Avatar (or welcome to the sad new cinema)

Rating: 5/10 (3 January 2010)

I would first say I kinda like James Cameron (Terminator and The Abyss are fine examples of his capacity behind the camera; a little behind I would include Titanic too) he is the revolutionary type: always trying to top what others have done before. Sometimes he succeeded, most of the times he didn't. AVATAR is a proof of a failure: let alone the script and the plot (one wouldn't dare say which is worst: the plot is definitely a lousy rip- off of other -much better achieved- movies; the script is... well that of the basic infant class, flooded with clichés and commonplaces). So, what is left? The tech aspect (special effects, CGI's, etc.) then kudos to the tech guys, including James of course. We are left with a 2 1/2 hours mammoth swimming in a deep blue ocean of Na'vi's, dragon-like animals, and species of all the possible imaginary kind. Great to watch in 3D or Imax... but only candy for the eye and not much more. IMDb should analyse -once again- how the Top 250 is obtained: I figure out that having AVATAR No. 28 is a mockery to many top quality movies (Dr. Strangelove, Apocalypse Now, Taxi Driver, you name it...) and I think IF this is the future of cinema the script-writers may take a very long holiday and let the tech guys do all the job, at least they won't feel responsible for movies like this. Thanks god in TCM "we'll always have Paris".
Sorry James... you blew it again.