Skip to content

Avatar: A 3-Dimensional Review

21st December, 2009

What. A. Movie.

No seriously. Avatar: 3DThis movie just blew me away! There were moments that were quite over-the-top (Colonel Miles Quaritch was least affected by fire on his right shoulder). There were moments that were really real (Jake Sully couldn’t stop himself from running as his Avatar, for the first time!). All this in a 3-D movie? *heart-beat-just-skipped*.

The year, 2154. The place, Pandora. Jake Sully, a marine and warrior by heart, comes to this beautiful planet on a mission. The natives of Pandora, the Na’vi (not a very innovative name, sounds a lot like ‘native’ 🙂 ) are a peaceful tribal race. And this is where James Cameron (remember Titanic?) really really shines! The fine minute details (the walk, the language, the expressions) of the Na’vi race show how well-thought-out and detailed his efforts were.

Coming to the story, this was one area I was really impressed. I didn’t have high expectations in this department, and I was taken aback by the (very obvious) analogy to the wars in Afghanistan and Africa. The wars here too were fought for precious minerals. Jake Sully, and his alter-ego Avatar (which means ‘another form’ in Sanskrit) undergoes many trials and tribulations to become one of “them”, to gain their trust. And (of course) he falls in love with Neytiri. I’m not telling you more – you must watch the movie! [Well, its not like I left much 🙂 ]

Finally, and what stands out the most, are the graphics. Some scenes really pop out in 3D. What I liked was that it wasn’t overdone – just perfect! The alter-world of Pandora seems so real, so true-to-life, that the the viewer is literally transported into another universe. That’s the end goal, isn’t it? Worth all the 6 years 14 years, $300 million pumped into this movie. (That’s estimated, it could almost be double of that!)

And that’s Avatar.

Come what may, watch it. In 3D of course!

7 Comments leave one →
  1. 22nd December, 2009 4:56 AM

    6 years? Thought it was a whopping 14 since Titanic!

    • 22nd December, 2009 9:44 AM

      damn .. I didn’t research that part! Wikipedia says this movie’s been in development since 1994 – and that makes it a VERY old movie!

      thanks for catching that!

      (but really, Cameron’s blown up a lot of investor money with delays 🙂 )

  2. Navneet Mahay permalink
    25th April, 2010 2:14 PM

    Hey… I really thought this movie was okay, not as great as that!

    The motion capture technology and the 3d rendering camera they developed (things you don’t see) were the highlight. Rest was techno trickery done by WETA, which they did much better a job on on the LOTR trilogy. If you look at it in terms of what is capable with 3D, Avatar is really at the lower end at imagining worlds and creatures.

    I’ve seen it thrice. First time was amazed at the clarity of 3D, which is now understandable, because they didn’t use out-of-focus backgrounds, as it would happen with a real camera. Second watch, I was mildly entertained as I started to see how un-original the story really is and how much money was wasted to tell it. Third watch made me go to sleep.

    There are some really idiotic scenes in the movie. For instance, the scene where the General (the villain with the scar) dies. He’s in a goddam robot suit. How can the robot suit fall in that melodramatic way if he is seated in it?

    My point of view anyway… I envy that you enjoyed it that much!

    • 26th April, 2010 1:00 AM

      I say, Mr. Mahay, you have a keen eye on such things.

      Thanks for opening my eyes to the fact that LOTR had better techno-wizardry, and that a lot of scenes in Avatar had focused backgrounds too!

      Oh and the General-cum-robot dieing scene? I totally agree with you on that! Have you seen District 9? At least the robot behaves a bit more normal when its “failing piece by piece”.

      But, anyways, the first (and only) time I saw it, I came out of the theater amazed! Thats what I expect a Rs. 350/- movie to do, right?

  3. Navneet Mahay permalink
    26th April, 2010 2:06 PM

    Well, I meant that LOTR made better use of the techno wizardry they had 10 years ago and Avatar just made plants and birds and rocks and things and sands and hills and rain.. with a billion polygons..

    Well, at least you saw it in 3D. Next time (if there is going to be one) see it in 2D…

  4. 1st May, 2010 2:18 PM

    It was good…not great…
    The story was nothing new and extremely predictable. i agree the graphics are amazing and the pandora world is just too awesome in its design but I think only that does not a movie become.
    and worse thing is the gates it has opened. The onslaught of pathetic 3-D converted movies…clash of titans really took the cake

  5. Navneet Mahay permalink
    1st May, 2010 3:12 PM

    I’d ask you guys to ignore all the hype surrounding 3D. Especially Ebert dismissing 3D! Wait for a verdict by real artists like Scorcese and Herzog, who’re both working on 3D films. It’s a new tech that needs to make money from every orifice of cinema so that it can be affordable for the real artists…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: