Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#551 Post by hearthesilence » Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:04 am

beamish14 wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:01 am
If only I could actually remember what Sam Worthington actually looks like. He’s probably the most forgettable actor to ever star in a Hollywood franchise
I haven't read X-Men in years and every time I hear Sam Worthington's name, I think it's referring to Angel.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#552 Post by swo17 » Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:13 am

I know he's not Sam Waterston but my brain's image cache apparently only has room for one of them

black&huge
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 5:35 am

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#553 Post by black&huge » Wed Dec 07, 2022 3:29 am

hearthesilence wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:04 am
beamish14 wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:01 am
If only I could actually remember what Sam Worthington actually looks like. He’s probably the most forgettable actor to ever star in a Hollywood franchise
I haven't read X-Men in years and every time I hear Sam Worthington's name, I think it's referring to Angel.
wasn't that character's real name Warren Worthington?

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#554 Post by hearthesilence » Wed Dec 07, 2022 10:55 am

black&huge wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 3:29 am
hearthesilence wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:04 am
beamish14 wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:01 am
If only I could actually remember what Sam Worthington actually looks like. He’s probably the most forgettable actor to ever star in a Hollywood franchise
I haven't read X-Men in years and every time I hear Sam Worthington's name, I think it's referring to Angel.
wasn't that character's real name Warren Worthington?
Yes, but that was part of what I meant - I haven't read the comics in a while so it's easy to conflate the two.

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#555 Post by Brian C » Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:34 pm

If it helps, he basically looks like a B-movie version of Ewan McGregor.

RIP Film
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:53 pm

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#556 Post by RIP Film » Wed Dec 07, 2022 8:15 pm

He looks like the default create-a-character in every video game.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#557 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:16 pm

RIP Film wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 8:15 pm
He looks like the default create-a-character in every video game.
Wow, you nailed it

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#558 Post by Finch » Thu Dec 15, 2022 1:26 pm

A pan from Walter Chaw
Maybe the problem with Avatar is the same one that any stories about first contact with a technologically less sophisticated alien culture share, given how our historical templates for these narratives involve genocide and the pillaging of natural resources. When a white person tells a story of a white man saving an indigenous culture from other white men, however, I start to worry about what kind of fetish is being indulged, and to what purpose/at what cost. What's not in doubt is that Avatar 2 will make bank, because whatever kink is being indulged in white-saviour narratives has proven a durable and profitable one in a white nationalist state. That's one way to look at it, anyway.

A more charitable view holds that Cameron is using his technical mastery, his broad platform and secondary celebrity as an irascible gadfly troubling conventional wisdom, to tell otherwise-incurious people the story of the many atrocities this country has committed in its founding and perpetuation. And that the best way to do it is to provide a white hero working his way through a simplistic linear master plot, because writing a lesson plan pitched to the most gaffed people in class means dumbing it down to broad emotional appeals spiced up with a bit of the old razzle-dazzle. The best way to make an anti-gun/anti-violence film is to disguise it as Terminator 2--and the best way to make an ecological screed is to cosplay it as a picture in which the prevailing stereotype for Native Americans remains the one where they're all spiritual children of a sentient Nature. But I don't think those who need this knowledge are very good listeners, so what Cameron's doing is patronizing the wrong people and gratifying the worst ones. For what it's worth, I believe he means well. If he's racist, it's in the Cloud Atlas sense of a person who never has to deal with racism declaring that racism is silly and should be ignored in questions of well-intentioned representation. (...)

As this movie opens, Jake and Neytiri have sired three offspring and adopted a fourth, moony teen Kiri (Sigourney Weaver). They're minding their own business until the inevitable return of the Sky People, who've come back to Pandora, it seems, not in a quest for more of the original's precious-metal MacGuffin, but because Earth's ecosystem has collapsed and humanity has chosen this planet, which has no breathable atmosphere and is teeming with "hostile" life, as a potential replacement. There have been better plans, but the picture doesn't dwell on it, so I won't either. (...)

