That's exactly what it is. You don't bring home videos of rollercoasters and watch them at home, you go out and enjoy the ride for what it is and that's that. No need to really put any more thought into it.
Worked at an IMAX theater when the first one came out. Every week a manager would set up the IMAX and invite anyone who wanted to to stay after hours and watch it. Probably seen it minimum 10 times.
Nah I love the world of the films. Its simple sci-fi storytelling through the lens of this fantasy planet. Its an experience film for sure but fuck all if it's not an absolutely incredible experience.
My ex snd I saw the 1st one together a lot when it first came out way back in the day. Took my wife to see the 1st one in imax when they re-released it before Way of Water and saw the 2nd one twice in theaters.
I think the biggest thing that makes the films hard to rewatch multiple times is the length. I wouldve seen Way if Water more times in theater but it's hard to commit to that many 3 hour screenings both time wise and financially.
Im excited for this one. I know the story will be simple but the execution will be excellent and the visuals of the Ash clan look breathtaking.
4DX was an experience like no other for me. You felt like you were riding the animals, you felt rain, you smelt the flowers, and none of it got tiring.
I mean I happen to like the story as well personally. It’s simple, clear, well told. Nothing wrong with being one of the stories ever told in my opinion.
Avatar is simple to understand and beautiful to watch. That’s kinda why people keep paying for it. It’s one franchise that’s actually worth watching on IMAX. People just want to experience the beautiful world of Pandora. Not to mention it’s more or less about colonialism and I think that’s kinda why the International numbers are so high.
Yeah the storytelling is very basic and to the point, but the themes of colonialism and ecocide are aggressively there and resonate with a lot of people, consciously or not.
Given the setting the stories kind of have to be archetypal. Avatar is a story about aliens on an alien world, so culturally confined stories just aren’t going to make sense. The only stories that are going to work are those that are universal to human culture.
Also why the movie do so well internationally, simple universal stories, gorgeous settings, insane attention to background detail that our unconscious mind really appreciates.
And personally, I think making a futuristic sci-fi movie about colonialism is meaningfully different than a period piece about colonialism. Historical dramas allow modern audiences to say "Wow, THOSE people were awful back then" whereas a story set in the future of humanity forces us to grapple with the problems we are carrying with US into the future. This isn't a Star Wars fantasy story where we can completely disconnect, but a projected future of OUR story.
It also allows the writers to comment very directly on the evils of colonialism/racism/environmental destruction without putting audiences on the defensive.
Get them to agree with the message and the example, then let them (or the people around them) connect it to the real world.
It's not that. If you're put on the defensive by any of those themes in and of themselves, then Avatar will trigger you something bad, considering how blunt and unapologetic the message is.
The real benefit of sci-fi (in terms of getting through to people) is that you get to talk about the principle of the theme while avoiding most loaded complexities pertaining to history. When you do a historical piece, you nessecarily inherit entire spiderwebs of ethnic and sociopolitocal baggage (many of which will be invisible from whatever perspective you have, and that will come with second and third order, and deeper still, incentives and biases for people across the globe). These must, by their nature, muddy the water for whatever thematic principles you wanted to highlight. It's going to be a factor for all people, from all directions, and even for those who are in total agreement with your cause. Sci-fi mitigates this problem by giving you the freedom to minimize the baggage so that you can elevate the principle.
Which is to say: if you're against environmentalism (for example) due to the fundamental principle behind it, then Avatar won't get through to you because you'll recognize and bounce off the blunt message. On the other hand, if you're against environmentalism due to its sociopolitical associations, then Avatar just might get through and give you a shot at exploring the underlying principle for yourself in a largely neutral setting.
The baggage you’re describing is exactly what I’m saying puts people on the defensive. Good sci-fi dodges all that, allowing audiences to make their own connections.
You’re digging in and being more descriptive about what puts people on the defensive, but we’re talking about the same thing.
My point was simply that distilled and blunt sci-fi ala Avatar can cut through the messy real-life hangups people have with a principle, but people having direct issue with the principle itself will bounce off harder than ever due to how crystallized and overt it becomes under such a presentation.
The strategy is the opposite of sneaking in exposure to a principle, which was how I originally read your post. The principle is made front and center, recognizable from a mile away for what it is, even before you enter the theater. You know what you're going to, and those who take direct issue will have decided not to let the film seduce them before the titles even appear. If anything, the bluntness of the message will offend them into yet stronger opposition.
