Jump to content

Avatar 2: The Way of Water


Recommended Posts

On 1/22/2023 at 10:28 PM, polishgenius said:

 but this idea that there's been a co-ordinated, or even un-co-ordinated, media reaction against it from critics who otherwise love big franchise movies without exception is as much of an invention as anything Avatar's critics might say.

Agreed. There's this notion in a lot of these movie threads that critics aren't fans and are bought and paid for, shock horror critics are people that have varied opinions just like people on this board. There isn't some grand conspiracy and fans need to get rid of this weird chip on their shoulder, it's just very very odd

As for Deadlines' comment that 'unalloyed praise at SW etc films' - they just haven't been paying attention to so many of those movies that have been panned by *lots* of critics, if you've missed that they you just haven't been paying attention ( and rightly so because a lot of the MCU/ Star Wars movies have been bad)

Criticisms aren't made to be 'trendy' or 'edgy', surely people are secure enough in their fandom to accept that there are some people that have issues that you may not have :dunno:

I watched it a few days after it was out but I think I forgot to post

The Good

 - Some of the visuals are great and whilst the last action set piece is quite long, it's mostly good.

- I think Sully's family dynamics and those characters within the family are strong points and really help the film. It helps the film have stakes and you actually give a damn about these people. The sense of discovery means the film isn't boring in most places whilst we're being introduced to the way of water

- I quite liked the score

The bad

- It's a shame that the villain is just a retread of the dude in the first one, and I get it's not the same person, but it's just a bit rote and not creative at all, imo.

- The kids being such a focus means I think Neytiri is sidelined quite a bit, which is a pity.

- I don't really think the film takes any chances with the story, it's not creative. It's not anything new and it's such a retread of the first avatar that I was a bit disappointed that after all thee years, we've been served up a plot that is just..meh. I feel like all that discovery of the way of water was just me doing exactly what we did in avatar 1. A lot of this comes down to Cameron just not being a good writer, he can undoubtedly direct an action movie, but a poor script hurts this movie just as it did avatar 1.

- I'm not even going to get into criticism involved with the only subtext in this film which is the colonialism/ white saviour stuff inherent to the movie

Overall - I think weirdly, what will stick out to me for the movie isn't the visuals but it's the speech between Sully and his son when they're in the water - I thought that moment was quite affecting even though on the whole I thought it was mostly an okay film.

 

Edited by Raja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Raja said:

Agreed. There's this notion in a lot of these movie threads that critics aren't fans and are bought and paid for, shock horror critics are people that have varied opinions just like people on this board. There isn't some grand conspiracy and fans need to get rid of this weird chip on their shoulder, it's just very very odd

Randos on the web talking about films is fine. I'm sure critics get caught up in trends like anyone else. But If professional critics behaving like fans then they aren't really doing film criticism area they? And I never suggested anything about about a "grand conspiracy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

. But If professional critics behaving like fans then they aren't really doing film criticism area they?

I mean, that depends on how you define the behaviour of a fan. You can be a fan and still have legit criticisms of films. I think it is naive to think critics don't  bring their own perspective, biases and experiences to their criticism - there isn't an 'objective' review, just different perspectives. Critics aren't a monolith, and Avatar 2 has received plenty of praise from them ( and plenty of criticism)

We're having two different debates here now though - Your assertion that previous Disney films have had had a free pass critically is just wrong though, and there are *so* many examples.

Edited by Raja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Raja said:

I mean, that depends on how you define the behaviour of a fan. You can be a fan and still have legit criticisms of films. I think it is naive to think critics don't  bring their own perspective, biases and experiences to their criticism - there isn't an 'objective' review, just different perspectives. Critics aren't a monolith, and Avatar 2 has received plenty of praise from them ( and plenty of criticism)

We're having two different debates here now though - Your assertion that previous Disney films have had had a free pass critically is just wrong though, and there are *so* many examples.

I know there's some pretty boring, mediocre stuff that scores higher on the coveted tomato meter.

As I made clear in an earlier post, the specific criticism of, "derivative", "no story", "no characters" that I have a problem with. Take SW:TFA; this is film I enjoyed a lot; this is a film I'd probably watch again. Is it derivative? Holy shit, yes. Forget about the fact that it isn't an original IP, in terms of character and story beats, it's a close as you could get to a remake of SW:ANH without actually calling it a "remake". How many critics used the word "derivative" in their reviews of that film? I'm guessing only few. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

It passed $2B and still going.  Oh, and apparently they are rereleasing Titanic for valentines day in select theaters.

https://deadline.com/2023/01/avatar-the-way-of-water-overtakes-star-wars-force-awakens-global-box-office-james-cameron-1235243382/

 

According to the-numbers, weekend estimates place its w.w. total at just over $2.1 billion and $620 domestic. It's still losing ground to TG: Maverick, but it still leads it by about $20 million. $700 million domestic is still within reach. I could see it getting a bit of a bump if it's still playing on enough screens during spring break.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

. Is it derivative? Holy shit, yes. Forget about the fact that it isn't an original IP, in terms of character and story beats, it's a close as you could get to a remake of SW:ANH without actually calling it a "remake".

This is a very odd thing to say when multiple reviews called this very thing out :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, you can include it, it doesn't detract from the overall point that I made at all :)

Edit: It is weird to me that you say that when so much of the critical conversation around TFA *was* exactly what you state above. These articles aren't hard to find.

Edited by Raja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like any review's first complaint on the film was inevitably the derivative parallels to ANH. 

I agree that I still can enjoy that movie and imagine two very different sequels. I kinda do like some of TLJ, just not enough to want to rewatch it for several more years. And I'd be shocked if I ever even bothered to watch the last one again.

Anyway, I went to see Avatar 2 a second time and had a total blast again. The movies are silly - though this one isn't as eye-rolling as some bits in the first. And the film is just gorgeous. I can't wait to eventually watch it on my Oculus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On reviews, it's always relevant to look at who wrote the review and when did it come out. I generally ignore any review written in the first week of a movie's release, if it's a major blockbuster kind of movie. Almost always they will be overwhelmingly positive, and will gloss over any flaws in the movie. That is simply standard practice. One curious behaviour is how reviews talk about flaws, as if they aren't flaws at all. 

  • 'This movie let's you switch your brain off and enjoy the action' = its dumb as fuck with no story but has 'splosions.
  • 'The slightly weaker third act doesn't detract from the overall fun experience' = the movie is over long and you can't wait for it to end. 
  • 'The movie is a subtle hint to others of it's genre' = it's a direct ripoff of other better movies, which you have seen.


After that first week, you tend to get the 'real' reviews coming out, where people who didn't get free passes and a bunch of cool stuff, or whose entire livelihoods are not in the hands of a major studio, when they manage to see the movie and get their reviews out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Raja said:

I mean, you can include it, it doesn't detract from the overall point that I made at all :)

Edit: It is weird to me that you say that when so much of the critical conversation around TFA *was* exactly what you state above. These articles aren't hard to find.

I acknowledge in that sentence that there are probably a few that actually use the word, "derivative". So yes, it does. 

The articles aren't hard to find? OK, find them. the ones that use the word, "derivative", as a criticism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Raja said:

Not here to do your homework for you, thanks, especially when you have clearly chosen an example that doesn't stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny.

Your homework. Not mine. You made the claim. you can support it. 

Quote

You have clearly not paid *any* attention to the critical reaction to TFA, or bothered to read about it, if you had, you would have seen that one of the main criticism of the movie was what you said, and it was brought up in multiple reviews - like Argonath stated. 

And now you're being deliberately obtuse, which is totally fine but maybe at some point you will realize that there is more than one way to say the same thing, and a lot of those reviews highlighted exactly what you did but you've chosen to ignore them.

Correct, there are different ways to say the same thing. "Derivative" is used as a pejorative. There are certainly nicer ways to dress that up. 

 

Edited by Deadlines? What Deadlines?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Your homework. Not mine. You made the claim. you can support it.

I did, because it's in lots of reviews that you've chosen to ignore, there's no point putting them up if you've missed the crux of them.

Horse to the water and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/star-wars-force-awakens-review/

https://www.gamesradar.com/total-film-star-wars-force-awakens-review/


https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/star-wars-episode-vii---the-force-awakens-2015

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/18/movies/star-wars-the-force-awakens-review.html

Here's four positive reviews by four prominent publications that all, to one extent or another, mention it being derivative. I didn't go deep searching for these; they're the three reviewers I'm most often likely to read, plus the obscure New York Times.
 

The idea that this wasn't mentioned by critics at the time is just a fantasy. 

 

 

You appear to be coming from the position that opinions are okay but objectively Way of Water is excellent and any reviewer who doesn't agree is not doing their job properly. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, polishgenius said:

What they said,

Quote

Sometimes, too, the adherence to Star Wars past grates. Parts of the first half hour feel like a remix, from the plans hidden in a small, feisty droid to the rescue of a tortured but still witty prisoner from an evil authoritarian regime. It’s all beautifully crafted, just a little too deferential to what has gone before. But then the new characters take shape and new elements emerge. By the end, this finds fresh ingredients to add to the Star Wars formula, strengthening and deepening it. The prequels this ain’t. We can all breathe again.

Huh, "a little too deferential". How about that?

7 hours ago, polishgenius said:

What they said,

Quote

And if Episode 7 is almost too slavishly reverential, it’s every sub-plot mirroring or reversing those that have gone before, and its nods and winks so plentiful as to border on the distracting, it is better this than to repeat Lucas’ prequel mistakes.

Hmm, "border on distracting"... At least we don't have to deal with that "Lucas" fella.  

7 hours ago, polishgenius said:

What they said,

Quote

Lucas' prequels balanced light with gathering darkness, and rhymed scenes, situations and shots with the original trilogy's, to create a sense of history repeating and inverting itself. Abrams and company have done something similar in “The Force Awakens,” but at the level of characterization and scene-building. This is a subtler way to revise (or recycle) elements in a popular franchise while finding something new in them, and it explains why this film feels more fully realized than any "Star Wars" movie since "The Empire Strikes Back"—it's certainly warmer than the prequels, which often failed at characterization and plot even as they served up intricate sequences and haunting images. 

Tsk. That Lucas guy agin. 

7 hours ago, polishgenius said:

What they said,

Quote

-

Paywall. Don't know what they said. 

What I said,

Quote

Is it derivative? Holy shit, yes. Forget about the fact that it isn't an original IP, in terms of character and story beats, it's a close as you could get to a remake of SW:ANH without actually calling it a "remake".

See the difference? Think I'm being too harsh? I can go to the video evidence if you like. And is it churlish of me to mention that none of those reviews use the dreaded "D-word"?

To recap, as I scan the comments on this thread, it's been implied that, I'm conspiratorial, I have a "chip on my shoulder", I just haven't been paying attention, I'm a thirsty horse, and that I think people who disagree with me are shitty at their jobs. Well, that last part might be kind of true. :D

If I decide to respond further it'll have to be tomorrow because its been a long day and you fine people only get so much of my time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...