At one point there's a fire on the water and Neytiri tells her daughter to run back onto a sinking ship to avoid it rather than dive down underneath it after we've spent what feels like a week watching these blue John Ford-era Native American cat people swimming underwater, the better to set up a Titanic/Newt-in-the-sewage-system-in-Aliens action sequence. I get it but, boy, is this a tortured way to contrive a set-piece. (...)

Aside from the simplistic race commentary, ecological message, and familial interplay, what's most disappointing about Avatar 2 are these manifold inconsistencies. Consider the thread concerning the bullying of Sully's "half-breed" children for having five fingers instead of four, and how Neteyam notably has four fingers for most of the third act in either a rejection of the declaration that miscegenation is acceptable or an example of how wrangling a beast the size of this production is perhaps too big a job for even the mighty James Cameron. For all the scope of its digital landscapes (history's most expensive Ferngully cut-scene), the film is conspicuously half-baked. There are no surprising story beats save the thing with the whales, and that's only because it's such cornball hokum. Is it a spoiler to say a three-hour film that doesn't end is incoherent? What's left to recommend it is the opportunity to bear witness to the unbelievable ballsiness of making something like this and doing it without listening to anyone's warnings.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#559 Post by Mr Sausage » Thu Dec 15, 2022 2:26 pm

I can see why people call Avatar a "white saviour narrative". It kind of is, but there's an important way in which it isn't. It's really a demi-god story. It's about someone who shares two natures, so they are able to act as a bridging figure between two worlds at odds. A classical example is Hercules, whose divine and human parentage allows him to close that gap and bring god-like power on behalf of human existence. A pop-culture example is Superman--born a god but raised as a man, and able to combine the best of both sides, etc. Avatar is doing that. The dude comes from one world, but is clearly alienated from it for personal and systemic reasons. On the other hand, technology allows him to become a part of a new, more accepting world, and prophecy makes him a spiritual member of that new world (later made physical by organic tech from the new world), and so he's able to use his knowledge of both to save the day. He knows human methods of fighting and also Navvi physicality.

If you displaced the story from the fantastical into our world, sure, it could easily be a white saviour narrative. But it's precisely the fantastical elements that allow the story to become something else, to recapitulate demi-god narratives and use the pattern of the hero who is a bridge between worlds, both of which are his heritage but neither of which he fully embodies.

That said, maybe the new one leans hard into the race allegory and ruins what I said. But I maintain it's true of the original!

User avatar
feihong
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:20 pm

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#560 Post by feihong » Thu Dec 15, 2022 6:11 pm

Mr Sausage wrote:
Thu Dec 15, 2022 2:26 pm
I can see why people call Avatar a "white saviour narrative". It kind of is, but there's an important way in which it isn't. It's really a demi-god story. It's about someone who shares two natures, so they are able to act as a bridging figure between two worlds at odds. A classical example is Hercules, whose divine and human parentage allows him to close that gap and bring god-like power on behalf of human existence. A pop-culture example is Superman--born a god but raised as a man, and able to combine the best of both sides, etc. Avatar is doing that. The dude comes from one world, but is clearly alienated from it for personal and systemic reasons. On the other hand, technology allows him to become a part of a new, more accepting world, and prophecy makes him a spiritual member of that new world (later made physical by organic tech from the new world), and so he's able to use his knowledge of both to save the day. He knows human methods of fighting and also Navvi physicality.

If you displaced the story from the fantastical into our world, sure, it could easily be a white saviour narrative. But it's precisely the fantastical elements that allow the story to become something else, to recapitulate demi-god narratives and use the pattern of the hero who is a bridge between worlds, both of which are his heritage but neither of which he fully embodies.