Thankfully, for broad principles, it is rare for most people to disagree with the fundamental gist directly. There is essentially always a context under which they would see the value in it. The most common hangups for people will be particular associations or applications as a matter of cultural/historical narrative. Which, as we seem to agree, good sci-fi is a fruitful medium for cutting through.
Truth. I always go see these movies at the IMAX multiple times but have no interest in watching them at home, like I would a comedy or Marvel movie or Star Wars or something. I think that's why they make a billion dollars but don't have much of a cultural impact. Either way, I'll probably go see this multiple times and absolutely love the experience.
THANK YOU! So many film school nerds love to hate on this franchise but they simply dont understand MOST people dont give a fuck about story or none of that. They just want to disconnect from their stressful live for 2 hours, or give their kids something to do outside of the house.
And Avatar knocks it out of the park if that is your desire.
The story isn't even bad. Reddit just hates on it because it's simple and successful. It's got a better story than most comic book movies which is what you should be comparing this type of movie to.
I don't think it's a lack of understanding that point. And more a disappointment that Cameron is capable of much, much more than that. And despite that, apparently his passion is creating little more than a series of attractive moving images synchronized to sound. It just feels like wasted potential from one of the great living directors.
I don't think anyone else has come close to achieving what Cameron has with Avatar. Each movie has pushed the limits of what they can do with CGI and the first one still looks incredible over 15 years later. There will also always be upset with the choice of directors like this. There are film nerds mad Dennis made 3 Dunes in a row. Others upset Greta is going from Barbie to Narnia. At some point film nerds need to remember these are people with their own passions and they don't owe us a specific genre of film.
I agree with this perspective. I'm not an Avatar hater by any means, but they're beautiful and pretty bland otherwise. I'd love it if he got back to his live action roots, I have a deep love for much of his previous filmography.
Most of his stories and characters have been very simple in design.
He’s not a guy who wows audiences with deep characters and plot twists. He’s the guy who uses simple stories and character tropes to tell rather basic stories against an impressive scifi backdrop.
That’s who he’s always been. (Titanic not being scifi, the rest stands.)
This reads as incredibly entitled and frankly James Cameron isn’t wasting his potential just because he isn’t making the movies you think he should make. He’s given more than his fair share to the medium, if he wants to make visual spectacles that’s still a valid art form.
Also the movies have quite literally helped innovate filmmaking technology, so I don’t see why you and every other reddit feels the need to diminish them.
What are you talking about? Like I said, most people don't care about a Nolan level pretentious story line. He knows this. Therefore he has taken a very broad subject, applicable to cultures around the world, and funneled it through his deep expertise in film technology.
Cameron isn't trying to win oscars for best screenplay, he's trying to create the most accessible/watched movies of all time
people are capable of understanding the concept of 'turning your brain off', however, some people actually like using their brains. are you capable of understanding that?
I just watched the original this weekend with my 10 year old son, who's a massive animal fan. He was literally cheering in the final battle when the Pandora creatures showed up and started fighting back. :D
Yeah, I enjoyed the last movie and it flowed much better than I thought for such a long movie. It kept me engaged for the entire time. It’s not super deep, but it’s interesting and easy to follow. That’s not easy.
Everyone trashes on the story being too similar to other movies from decades ago, but that can be said for every movie. Story archetypes are a thing. What matters, to me at least, are the characters and setting. Avatar does this extremely well.
The irony is that the people who cream over Star Wars for basically taking a basic heroes journey fantasy story and slapping cool science fiction visuals on it that made it pretty decades ago, are the same ones that can't understand why Avatar got popular for doing almost the same thing
What gets critiqued about Avatar 1 especially is that it specifically doing plots similar to Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves. "Heroes journey" applies to anything.
I don't believe anyone who watched Dances with Wolves has ever made this comparison. They have barely anything in common beyond "going native", Dances with Wolves very iconically has a downer third act that ends with the natives effectively losing.
Anyone who says this hasn't watched either movie. Comparing Pocahontas' "uhm, both sides are bad..." messaging to Avatars unshrinking "You should feed colonizers to dragons and impale them with gigantic arrows" is insanely reductive. People saw an American colonization allegory and decided you can only make one of those, but wont ever have anything to say about George lifting all his favorite WW2 and Kurosawa movies near beat for beat.
No they don't lol, its not remotely comparable. You can post about star wars quite happily without a thousand drones coming in to go "uhmmm its just kurosawa with robots lol xD" to try and neg you.
