Avatar review

Rating: 9/10 (4 May 2010)

Star date: May 4th, 2010 ;) Imd(i)b-er's log:
Let's say first that I am a newcomer on IMDb and, being French, I apologize for the quality of my English.
"Avatar", interesting title, isn't it? I wonder how they will call the next M. Night S. movie, knowing the tremendous critical and financial success that Iron Jim's movie had.
First, I saw this movie in December, when it was not yet clear if it will be the huge success we know today. I saw it in 2D and I must say I was disappointed. Unconsciously, I had compared this movie with another one that I saw the same week: 2012. The apocalyptic extravaganza touched me more, for I was more moved by the real characters in 2012 than the blue ones in Avatar.
Also, knowing the huge investment in Avatar movie, the epic scale, the groundbreaking 3D special effects etc, the only movie I could compare it was The Return of the King. They are two different genres, but still, I believe in a quality crux/core of the movies, no matter their genre. Once again, emotionally, I was not as impressed as I was on hobbits and nazguls ;).
What lacks to Avatar is a compelling and rich script. It is too predictable, and too linear in storytelling. Maybe, if you believe it is a documentary style film, it makes sense. Jim, where is the amazing script à la Terminator 2?
Also, I would have loved a less Manichean view on the bad guys. They had incredible technology and maybe interesting views and projects on Pandora. I wanted to see more... I can't believe they were only evil.
But, there is a twist in my story. After seeing it in 2D, two weeks later, I gave it a try in 3D. I had to do it because, being an unconditional Cameron's fan, I "forced" myself to love this movie ;).
The result was mesmerizing! The movie gained in shape and somehow in depth. I can't explain it to myself, but is seems that the 3D took off all the flaws, as it took me into the story till the end. Being also a pleasure for the eye (thanks also for the smooth pacing), one tend to forget the weaknesses of the script. It changes the movie and makes it so much better!
The 3D is amazing with perfect depth and CGI animation. Gollum, technically put, unfortunately, is far behind us... The performance and motion capture are used at their best! The creatures and the natives were great and with a rich culture. The conflict on Pandora somehow reminds me of Harry Harrison's "Deathworld".
But just some things about 3D. It would have been much better if:
-the creatures could pop-out the screen as they did in Ice Age 3 (it's more spectacular)
-they had used subjective view as they were flying . In 3D, again on Ice Age 3, I had the impression to literally flying. I had the same impression on Star Wars 3 in the opening scene, and it was only in 2D. So, it's even more breathtaking in 3D.
So: It will be cool having more subjective view + moving chairs and physical effects in movie theaters (like wind). But I am dreaming...:)
The music: I would expect better from M. Horner. On Aliens he was amazing! I mean, come on, we can hear a melody from his previous war movie in the beginning... If it only were for Brad Fiedel to do the music...
But all in all he did a good job, with "junglesque" score and epic dimension.
This movie should been taken as a whole experience, in order to be appreciated. It is, fore sure, the best extravaganza I have seen in long time!
I am a huge Sci-Fi movies fan, and I was waiting for a movie like this since Star Wars 3. Of course, there was District 9 which had a great script, but smaller in scale and epic action.
So, I will give a 9/10 to this movie, because it's breathtaking and ambitious. James Cameron is one director who will stay in shadow for 10 years and then do a master piece.