That said, maybe the new one leans hard into the race allegory and ruins what I said. But I maintain it's true of the original!
Well, Hercules and Superman don't serve in an environment of existing colonial exploitation, the way that Jake does when he comes to Pandora*. Superman's alien nature and his secrecy and disguise takes him outside of most power-structures––except when Frank Miller casts him as an imperialist stooge in The Dark Knight Returns, for instance––and Hercules helps people who look like him, who he feels cultural kinship with, and who he interacts with as equals. Hercules is not poised to take the Greek's land, is what I'm saying. Jake Sully, by comparison, arrives in Pandora as a part of the military/industrial colony that is exploiting the Na'avi's natural land rights. His job is to be the spear tip of a reservation-like resettlement, and he works for a guy who is a recreation of General Custer, who wants to do the resettlement in the worst way he can, because he looks down upon these creatures and their world as "savage." When Jake flips allegiances, he is doing so because he's "gone native"––I think Quarridge even uses those exact words. Jake does lead the Na'avi in a resistance movement, where he teaches them to resist in ways they should already know how to do––they're just too "primitive" to understand these fancy human machines. Of course, they have very obvious ways to sabotage these machines, and those are the methods Jake allegedly teaches them. I don't think the racial/exploitative element of the relationship can be detached any in the case of Jake Sully. He isn't someone sharing two natures in the first movie, because he is always free to return to his native state, as a human, and have the rights and privileges he enjoys in that form. He is like if a CIA agent put on blackface to go and talk black South Africans into starting an uprising against the mining companies there--then shows them how to use the tools they already have, and are experts with, to sabotage the mining infrastructure. Whether he does it for their sake or for another reason, he's doing a "white savior" trope, rallying them to a resistance they are entirely capable of by themselves––and the Na'avi reward him by giving him a hot native girlfriend––the hottest girl they've got (though they actually offer him his pick of any of the Na'avi women), and awarding him a place of leadership, making an exception to their tribal structure to accommodate him. Hercules and Superman aren't talking down to people when they're saving them, or hiding essential details of the reason they're there while they frolic and play and take advantage of the "exotic" culture that has allowed them access––and they don't do things that the people they save could do themselves, but rather, they perform feats of strength outside of what other humans are capable of doing. Their ability to bridge their two worlds is made possible because of their extra-human abilities––and also their ability to ultimately conform to the culture in which they're integrating themselves. In Hercules' case, he is born of Greek woman, and has an equal claim to citizenship as other Greek men of his era. In Superman's case, he can hide his alienness really well, and he has no colonialist designs, because the world he bridges is extinct, and it never had any colonial designs on Earth (whereas, the ancient, extinct "First Ones" of She-Ra and the Princesses of Power are explicitly colonialist in their motives, exploiting planet Etheria's natural resources for the purposes of their own empire and co-opting the "superhero" identity called She-Ra, co-opting what is essentially an element of native folk culture into their own dominant culture––and when Adora discovers that she has inherited a "white savior" identity vis-a-vis Etheria by taking up the mantle of She-Ra, she explicitly rejects the colonialist roots of that identity and embraces instead a pre-colonial reading of her role). After the first movie, Jake is now a Na'avi in most ways that matter (though he doesn't have access to their shared cultural history in any experiential way), and I think in most senses he ceases to be a white savior character––since there is no longer any way for him to hide his identity as a member of this exploited race. But the first film presents him fairly unambiguously as a white savior––but not necessarily as a demi-god.

The tiny exception to this is when Jake communes with the planet, and has a sort of one-sided dialogue, where he convinces the planet to intervene in the fight against the colonial forces. He shares an experience with the planet that the Na'avi couldn't possibly have––Grace's memories of their blighted homeworld (how much more effective would this be if we could have actually seen this in the beginning of the film?). But his other actions––organizing the Na'avi tribes to fight, jumping onto the big dragon by attacking it from above (no one has thought of this before, apparently), teaching them to fly their dragons above the planes and throw stuff into the propellers and exhaust ports, and getting them to shoot their tree-trunk-size arrows at the humans––this is a resistance the Na'avi should already know how to do, and should be able to undertake without Jake Sully telling them how to do it. These are, to my eyes, white savior tropes. Jake is like the hero in a comedy who runs into a room full of people working in penal servitude and tells them "you're free!"––whereupon they suddenly realize they were never wearing shackles to begin with, and they suddenly have the will to resist their oppression. I can't remember what comedy I've seen that in, but I'm positive I've seen it go down.