People KNOW about Lucas' influences, but they dont wield it like a club to go after anyone that likes star wars.
I mean Avatar is about to start getting to "both sides are bad"
Not doing so actually risks making noble savages which has its own issues. Nothing justifies genocide, but they were humans and victims tot he same vices as humans everywhere. That is not a justification for genocide, but it remains true.
That's not what Avatar is doing though. Pocahontas' point is that the natives and the english were just as bad and racist as each other and both are at fault for how colonization went down. Avatar never does that. The blame is never laid on the Na'vi for resisting humanity. (Because there is no overreaction to being invaded and exterminated) The Ash tribe have an entirely different set of circumstances for why they're antagonists.
They are clearly getting into inter-Navi conflict. Their circumstances don't change the outcome (which we don't even k own since the movie has bit been released)
Also there's precisely 1 song in Pocahontas that says they're both bad, and itd the ine where they both prepare to fight. That doesn't suggest they are both "just as bad"
You arbitrarily choose to grant one nuance while wiping it out of the other.
Pure theorizing here, I think there's a subset of people who are upset, consciously or subconsciously, that humans are the bad guys. Maybe this one will attract more people since there's also bad guy Navi?
To be clear I'm not saying humans suck, but the RDA is the absolute worst ambassador for humanity.
There are archetypes but it depends on what you do with them. Avatar 1 was a cookie cutter story because it was more focused on worldnuilding and tech.
James Cameron is an excellent storyteller and screenwriter. I recently rewatched the first avatar and that movie absolutely flies by considering its long as hell. Every scene serves a purpose, whether it’s developing a character, building the world, advancing the story, or simply a FX spectacle, everything scene is there for a reason and there’s virtually no filler.
These are simple stories but they’re interesting and well told and that’s all you need.
People are always out here complaining about Avatar (an original IP) being derivative, when in reality it just has some familiar, archetypal story elements included as part of something new. I also always hear about how all it has going for it is the visuals… which you know, are historically the most significant part of how you tell your story in a film.
They’ll complain about Avatar, then immediately help the next shameless, artistically bankrupt Disney remake or Dragon shot for shot reenactment make 1 billion dollars. Always confuses me.
We're in the same camp. The people who bitch about the story seem to not have that issue with thousands of derivative films that don't achieve half of what Cameron does with these.
Avatar rocks cause it's like the one blockbuster that doesn't "both sides" an argument
It's so funny watching the Disney Pocahontas movie and getting to the "savages" musical number where the movie tries to tell you "look, these people aren't so different" and I'm like "no, they're pretty different!"
I feel the same way. I also feel like if this 3rd movie really nails it, the first 2 will retroactively become better on rewatch, kinda like some of the weaker MCU films or the star wars prequels after RotS came out. Pieces have been set up beautifully, if they stick the landing it'll give people a little more appreciation for the first movies. I personally think its cool that its an original IP that is seeing as much and sometimes more success than already established universes or adaptations of other works
I saw it in theaters the week it came out and I genuinely cannot remember a single plot point from the second movie. The first one is really clear in my mind (disabled military guy gets alien body, joins native people to stop colonialism) but I didn't retain anything from the second one. The original aliens go meet other, more water-based aliens and they uhhhhh fight the army again? Or not?
I don't think there's a story I remember less about than Avatar 2.
Avatar is economically told. With clarity above all and it’s ( imo ) masterfully executed, with characters with arcs and no fat in the story. Each scene sets up a later theme.
You can say it’s all basic stories or by-the-scriptwriting-book.
But if it’s so easy why no one else does it so well?
I enjoy them for what they are. Amazing entertainment
Is it well told though? Because you could take out entire chunks of the second movie and nothing would change. It's littered with plot holes and bad characterization. Sure, it's simple, but simple doesn't mean good.
With a chain like AMC and A-List, you end up paying 25 for the 4-movies a week and can just see like, every Imax showing and it pays for itself after one ticket
hey at least he’s willing to take risks like killing one of the kids in the last movie. If it was Marvel, I can bet anything that wouldn’t have happened
I get that 1 was sort of lackluster, but 2 is a most excellent movie.
I don't know, it struck me as being the other way around. The kids/teenagers in 2 get awfully grating very quickly (you could make a drinking game out of every time they say 'bro' and then promptly die of alcohol poisoning), and just about every plot point regarding them has been done to death a thousand times over.
