Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Avatar
This movie signals our entry into the second decade of the new millennium. Writer and director James Cameron conceived of the project 15 years ago, though he had to wait this long for technology to catch up with his vision - he even invented a new camera in the process.
To watch Avatar in a theatre filled with adults wearing 3-D glasses is an experience in itself, though to explain the innovations that made the movie possible is beyond my limited capabilities. Fortunately, the final product played out on the big screen speaks for itself.
The story is about Pandora, a planet whose Native inhabitants, the N’avi, are under threat from human invaders. In the movie, the Avatars are man-made hybrids created by combining human DNA with that of the N’avi. Avatars are used by their human navigators to infiltrate the alien community and influence them to allow the mining of their sacred home, to the detriment of the planet. Human beings as rapers and pillagers of the Universe - “They killed their Mother, now they will do the same to this World” – it’s a predictable theme, albeit updated. The humans are mining the planet Pandora for a rare mineral that will solve a disastrous energy crisis and shore up their greed back on earth, despite the threat to the spiritual home of the N’avi. Ultimately, Pandora’s saviors are human, too, and the age old theme of good versus evil is resolved in comfortably familiar fashion.
James Cameron’s last movie was Titanic, which he wrote and directed in 1997. This latest epic is a worthy next act in his career, once again showcasing Cameron’s ability to create a captivating movie that keeps one engaged throughout, despite its length. The young stars of Avatar; Sam Worthington - an unknown actor until now - as hero Jake Sully, and Zoe Saldana as the heroine Neytiri, are two to watch. Sigourney Weaver still has "it" in her role as Grace Augustine, the sympathetic scientist, while the villains, played masterfully by Giovanni Ribisi as the soulless Parker Selfridge, and, notably, Stephen Lang as Col. Miles Quaritch, are suitably despicable. Michelle Rodriguez delivers a comeback performance in the type of role that has come to fit her well, as tough-girl renegade pilot Trudy Chacon. Weaver and Worthington, eerily beautiful in their Avatar incarnations, are still recognizable – an example of how the magic of the new technology comes into play. The actors were filmed wearing special headgear mounted with tiny cameras pointed at their faces to record every nuance and expression. They call it ‘motion capture’. It works.
The strength of this movie lies not in the rather clichéd storyline, but in its startling visual beauty; in the juxtaposition of the wondrously evolved N'avi, and the muscle-bound ignorance of earthlings; in the sight of radiant blue creatures soaring in an impossibly glorious dreamscape, contrasted with monster machines fighting epic battles “in your face”. In the end I didn’t want to leave the magical land of Pandora.
Today worldwide ticket sales for the movie hit the $1 billion mark. Chances are you’ve already experienced Avatar. To those who have not, I would say that if this is not the kind of movie that you would typically choose to spend almost three hours on – Sci-Fi/Action/Fairytale in 3D that it is - take a chance. Glimpse into the future of movies. I’m glad that I did.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I had not the slightest interest in this movie, and here I am, reading and re-reading this beautifully written review and checking out every link! (The New Yorker article, in particular, provided a fascinating "understory.") So, do 3D glasses still look the way they did 50 years ago? I love thinking of those glasses in the context of this movie and its way over-the-top 21st century special effects.
ReplyDeleteThe glasses still look the same, but the picture's a whole new animal now!
ReplyDeleteLike Raining Acorns, I had bypassed most of the publicity for this movie, but your essay makes it sound like more than a typical action film.
ReplyDeleteNice to see Signorney Weaver still starring in good roles. I read a piece (can't recall where) discussing James Cameron's use of strong female leads in his movies (think Linda Hamilton, Kate Winslet, Jamie Lee Curtis, etc), which he continues here with Signorney.
The 3D effect must be amazing. The last 3D movie I saw was Hannah Montana (!); I am sure the effect is much better used on Avatar!
I am, by trade, a Geek. I work with and on computers, am an audiophile turned videophile and an avid HD home theater enthusiast. I have been reading article in trade mags for over 3 years about the technology involved in the making of Avatar, much of which, as pointed out, invented by Mr. Cameron for this project. Carol-Ann's well written write up should inspire many of you to take a chance on a movie that may not, at first blush, have much appeal, and those of you interested in technology may, in all likelihood, have already seen it.. but for those fence-sitters who have not yet laid down their exorbitant entry fee for this experience allow me to offer a quick read that may push your curiosity over the edge into reality. I submit a simple article from Popular Science that seems sum up some of the more interesting tech employed by Cameron in the making of this milestone. http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2009-12/feature-3-d-revolution
ReplyDeleteOn another not, the 3D itself... I love that JC didn’t try to wow and amaze you with dramatic 3D effects. He realizes that 3D should be used to enhance your immersion in the story, not to make you say, “WOW, did you see that!” In my area there is only one theater showing Avatar in 3D, I have since learned that there are actually 3 flavors of the 3D version out there. The vanilla flavored version that probably has the widest circulation [cost of retro-fitting theaters is lowest –around $100K] the IMAX version –the most likely to send your middle ear into orbit and the one that, among the three, is most dramatic and the REAL-3-D version. A minute or two on Google and you’ll find that the film was actually shot in REAL-3-D and among the 3 flavors it is the one that best displays Cameron’s true intentions. Look at the theater listings and seek out that one, I have it on good authority it is the best version to see…
I would love to blather on about this film and its many aspect of bar raising, standard setting etc… But Carol-Anne has gotten you this far and you must still be interested if you are reading this so face it, your participation is inevitable… It’s time to change the URL to Fandango and just decide where and when… Then you too will be back here singing its praises!
Thanks Carol-Anne
Gill
Thank you, Gill, for enlightening all of us on the finer points of 3-D technology. Heck, never mind the finer points, I barely understood the most basic points! So thank you, too, for the link to that really interesting article.
ReplyDeleteI saw Avatar at a 3-D Imax theatre though I did notice that there were 2 versions being screened at the same time at that theatre. That is when I stopped trying to figure it out!
You are absolutely right about JC's understated, oh so subtle, use of 3-D. He could have hit us over the head with it, and if he did, he would have lost me. As it is, the movie is still lingering on in my mind.
Hi, Gill: Welcome to the blog! Thanks so much for writing, and for all the good information you gave us non-geek types (speaking only for myself, of course) about this movie.
ReplyDeleteLooks like Carol-Ann is prescient. The Hollywood Foreign Press gave Avatar 2 Golden Globe awards last night, including Best Motion Picture.
ReplyDeleteI would bet that when Oscar nominations come out, Avatar leads the pack for technical and special effects awards.
A great comment to this post disappeared, but I have retrieved it. Here it is:
ReplyDeleteI am, by trade, a Geek. I work with and on computers, am an audiophile turned videophile and an avid HD home theater enthusiast. I have been reading article in trade mags for over 3 years about the technology involved in the making of Avatar, much of which, as pointed out, invented by Mr. Cameron for this project. Carol-Ann's well written write up should inspire many of you to take a chance on a movie that may not, at first blush, have much appeal, and those of you interested in technology may, in all likelihood, have already seen it.. but for those fence-sitters who have not yet laid down their exorbitant entry fee for this experience allow me to offer a quick read that may push your curiosity over the edge into reality. I submit a simple article from Popular Science that seems sum up some of the more interesting tech employed by Cameron in the making of this milestone. http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2009-12/feature-3-d-revolution
On another not, the 3D itself... I love that JC didn’t try to wow and amaze you with dramatic 3D effects. He realizes that 3D should be used to enhance your immersion in the story, not to make you say, “WOW, did you see that!” In my area there is only one theater showing Avatar in 3D, I have since learned that there are actually 3 flavors of the 3D version out there. The vanilla flavored version that probably has the widest circulation [cost of retro-fitting theaters is lowest –around $100K] the IMAX version –the most likely to send your middle ear into orbit and the one that, among the three, is most dramatic and the REAL-3-D version. A minute or two on Google and you’ll find that the film was actually shot in REAL-3-D and among the 3 flavors it is the one that best displays Cameron’s true intentions. Look at the theater listings and seek out that one, I have it on good authority it is the best version to see…
I would love to blather on about this film and its many aspect of bar raising, standard setting etc… But Carol-Anne has gotten you this far and you must still be interested if you are reading this so face it, your participation is inevitable… It’s time to change the URL to Fandango and just decide where and when… Then you too will be back here singing its praises!
Thanks Carol-Anne
Gill