Plus, I'd say no bridging between these worlds really exists in the first movie. The Na'avi gain nothing from the human settlers. They need nothing from them to begin with. Superman and Hercules help mortal humans in ways they cannot help themselves. Jake is not elevated above the Na'avi, as Hercules and Superman are elevated above the populations they live within. And Jake doesn't bring anything more to the table once he transforms into a Na'avi creature himself. As a bridging figure, he has nothing really to do, and the film centers his experience of Na'avi culture, and transforming into a Na'avi, without the sort of significant exchange necessary to make him a bridging figure. Philip Marlowe is a bridging figure in Raymond Chandler's novels. Born into wealth, fallen into the gutter, Marlowe can navigate both worlds––and this is important, because with access to both spaces, he can solve mysteries that impact both cultures--he can use his liminal status to make a change. Jake is a tourist, who decides to stay. His active role in the Na'avi anti-colonial resistance is not a product of his human upbringing which the Na'avi don't have access to for themselves. He is really like the Scott Glenn character in Apocalypse Now––just a guy in a crowd at Kurtz's compound––no longer of value to the army, a traitor to the U.S. military, perhaps––but not an important traitor, who could provide the enemy with anything important. His journey is personal, and it never rises to any larger level, I think. So I guess I'd disagree, and say that the white savior tropes are pretty strong in this one, magical world or not.


*By saying this, I'm suggesting that Superman and Hercules' narratives don't make any acknowledgement of a colonial system in place, the way Avatar does.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#561 Post by Mr Sausage » Thu Dec 15, 2022 6:55 pm

If I'd known you were going to respond, I'd have done a better job! Great post.
FeiHong wrote:His job is to be the spear tip of a reservation-like resettlement, and he works for a guy who is a recreation of General Custer, who wants to do the resettlement in the worst way he can, because he looks down upon these creatures and their world as "savage." When Jake flips allegiances, he is doing so because he's "gone native"––I think Quarridge even uses those exact words. Jake does lead the Na'avi in a resistance movement, where he teaches them to resist in ways they should already know how to do––they're just too "primitive" to understand these fancy human machines. Of course, they have very obvious ways to sabotage these machines, and those are the methods Jake allegedly teaches them. I don't think the racial/exploitative element of the relationship can be detached any in the case of Jake Sully. He isn't someone sharing two natures in the first movie, because he is always free to return to his native state, as a human, and have the rights and privileges he enjoys in that form.
Is that true? I seem to remember he wasn't able enjoy the right and privilege of having his legs restored to him, which is a technology they had but which he was denied for some reason. And this, among other reasons, is why he starts the movie as part of the military effort, but alienated from it and his former world. I think your point would have more force if Jake began the film gungho for his own side but then switched, when actually he begins the movie on a lower-footing than everyone else and possessed of a growing ambivalence. This is the movie's way of making him half out of his own world to start.
feihong wrote:Hercules and Superman aren't talking down to people when they're saving them, or hiding essential details of the reason they're there while they frolic and play and take advantage of the "exotic" culture that has allowed them access––and they don't do things that the people they save could do themselves, but rather, they perform feats of strength outside of what other humans are capable of doing. Their ability to bridge their two worlds is made possible because of their extra-human abilities––and also their ability to ultimately conform to the culture in which they're integrating themselves. In Hercules' case, he is born of Greek woman, and has an equal claim to citizenship as other Greek men of his era.
You're pretty mistaken on Hercules. He was quite ready to outright kill people who upset him. Like the time he asked King Neleus to absolve him of blood pollution, Neleus refused, so Hercules killed him and all his sons except for Nestor. Or the time King Eurytus reneged on a promise to marry off his daughter to Hercules, so Hercules killed him and and all his sons but one (rather a theme) and then abducted the daughter. Hercules was always getting into fights and killing people, forcing him to work off the debt with some labour or other. Just in general, in Greek myth, pissing off a hero was a good way to get your whole family righteously killed. They had a very different sense of what was just.

And, yes, while Hercules is not an emblem of modern colonialism, he is still there to help impose Olympian rule, the rule of his father, onto Greece by banishing figures of chaos and disorder, banishing in effect what's alien and destabilizing from the landscape. He is a figure of traditional, patriarchal hierarchy who exists to help the world better match that ideal (one often foiled by Hera, his nemesis and a figure of female destabilization).

Also, there was no such thing as Greek citizenship (there was no unified Greece). You could be a citizen of a city state if you met the criteria for that particular state (eg. had one Athenian parent).
feihong wrote:Plus, I'd say no bridging between these worlds really exists in the first movie. The Na'avi gain nothing from the human settlers. They need nothing from them to begin with. Superman and Hercules help mortal humans in ways they cannot help themselves. Jake is not elevated above the Na'avi, as Hercules and Superman are elevated above the populations they live within. And Jake doesn't bring anything more to the table once he transforms into a Na'avi creature himself. As a bridging figure, he has nothing really to do, and the film centers his experience of Na'avi culture, and transforming into a Na'avi, without the sort of significant exchange necessary to make him a bridging figure. Philip Marlowe is a bridging figure in Raymond Chandler's novels. Born into wealth, fallen into the gutter, Marlowe can navigate both worlds––and this is important, because with access to both spaces, he can solve mysteries that impact both cultures--he can use his liminal status to make a change. Jake is a tourist, who decides to stay. His active role in the Na'avi anti-colonial resistance is not a product of his human upbringing which the Na'avi don't have access to for themselves. He is really like the Scott Glenn character in Apocalypse Now––just a guy in a crowd at Kurtz's compound––no longer of value to the army, a traitor to the U.S. military, perhaps––but not an important traitor, who could provide the enemy with anything important. His journey is personal, and it never rises to any larger level, I think. So I guess I'd disagree, and say that the white savior tropes are pretty strong in this one, magical world or not.
While you make fair points, your argument boils down to saying that the movie doesn't use its bridging figure especially well, therefore it's not using one at all. And that's not a good argument. The film is certainly setting Jake up as a typical bridging figure, ensuring he is alienated from his own world and giving him spiritual and prophetic connections to his new world. And it's certainly trying to make his knowledge of the workings of earth the key to the Navvi defeating them. I got the impression, too, that the Navvi didn't realize the pure colonialist and militarist ambitions of the humans and were divided on whether or not to resist, with Jake being key in convincing them to resist given that he was at one point an insider, but maybe I'm misremembering?

But, yeah, fair point that a white dude dropping in to teach the ignorant natives how to fight is a bog-standard white saviour trope. I just think it's also using its metaphysical and technological exaggerations to create a typical demi-god narrative as well, which is slightly more interesting I guess. Can we say the movie is itself divided on what it's doing there?

User avatar
Randall Maysin Again
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:28 pm

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#562 Post by Randall Maysin Again » Thu Dec 15, 2022 7:14 pm

I don't utterly despise this movie, I found it a bit fun in its rote, shitty way, and the Angry Sigourney Weaver Character I also enjoyed. The real question for me is....how in God's name did this win an Oscar for its cinematography? and while we're here, let's cc that same question to Pan's Labyrinth. Whatever else may be good or bad about them, they are both extremely ugly looking films that exhibit pretty much every single last dreadful trend in modern cinematography in all their tacky hideousness..though in Avatar I suppose the problem is really at least as much what is being photographed, as much as how.

