Showing posts with label james cameron. Show all posts
Showing posts with label james cameron. Show all posts

Dec 22, 2009

Avatar: Notes on a Second Viewing


Screened in 2D. Original review here.

As suspected, the 3D version of Avatar I experienced in IMAX on opening day was anything but the complete "immersion" that many have proclaimed in their hallelujahs of the film. (Granted, this might boil down to nothing more than a simple matter of personal preference, and my understanding is that anyone with either glasses or contacts is more likely to experience visual unpleasantries with the 3D Avatar.) Basking in the inviting - rather than imposing - environment of 2D, the ravishing landscape vistas and imaginative character/creature designs of Cameron's long-gestating baby were far more engaging to these eyes - viscerally, poetically, emotionally. That being said, I'm still not a fan of the work, and have to wonder if this is how the majority of Star Wars fans felt in the days and weeks after Episode I. On paper, there's certainly more to love than hate, but the experiential whole is still much, much less than the sum of the parts. Despite much in the way of considerable artistry, at the end of the day, I'd much rather play a truly immersive, Fallout 3-style videogame set on Pandora than slog through 160 minutes of the hands-off demo only to be left with blue balls.

Some films exhaust you out of sheer sensory overload or emotional experience, while others do so because they outstay their welcome. Avatar falls a little bit into both categories. Though certainly better off without the technology being so superficially flaunted (thankfully, the film avoids gimmicky 3D shots, but still), the fact remains that, once the novelty of the new toys wears off, there isn't much left in the way of either conceptual development or kinetic vigor to keep things afloat. As motion capture creations, the Na'vi are astonishingly real; once the initial amazement wears off, the blandness of the storytelling more readily rises to the surface. To these eyes, Cameron has always successfully juggled the dual sides of entertainment and substance until now, and while I was never one to go for the pre-release (hell, pre-production) Avatar Kool-Aid, the film still manages to set itself up for disappointment on virtually all fronts.


Much of Avatar suggests a work of nearly limitless potential having been watered down so as to appeal to a larger audience; that Titanic got away with a PG-13 rating was perhaps the greatest stunt ever pulled on the MPAA, whereas the relatively bloodless (figuratively and literally) Avatar instead plays into puritanical, family-friendly expectations. (I wouldn't go within four clicks of a fast food joint, but if the gluttony of tie-ins abound are any indication, you can probably get a Na'vi toy in your Happy Meal these days, natch.) This is particularly aggravating in that the film's anti-capitalist overtones are kept at a safe, whitewashed distance. In mounting so much around the historical trend of the developed exploiting the technologically inferior, the film trades almost exclusively in lip service, suggesting that Cameron was too timid to theoretically bite the hand that feeds him (this assumes he believes what he's selling us in the first place; Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith, WALL-E and Speed Racer all scrutinized similar notions of greed and justice to far more edifying ends, and each was loads more fun at that). Only the bravura sequence (spoilers ahead) in which the Na'vi's Hometree is destroyed (along with War of the Worlds, the most moving blockbuster evocation of 9/11 to date) does the film evoke a genuine sense of loss, fleeting though it may be.

Of all my second viewing fluctuations, I'm most pleased to say that the cast entire fares much better when not jumping off the screen like flimsy cardboard cutouts, which is to say that I no longer feel so ungodly embarrassed for the lot of them. On the page, Sam Worthington has less to work with here than in Terminator Salvation, but he proves an able everyman and gives the film most of what little dramatic resonance it has (here's to hoping this film boosts his career into the stratosphere). Cameron can't quite nail the one-liners like he used to, so moments of awkwardness abound even as the actors give it their all; only the delectable Stephen Lang, as the villainously single-minded Colonel, succeeds in creating a true characterization. In comparison, I'll take Lucas' prequels any day of the week, as those films' performances more acutely captured the archetypal B-movie essence at their respective cores - perhaps imperfect, but always feeling.


More so than a technical accomplishment, Avatar is a golden example of a director doing less with more, a trait exacerbated by the numerous instances in which it recalls his own Aliens - a film superior on every front, save possibly for makeup (personal preferences dictate that that film's model work and alien body suits outpace even the superb digital creations of Pandora and the Na'vi). Such overlapping elements - Sigourney Weaver, humanoid fighting machines, cartoonish military personalities - are largely superficial, but also point to more cardinal failures. A drag at 160 minutes, large stretches of Avatar actually demand a more leisurely pace so as to better absorb the sumptuous nuances of the world conceived for it. Even the most memorable of images often end up feeling like just another domino in the line of a plot too dusty to stand on its own two feet.

For a film so indebted to the dreamwalker experience, only two scenes - one involving a cluster of airborne, jellyfish-like creatures, the other witness to several Na'vi climbing Pandora's levitating mountain range - successfully create a mindspace of seemingly boundless wonder and awe. Surely, Cameron is flexing his creative muscles, but the film never overcomes the nagging feeling that he's also simply going through the motions, forgoing the expert potboiling of his earlier work. Was the King of the World afraid of boring an audience, of being labeled that worst of all monikers, artsy? If so, for shame, for what could have been the trippiest sci-fi smorgasbord since Kubrick took up the reigns of the genre has instead been reduced to a widget.

Dec 18, 2009

Avatar (2009): B-

Screened in true IMAX 3-D.
 
Oh, how far the mighty have fallen. More than a decade in the making, the much-hyped, ravenously-followed-even-before-its-production Avatar is nothing less than the third time (assuming the unofficially reported tallies of $350 million) director James Cameron has delivered the most expensive movie ever made, after the then-record-setting budgets of 1991's Terminator 2: Judgment Day and 1997's Titanic. But whereas his previous works are typically remembered for both their savory implementation of groundbreaking special effects (always in the name of dramatic storytelling) as well as their sterling entertainment-oriented blockbuster artistry, the top-heavy Avatar stretches the worth of its visuals like silly putty frosting atop a narrative rendered with muted fervor and transparent emotions. Always a technocrat, the thrum of Cameron's modern classics stems primarily from a constant surge of suggested spontaneity; to its incalculable detriment, nary a moment goes by in Avatar that doesn't feel as though it's been overly thought out at the conceptual stage only to be all but processed to death on screen. In hindsight, the title seemingly refers less to a central plot element than it does the thought that the film itself is just an empty suit awaiting occupancy and a pulse.

This sci-fi epic would be a masterpiece if judged solely on its technical merits; on their strength alone, one can imagine a tweaked silent-film version being infinitely superior to the one now playing in theaters with no less than Roger Ebert warning the masses, "Good luck getting a ticket before February." Surely, Avatar will go down as yet another Cameronian landmark in the evolution of cinematic wizardry, yet no amount of razzle-dazzle can begin to compensate for a dusty storyline plagued by both a cumbersome screenplay that could well have been written in less time than it takes to watch the film itself (imagine Pocahontas, or rather, The New World, filtered through a sci-fi lens and simplified to its good guy/bad guy essentials) as well as an overly polished form of acting that never expresses emotion and feeling even half as much as it merely dictates plot details and spelled-out character motivations via streamlined sound bytes. That Cameron has worked successfully in such broad strokes before is not to his advantage here. Unlike the larger-than-life vividness of his Terminator films or the earnest, knowingly cheesy cliches of Titanic, what the genuinely humorless (Cameron's one-liners and sight gags have never felt so strained) Avatar most sorely lacks is a personal touch.

The world created for Avatar – the exotic alien planet of Pandora, where, a century and a half into the future, humans from a resource-deprived Earth hope to extract valuable minerals for profit at the expense of the computer generated locals (enter broad allegories to everything from Native American genocide to the current Iraq War) – is a CG wonder to behold, and as such is the film's bread and butter. Even The Lord of the Rings' Gollum can't touch the level of physical detail instilled into the digitally-rendered Na'vi (the indigenous Pandora inhabitants), who transcend previously expected special effect barriers, convincing even these most scrutinous eyes that what is on display is true flesh and blood. With the sincere hope of better enjoying this project in the potentially more story-friendly context of a 2D, non-IMAX exhibition, I plan on seeing it again, if only to better absorb the detail work that sparkles in every frame. Such minor touches – the way the ground-level vegetation lights up as it is walked on, like the sidewalks in Michael Jackson's Billie Jean video, or the rush of the wind as the Na'vi ride dragon-like creatures down the side of a cliff face - are among the fleeting, genuinely feeling joys to be found herein. Alas, barring such a second-viewing turnaround, Avatar represents the maiden wreck in the eyes of this otherwise unabashed Cameron devotee. The ideal viewing experience may very well 3D, but where it matters most, the overwrought Avatar proves regrettably flat.

Mar 25, 2007

Deja Vu: Buñuel meets Cameron

When it comes to Cameron's debut, I have no shame in being an unabashed fanboy. Yet this film - of which every frame, audio clip and line of dialogue is forever ingrained into the deepest recesses of my mind - took on a new place in the lexicon of cinema when I finally realized why the most famous image from the masterpiece Un Chien Andalou always felt so vaguely familiar...