Entry tags:
Avatar
I think I can explain what I didn't like about Avatar enough without spoiling anything.
I liked the protagonist (mostly) and I liked the graphics.
But I feel like this is James Cameron's "I just watched an anime and now I'm going to make a movie!"
I cringed with apprehension in the first 5 minutes, and the loosened up over the next 30. By the end I was shuddering repeatedly with James Cameron's self-righteousness.
This movie could also be titled, OMG GEORGE BUSH IS SO EVIL! I WILL SPEND $300,000,000 TO EXPLAIN WHY!!
There could be a lot of interesting discussion on bodies in this movie, and obviously race. I look forward to the response of fandom.
I recommend the write-up by
nihilistic_kid, although it spoils everything if you're concerned about things like that.
Overall: It was not as squicky as I thought it would be, but I was underwhelmed/annoyed by the heavy-handedness and refusal to go a lot deeper.
I liked the protagonist (mostly) and I liked the graphics.
But I feel like this is James Cameron's "I just watched an anime and now I'm going to make a movie!"
I cringed with apprehension in the first 5 minutes, and the loosened up over the next 30. By the end I was shuddering repeatedly with James Cameron's self-righteousness.
This movie could also be titled, OMG GEORGE BUSH IS SO EVIL! I WILL SPEND $300,000,000 TO EXPLAIN WHY!!
There could be a lot of interesting discussion on bodies in this movie, and obviously race. I look forward to the response of fandom.
I recommend the write-up by
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Overall: It was not as squicky as I thought it would be, but I was underwhelmed/annoyed by the heavy-handedness and refusal to go a lot deeper.
no subject
no subject
It did seem like a lot of people hated it before even seeing it, which is partly why I went to form my own opinion.
It'll be interesting to see if it ends up being profitable for Cameron or not.
I did enjoy myself through most of the film....it's always the negative aspects that are most easy for me to articulate.
no subject
no subject
no subject
To be fair, though the CGI of blue people to humans, of landscape to crawling military machines was quite seamless, and impressive. Leaps and bounds ahead of Final Fantasy/Advent Children/etc.
no subject
But this is different. I don't like when people try to mix animation styles (hand-drawn with CGI) or live action with animation. I don't think they mesh well, and it's jarring. It also feels, to me, to be a bit half-assed. The company uses whichever is easiest, and when it stops being easiest, they switch to something else. If they wanted to use animation, they should have used it through the whole production--but they couldn't do that, because then it would be an animated film, and fewer people would go watch it. So really, it's done for money.
Using CGI is like using gold lame in a costume. You have to go very easy with it, or it looks like you tried too hard.
no subject
no subject
I mean, there were other things I liked about it. I like the animation, the art direction, the creatures and plants. I loved Michelle Rodriguez and Sigourney Weaver.
I'm still mulling over the disability portrayals, because I think it wasn't as bad as it could have been, but it was still problematic: it's assumed that no human would want to give up their body and take on the Avatar body unless the human body was already broken or damaged. Which places the human body, in a subtle way, as superior to the Na'vi body, and presents disabled or injured bodies as disposable. It also emphasizes a mind/body disconnect, the idea that brains are separate from bodies. There is some good food for thought there, that I will continue to chew on, and I wish the movie had gotten into that more, and laid off all the colonialism and war crap.
no subject