TV Tropes Org
site search
Avatar back to reviews
Comments
Preachy. Annoying, Stupid...
But with good effects. I know, you have probably heard TONS of reviews like this, but that is what this movie is. A lame, annoying, preachy, and manipulative story with 1 dimensional, unlikeable characters, but with good effects. Good effects are not always enough to save a movie, best demonstrated here. Ok, let me explain, lets start with the story: Like I just said, it is lame and cliched. It tells the most overused story ever told, where the Imperialist assholes come down looking for land and oi- I mean, Unobtanium, and have to use violent methods to remove the local population. The characters are even worse. I will admit there is 1 or 2 good performances, and 1 REALLY entertaining, yet terrible one (you know who I am talking about), but no actor could've worked with this material. The characters literally have no depth, they exist only to do what the plot demands, even if it makes no sense to their motivations. None of them go beyond their cimple stereotype, and that bothers me. As for the themes, well... They, like the rest of the movie, are annoying, overused, lazy, and preachy beyond all belief. I hate these movies exclusively invested in making me feel guilty as an American, because of all the horrible things that my ancestors did to the native Americans and the blacks. I get it, they were bad people and I should feel bad, so shut up about it. But the native Americans were not perfect either, what with the Aztecs sacrificing hundreds of people on a temple, or pretty much every tribe executing war crimes. The Na'vi are supposed to be perfect too, but like the native americans, you easily notice they are not. Just look at the "itjustbugsme" page, under the broken aesop category, that explains it better than I can. Now, I know I have been bashing this movie a lot just now, but the movie is not god-awful. It is mediocre, but its not bad, it has some good performances (especially from the guy who played Quartich and the girl who played the girl Na'vi, I dont even remember her name) and the effects are fantastic. But its not a masterpiece, despite what many say, and that is why I hate this movie so much, not because of the film itself (well, that too...) but because it was advertised and hyped up as being a masterpiece. Its not. Its just OK, so just go watch it once, then never again. Its not worth sitting though it for more viewings. C-.
By my own observations, Avatar is mostly called "stupid" by stupid people))) For example, the story is told from the 1st person (Jake's) POV, it's literally his log we're watching, that's why most characters "have no depth" - because STORYTELLER WASN'T INTERESTED IN THEM (except, guess it, Quaritch and Navi girl you mentioned))) So it's not "stupid", in fact it's clever and realistic; but not understanding such simple things IS stupid)))
comment #3694 78.40.231.89 2nd Aug 10
No, it's just stupid. Sorry to burst your bubble.
comment #3742 LostHero 4th Aug 10
Yeah.
comment #3743 Darkmane 4th Aug 10
Whatever. So "not understanding such simple things is JUST stupid". Be my guest.
comment #3744 78.40.231.89 4th Aug 10
It looks you just brought that up out of nowhere to justify bad story telling. So I can make a horrible movie with flat characters as long as I put like 2 vlog scenes and some narrations of the main character?
comment #3775 CP/FMfan 6th Aug 10
Oh, i'm sure you can make unbelievably horrible movie, seeing how much you don't understand things you're talking about)) But i doubt anyone can earn billions on horrible movie)))
comment #3777 78.40.231.89 6th Aug 10
Anyone can, as long as they dress it up with $150 million in CGI. Look at Revenge Of The Fallen. Or Spiderman 3. Or Troy.

But I suppose those were all Oscar-worthy movies to you because you're the only one who "understood" them....

Fuckin' Uwe Boll could earn a billion dollars if he was given a #300 million budget and Weta Digital / Joe Letteri to work on the goddamn graphics.
comment #3778 Darkmane 7th Aug 10
Ok, I see comparable (and even bigger) budgets, but NO BILLIONS earned. And you fail your box-office research forever.
comment #3789 78.40.231.89 7th Aug 10
None of them had Letteri heading the CGI team. Also, you left out the extra $150 million in advertising.

Psst...the movie's still stupid.
comment #3797 Darkmane 8th Aug 10
LOL, you were actually expecting an original and deep story. Like going to a Michael Bay movie and NOT expecting explosions and hot chicks drowning the plot. I hope you didn't go and see Titanic for the actual love story in it.
comment #3799 67.180.209.236 8th Aug 10
Lovely Bones and Jack Frost had Letteri)) Also, i left out marketing budgets for every film (there wasn't much difference)
comment #3803 78.40.231.89 8th Aug 10
Nah; everybody I know leeched it off the internet to see Kate Winslet's boobs. :P

And around here, "Kaette" means "fuck", so that was unbelievably fuckin' hilarious.

But hey, I understand some people get off on aliens, too, so that might explain something.
comment #3805 Darkmane 8th Aug 10
"Masterpiece" can mean many different things. The real hype problem is that people believe "masterpiece" means an all encompassing word. It's Cameron's script and his special effects. It's obvious which one he is a "master" at. Cameron has been given unanimous critical accolades for the art. This is why it's a "masterpiece". The movie was billed as a revolution in cinematic experience, not as a deep and brand spanking new story. The trailers should have been obvious in that aspect.
comment #3807 victorinox243 8th Aug 10
"Ok, I see comparable (and even bigger) budgets, but NO BILLIONS earned. And you fail your box-office research forever."

Okay, not stupid if 1) it has some vlogs and 2) it makes a lot of money. Got it.
comment #3815 depaderico 9th Aug 10
Jesus, this review reads like a guilt-rant. Somebody call the Whaaaaaaaahmbulance!
comment #4825 205.210.223.133 19th Oct 10
In order to post comments, you need to Get Known
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy