first, let me say that this is an unreal experience, and that in this particular league of movie, the game has changed. it's the greatest yet, and takes everything to a new level. most comments will be negative, but that's just because it so overwhelmingly speaks positively for itself, and nothing i could say could do it justice.
i was a definite avatar hater leading up to the film. i wasn't planning on seeing it opening day, but tyler had an extra ticket, and everyone who had seen it seemed to be screaming positive things. even the bad reviews seem disingenuous, like they were afraid to admit how good it was. it had an 82% on rotten tomatoes, which somehow felt below what it needed to justify the time and money it took to make it.
it was a failure of marketing, but it was an impossible task. there was so much hype behind this movie for so many years before there even was a marketing plan that no cursory first impression could ever live up to the expectations. call it segway syndrome. once a campaign came out, the key image and poster highlighted a part of the movie that is absurd out of context; the font looked like a bad microsoft word stock; and the title, which is possibly the only option, is terrible. the marketing actually highlights faults in the film, and in some respects (in the minds of 18% of rotten tomatoes reviewers, for instance) the marketing illuminates the faults so much that the preconceived notions can't be overcome no matter how well the affected elements are employed in the film. (this isn't to say they were employed flawlessly, nor is it to say they weren't.)
questions it raised:
-how long until we have our own 3d glasses? (my guess is 90% of non-glasses wearing frequent moviegoers have them within 2 years, and they're a hot but expensive christmas gift next year.) how much will prescription ones cost? they'll be usable both in theater and at home, right?
-is avatar already upwards compatible come the next generation of stuff? will it be all-it-can-be on our home systems? or will it be like watching a dvd on a player with hdmi up-convert instead of watching blu ray?
-is it a coincidence that the official 3d specs for blu ray were finalized the day before this overwhelmingly literally blue movie came out?
-will there be any race relations fallout here? (i'd say no "fallout," but i guarantee freshman will write media studies papers about it next semester like none other. there are definite discussion points here.)
oscars it should win:
-best picture
-best director
-best visual effects
-best sound mixing
oscars it might win
-best screenplay
-best editing
-best art direction
should this be able to be nominated for best animated film? this is going to have to be addressed soon. and what about best makeup and wardrobe? could the argument be made that this film had incredible digital makeup and wardrobe?
i leave you with this: it should have been full screen in imax. not sure how much more that would have cost, but in an ideal world, they would have gone all out for that. i hate that they patronized us at the beginning by saying they didn't want us to miss any of it in our periphery. i want to miss it in my periphery. i want it to envelop me.
10/10
classics scale: 9/10
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/
(ps it's a joke that i'm ending with what is essentially a giant middle finger. it's especially cruel given that it's a true one. i feel like an older brother would do something like that, and now i'm ashamed for thinking it would be funny. ...oh well.)
PLEASE NOTE: there is a major difference between the scale with which modern movies are being judged and the "classics scale" with which the...well...good ones are being judged.
*******SPOILERS BELOW*******
*******SPOILERS BELOW*******
avatar: imax 3d (cameron, 2009)
what it is whatitis
2000s,
non-list classics,
seen in theaters
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment