Avatar Sucks
Avatar. Last night I went to see this over hyped movie. What a lot of rubbish. My first outing to the cinema since ‘Quantum of Solace’ reminded me why I stopped going to the cinema. The only reason I bought into it was the whole 3D thing. So after the Odeon had flushed me for £10.40 a person, I sat in my uncomfortable seat, with my overpriced popcorn, in a packed cinema, adorned my silly 3D glasses and got ready for the trailers.
Having never experienced a 3D movie before, I have to admit I was quite impressed by the trailers. Yes is was straining my eyes a bit but it was really quite immersive. But then Avatar started, all 3 hours of it. Typical James Cameron, 3 hour snore fests, just like all the Lord of the Rings films. When will you people learn? The more you hype these movies up, the more you are giving Hollywood credence to this idea that 3 hours is acceptable for a movie, it’s not. 2 hours is ample time to tell the story well, and 2 hours is long at the best of times.
The one thing I will say is that the visuals in the movie were tremendous, but they are definitely not good enough to prop up the weak story for 3 hours. If you are on the same boat as me, and curious about 3D movies having never seen one, do yourself a favour and just don’t bother with Avatar. More will come in the future with equal, if not better, visuals and hopefully not 3 hours long. That’s Avatar in a nutshell really, if it was released 3 or 4 years down the line, when 3D was just the norm, there is no way it would get the same reviews, it would probably lose 10-20% off its metacritic score straight away in my opinion.
New year resolution : Boycott James Cameron movies and/or movies longer than 2 hours.
January 25th, 2010 at 7:30 am
I think 3D detracts from movies more than what it adds, especially sitting there in a darkened room with darkened 3D glasses sittin on the end of your nose. Some bits in 3D are good but to be honest seeing a movie in 2D will do for me. As for Avatar, the story was a bit lame but there is plenty of action sequences in it to keep you entertained for a good part of the movie. No way is it as good as they are making out though.
Saw Daybreakers last night, some bits were absolutely hilarious, even though I don't think it was intentionally meant to be funny.
January 25th, 2010 at 2:28 pm
Hi Stu, totally disagree with you on this one, I thought Avitar was a great movie seen it twice now in 3D and think that while the story may have been somewhat predictable the action more than made up for the plot deficiencies. “3 hour snore fest”??? Not sure what you expect from a movie if this failed to float your boat?
BTW Don't think James Cameron had anything to do with the Lord of the rings trilogy? wasn't Peter Jackson the man there?
January 26th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
@Colin
Doh. You are right I mixed up my Jackson's and Cameron's. My mistake.
It was good action, but it could have just have done with being 2 hours and then it might have been a bit better.
January 27th, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Have to agree with you in the main, the plot/moral etc were just cheesy and awful, as was the dialogue…. I SEE YOU! Cringey stuff indeed, although the 3D was pretty slick, but im guessing Sky broadcasting the world cup in 3D this summer will impress more people, and be way more entertaining too, so long as England get knocked out in the group stages. Not sure why youre ranting about 3hr long movies though, thats just nuts… avataar was too long, but its certainly not the case with every movie over 2hrs. JFK was over 3hrs long and it didnt feel overly long at all
January 27th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
The thing I don't apprieciate about 3D is the fact you have to pay more for it. I understand that you would have to pay for the glasses (which cineworld charge 80p and you get to keep them for the next visit) but they still charge another £1.50 on top of the cinema ticket price, and with my cineworld unlimited card I have to pay this fee – ridiculous. Especially since the equipment necessary to show these films would probably be paid for by one screening!
It's just a way of raising prices by the backdoor, soon the cinema will be even more expensive than it is now and then the movie companies wonder why piracy exists!
Supposedly piracy is hurting cinema, but supposedly 2009 was the most lucrative year ever for cinema takings worldwide in history so figure that one out.
February 10th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
My only complaint about this article is that the author laments the 3D more than the total suck fest of a movie that Avaretard is. A 3hour movie is fine if it is a good movie but this dung heap was too long at 40 minutes.
February 10th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Finally some sense!