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Ask me about my visible cat breasts
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#563 Post by DarkImbecile » Thu Dec 22, 2022 3:22 pm

This probably speaks to some of the film's repetitive shortcomings, but I could almost copy and paste my thoughts on the original onto the sequel: on the one hand, undercooked and overly broad writing and character work; on the other hand, visual effects work and action directing that puts almost every other blockbuster to shame. I was hoping for maybe a more ambitious scope than this film ultimately offers — though Cameron seems to be hinting that such an expansion might come in future sequels — but from a technical perspective it's hard to argue with the resources and time put in to making this look as good as it does in IMAX 3D.

In retrospect, it's kind of amazing both how little actually happens given the length of the film and how many new characters, concepts, and dynamics Cameron manages to shove into three hours and still have room for ten-minute sequences of characters just swimming around and checking out aquatic life. The environmental messaging and indigenous pandering is just as simple and direct as with the first film, and the action sequences are similarly well-designed and presented with a crisp clarity and consequence that is so often lacking in certain other Disney mega-franchises <shakes fist at clouds, tells kids these days to get off lawn>.

Perhaps most importantly, my kids were enraptured and excited to see more of this world and characters, and I'd rather they want to see something like this more than once than the latest Minions sequel or tossed-off superhero entry.
Brian C wrote:
Wed Dec 07, 2022 2:34 pm
If it helps, he basically looks like a B-movie version of Ewan McGregor.
Amusingly spot-on; I might have said he looks as if McGregor was pressing his face against a pane of glass. It's amusing to read that Cameron initially offered the role to Matt Damon; genuinely not sure whether that would have been an improvement or not.

User avatar
Red Screamer
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 12:34 pm
Location: Tativille, IA

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#564 Post by Red Screamer » Thu Dec 22, 2022 10:00 pm

I thought his avatar self looked like Neil Patrick Harris a few times during my screening.

I dunno, I couldn’t muster up much enthusiasm for the tech achievements here. As you say DI, it’s astonishingly repetitive. First they literally resurrect the villain from the first film—if you need an indication of the total lack of imagination here. Then nearly every set piece in the film has the same set-up: kids are told not to do something, they do it, they’re in danger, they call their parents to come rescue them. I didn’t find the action sequences all that special, but a bunch of people have said otherwise so maybe it’s just not for me. The animation demo type stuff you mention of the kids swimming underwater and checking out the sea life was my favorite part, along with the secondary whale character. It’s not so bad I guess but I should have walked out in the first 20 minutes when the resurrected stock villain says back to back: “We’re not in Kansas anymore…this is Pandora” and, referring to the Na’vi skin color, “Why so blue?”

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#565 Post by Brian C » Thu Dec 22, 2022 11:25 pm

Red Screamer wrote:
Thu Dec 22, 2022 10:00 pm
It’s not so bad I guess but I should have walked out in the first 20 minutes when the resurrected stock villain says back to back: “We’re not in Kansas anymore…this is Pandora” and, referring to the Na’vi skin color, “Why so blue?”
This is probably the one and only time that I or anyone else will defend dialogue in a James Cameron movie ... but the "why so blue?" line in the context of the film was a painfully bad dad joke by a character whose only mode of humor is self-satisfied smugness. We're supposed to roll our eyes at it!

User avatar
The Curious Sofa
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:18 am

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#566 Post by The Curious Sofa » Fri Dec 23, 2022 7:48 am

While I mentioned earlier that I like Avatar and feel it's become unfairly maligned, I think this sequel is Cameron's weakest film (obviously not counting his disowned Piranha 2). Technically it is no doubt a major achievement and the 3D is stunning, but I wasn't as blown away by this underwater world as I was by the forest world of the first film. The first hour is incredibly choppy, I found it hard to get on board with the retcon of
SpoilerShow
not one but two characters who died in the first film, having had children (or in one case the avatar).
The second act of exploring "the way of the water" is fine and the action in the last hour is decent, but it all feels low stakes and dramatically under-powered, especially for a three hour movie.

With Aliens and Terminator 2 Cameron found ways to make sequels which meaningfully expanded on the earlier films by both giving the audience more of what it wants, while also taking them into new directions.This is the first Cameron sequel which feels like a mere retreat.

There are Cameron movies like The Abyss and True Lies which I initially wasn't on board with and which I eventually came round to, so I'll give this another shot at home. I seriously hope they'll make an exception by also giving this a 3D Blu-ray release.

User avatar
Kracker
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:06 pm

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#567 Post by Kracker » Fri Dec 23, 2022 11:34 am

When it comes to the retcon:
SpoilerShow
I do like what they did with Sigourney Weaver's character in having her play her character's own daughter and thought it was the best part of the story. Not really a retcon because its highly implied the father is 'Eywa' who, since Eywa couldn't transfer her into her avatar body like Jake, used the body to reincarnate her instead. Not the case with the villain's kid, who came out of nowhere with absolutely no setup or even explanation and was the one of the weakest points of the movie and a pretty sour attempt to not make the villain so completely one-dimensional this time around.
But it was indeed part of such a sloppy rushed opening which even included completely tossing out the previous film's mcguffin and not bothering to explore the human's new motivation not to mention the logistics behind it. The first film also suffered from this which the extended cut alleviated somewhat, but this time around, they rushed it so much its just absolutely cartoony.

I wouldn't rank this among James' other sequels because this felt way more like a 3D ride than movie. Things like the whale hunting sequence felt more like a documentary, the Avatar franchise feels like a totally separate thing from the more narrative driven movies he did back in the previous century so comparing seems rather unfair. During the lengthy underwater sequences of the second act, I asked if this was pretty much going to be the rest of the movie and if I really minded or actually expected differently.
Last edited by Kracker on Fri Dec 23, 2022 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Curious Sofa
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:18 am

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#568 Post by The Curious Sofa » Fri Dec 23, 2022 12:29 pm

What they did with Sigourney Weaver was interesting and I would have been good with
SpoilerShow
just her avatar's daughter. I didn't just dislike that Stephen Lang's character had a kid which came out of nowhere, I didn't like they brought him back too, it added to the repetitive nature of this sequel. I would have preferred Edie Falco being the main antagonist, at least that would have been a different dynamic but after a promising introduction, she didn't get much to do.

User avatar
Altair
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:56 pm
Location: England

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#569 Post by Altair » Sun Jan 01, 2023 8:12 am

New Year's Resolution: to go to the cinema more and to do write-ups here on what I see. No time like the present to start, even if I saw Avatar: The Way of Water on New Year's Eve.

I'll start with what works: Stephen Lang's villain actually improves (I was dreading his return, due to his utterly generic characterisation in the first film), at least the addition of Spider as his son sets up a more interesting tension. It means that the climax
SpoilerShow
where Neytiri uses Spider as a hostage for a moment pushes the film into more intense, ethically darker position on who counts as 'family' and whether one takes an essentialist view on who is Na'vi and who is human. Such complexities are quickly bundled away and not referenced again, of course, but it makes for the most powerful moment in the film.
It's perhaps superflous to praise the special effects, but having glimpsed the plasticky CGI of The Tomorrow War only the day before, it does remind you how good GCI ought to be, when done with care and attention. There are a few breathtaking moments, even if the bright blue, green, and orange colour palette tires the eyes by the third hour.

That brings me on to what doesn't work: it's at least half an hour too long, with an indulgent middle section that could've easily been trimmed, but gosh darned, Cameron just loves Pandora too much and we'd better as well, because we have an hour of swimming with alien whales and looking at luminous plankton, threaded through with predictable family drama. Family is a key theme in Cameron's films and the 'family is fortress' mantra could've been used well, but the film is determined to traffic in mythos-embedded narratives, so that it's never less than predictable. All of Sully's and Neytiri's children have one character trait and they're defined by it; Spider, by virtue of being human but being raised by the Na'vi, is at least placed in a more interesting position.

