ship sinking. 

There were some great parts! The parts where the world and the culture got to shine through without being bothered by the stupid plot were great. Like, the first ten minutes. Very good. And some parts inbetween when the team gets to discover the underwater world. I liked Sigourney Weaver's character, who actually still had that sense of discovery and mysticism. 

But that's not what the movie focused on. Instead of giving me _more_ of those great parts, they decided to focus on the mediocre plot and mediocre characters, and it sucked. I think if I left halfway through I would have thought "not bad". Sitting it out till the end moved it firmly into "terrible".

----------