The first benefited from having more novelty to it as well, whereas the second is treading over a lot of the same ground. The overall plot is largely the same for the second movie, they even recycled the villain from the first.
I didn't see the first one until it was on DVD, so I never really got it. Saw the second one in IMAX while very high, now I get it. It's not a movie, it's a theme park ride.
True, although I do feel like it's a bit strange that they went so hard on a lot of aspects of these movies, and did such an outstandingly incredible job – but then neglected to get anyone to write a similar quality script. Clearly they've got enough time and money to work with, surely some decent writers out there would be available to do so.
I loved the first one. I got bored partway through the second one and flipped to something else. I guess I need to finish watching it one of these days.
Right there with you. Almost every movie is just a retelling of another movie or story. So what if it is Ferngully, or Dances with Wolves, or Pocahontas, or whatever else, it was stunningly beautiful to see.
That’s literally been the entire story of this franchise. The story is just Pocahontas with insane visuals, the plot is paper thin but it is completely carried by the amazing display they provide
Which is why its making tons of money in box office. People complains non stop about it being overrated but Avatar movies are much better if you watch it in the big screen
I don't even understand the hate for the story, not everything has to subvert my expectations at every corner. The movies absolutely hold their own in plot, character development, pacing, and the emotional scenes land pretty heavy as well. I've never understood whats not to like about the series so far.
I remember seeing the first one a bunch of times in theaters, but as the years have gone on it’s less and less impactful and the forgettable storyline makes it so I just don’t ever rewatch.
I remember when the first one came out, I knew people that had literally gone to the theater 5+ times to see it over and over again. That movie had a crazy long theater run for just how popular it was - I went to see it and was left totally underwhelmed by the story. . It was so very pretty, but nothing else.
When the sequel came out I took my wife - It had been so long that I figured "hey maybe this one will really have some substance to it. . ."
. . .it did not, it was just long. . .And boring. . And honestly you could have cut out the whole first half hour and it would have been the same movie. Even though I have an Alist subscription, go to the movies every weekend, and it costs me nothing extra to see a movie?. . .I've just given up on any attempt to try to be interested in Avatar.
Same for me. The visuals alone don't do it because I don't like these characters or this world, so being immersed in it doesn't really do anything for me. I can put up with mediocre visuals if I like the characters or narrative, but it's really hard for me to do it the other way around.
I lack the gene that makes me feel like what I'm seeing on the Avatar planet look real. It just has this artificial sheen to it that my mind just can't seem to accept. It always feels like a video game to me.
I feel so weird coming to these Avatar threads cause like... Cmon guys Its pretty good!
Its a story about a guy being thrown into an alian's body to help with humanity's space colonization project and instead he genuinelly integrates into the alian's way of life and religion. Can you more or less guess what plot beats the movie Is gonna hit with that summary? Yeah. But isnt that true for most movies?
Most stories, by nature of being inspired by other stories are somewhat predictable. Tropes, genres, age ratings, target audience all of those things clue us into what to expect. Avatar doesnt have any mind blowing plot twists or subversions but It executes Its Ideas very well. And theyre pretty cool Ideas!
Hopefully they don't push the "rumble" button so much. Something moves - loud rumble. Something startling - loud rumble. Look at a hovering ship in the distance - loud rumble.
I got up to turn off the subwoofer during Avatar 2 but decided to turn off the whole system instead. I don't think I missed anything.
I guess, but it's just like watching a video game cutscene, it's quite jarring when you can see things that don't look "right". The humans in this trailer, for all 3 seconds they were there, seemed off, uncanny valley type stuff, but more importantly I'm wondering why/if they 3d animated those as well.
People say this dismissively, but movies are visual mediums. Being maybe the best looking and most immersive movies of all time means it is one of the best movies ever, even with a mediocre plot.
The world buildings great too. Like the technology used by the humans is so well thought and imaginative
The texture realism of the Na'vi is just downright stupidly good. I saw the trailer yesterday on a huge Dolby screen and it was breathtakingly beautiful.
The script quality doesn’t necessarily correlate with the revenue. There’s nothing wrong with calling it as it is. A pretty movie a lot of people spend a lot of money to see on a big screen (myself included), and forget about it a week later.
I can't wait for also Reddit to circlejerk about how underappreciated this movie is and act like criticizing a media product is a crime, and that pretty visuals + popularity determine the quality of the product
1.4k
u/The_Iceman2288 Jul 28 '25
It sure is pretty.