Two hours of Pandora at sea and one hour of relentless action: I'm glad that the conflict is explicitly personal between the characters, rather than saving the planet (again), but if we're to have more of these, there needs to be more meat on the narrative bone and with a tighter attitude towards pace.

erok910
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2019 4:41 pm

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#570 Post by erok910 » Mon Jan 02, 2023 4:36 pm

I'm into seeing this kind of weird stuff in theaters. (48 fps Hobbit, wish I got to see any of those Ang Lee 120 fps releases, weird 3D, etc.) I don't really dig the kind of movie made in this format, but I try not to let it bother me- just to get a look. I'm very interested in seeing this, for sure, and will probably be part of the very final wave of theater-goers.

I imagine the weirdest part is 48 frames integrated with the 24 footage. Anybody have anything to say more specifically on this? Or how it changes the look of the 3D in your theater? I'm sure the CGI goes hand in hand with it, but am wondering how different it'lll be in the theaters as opposed to home video- as I figure the frame rate change won't show up in any home video release.

User avatar
dekadetia
was Born Innocent
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 11:57 pm
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#571 Post by dekadetia » Mon Jan 02, 2023 5:07 pm

erok910 wrote:
Mon Jan 02, 2023 4:36 pm
I imagine the weirdest part is 48 frames integrated with the 24 footage.
This was the film's biggest technical failing, to me. If Cameron had committed to 48fps throughout it would've been far less jarring -- as it is, I was very aware of the shifts back and forth and the juxtaposition is unflattering to both speeds -- the 48 gets that weird liquidity (soap opera effect) while the 24 feels choppy. The 48fps works best in the underwater sequences; I can't really account for it but there's something about underwater photography that lends itself more readily to this framerate without looking like a video game.

User avatar
barryconvex
billy..biff..scooter....tommy
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:08 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Avatar and the Avatar Cadence (James Cameron, 2009-2028)

#572 Post by barryconvex » Sun Mar 05, 2023 6:58 am

I finally dragged my sorry ass to an honest to God movie theater for the first time in three years to see this and as with the first one one I was utterly repelled by the two most lifeless leading performances by any actors ever, the grade school psychology and ridiculous macho posturing, the regurgitated story (13 years and all they could come up with is, "Hey, let's make Quaritch a Nav'ii!), and the cartoonish supporting cast (Edie Falco I love you but you're just not cut out to play military figures). The general 7th grade philosophies of everyone associated with this film along with Cameron's moronic and cynical sense of the dramatic i.e. putting kids in peril time after time, characters with extremely questionable motivations, whatever it was that Sigourney Weaver's role was supposed to be, the corniest of corny dialogue (the sea Nav'ii's spiel about the water being the chief offender) and Horner's atrocious music had me on the verge of leaving the theater early. Except everything I just wrote gets pushed aside by the awesomeness of spectacle that is this movie. Cameron is so good at choreographing and directing action scenes that I could hardly give a shit about any of the things I was just complaining about. His world building skills are off the charts - the underwater life depicted here is incredible - and Pandora once again comes to life in a way no other Alien planet depicted in film even gets close to. This guy is seriously capable of making the greatest film the world has ever seen if he'd just hire a decent screenwriter. Really, anybody would do. A grad student, anyone. It doesn't even need to be a grad student pursuing a degree in literature at this point. Just anyone with one original thought in his or her head.

My point of comparison here is Eddie Van Halen, another technical genius who rewrote the rules of what was possible within his chosen medium, reached a certain level of greatness (Fair Warning), then got bored by his own ability and surrounded himself with sycophants unable to tell him he was spending his autumn years making music for the long since grown up teenagers of past eras to get drunk to. But I can't help it, I love Van Halen (with DL Roth) and for many of the same reasons I love Cameron. Like EVH with music, no other filmmaker has had the ability to make me totally blow off the core things I value most in film like Cameron. It's a really neat sleight of hand and instead of feeling like I've been taken I want to line up again. Twice now he's sold me on what I think are simultaneously and uniquely the best and worst movies I've seen. I'm looking forward to the next one.

Post Reply