'Avatar' Part 2, with David Cho: Who Remembers 'District 9'?
So as not to be confusing: I definitely think you should go see Avatar as soon as you can, if only because of what it does visually by creating a completely new world that is really amazing—especially the 3D, it's all very, very cool and mind blowing! That being said (SORRY LARRY DAVID AND/OR JERRY SEINFELD), when watching Avatar, I was never really invested in any of the characters or emotionally compelled by what was happening on the screen. I walked away thinking that I had never seen anything like that ever in a movie, while at the same time also very reminded of another movie from this year, that did a lot of what I thought Avatar tried to do but with much better results: Neill Blomkamp's District 9.
Now, I don't want you to think that I'm being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. I swear I'm really not. I completely agree with all of what's being said about how much of an EXPERIENCE it all is, but here are my main qualms with Avatar:
1) The characters are a bit like what you would expect from the characters of the Squaresoft-era Final Fantasy series circa the late 90's (think Final Fantasy III/VI), which is fine if you're a Super Nintendo game, but less so if you're being lauded as one of the greatest movies ever.
2) The dialogue—well, there's a lot of times where what the characters say sounds like what a foreign person probably thinks an American would say in the various situations—especially the military dialogue.
3) Both of those things conspire to really telegraph where the story's headed. (Obviously the articulation of that resolution is a really gorgeous sequence of events.)
In a lot of ways, Avatar and District 9's plots are pretty similar, especially in how they're structured. Without giving too much away (NO SPOILERS FOR EITHER MOVIE AHEAD!), both movies deal with the unlikely protagonist and audience being thrust into an already existing world of foreign creatures and the situation forces the hero to grow and change accordingly. The main difference however, is how much tension District 9 and its characters created. You care about what they're all experiencing, and a lot of times are even conflicted because there are so many different emotions in play. Whereas with Avatar, particularly at the slower, dramatic bits, I caught myself just marveling at how interesting and cool the really specific details of this new world were—and not really giving two hoots about what the characters going through.
There are more than a few comparable moments in the movie, but one of the most similar ones is found in the last hour of both movies. At this moment, there's a lot at stake for the characters involved in both movies, and they're both visually incredible and impressive, but one film has great tension and the other doesn't. If Avatar is a fairy tale, then District 9 is a home movie.
It's questionably relevant to have a bias like this, but while Avatar's production budget was somewhere between $250 and $350 million dollars, District 9 was produced for something like a tenth of that: just $30 million. And while Avatar does not waste any of that money, District 9 looks much, much more expensive than it is. A lot of comparable movies from this year with a lot more money, have looked much, much worse. (Terminator Salvation, production budget: $200 million).
Sidebar: I watched a "making of" Avatar piece on 60 Minutes after I had seen the movie, and while watching, I didn't realize how much of the CGI'd characters faces were taken from the facial movements of the actual actors. I was especially confused/surprised/bewildered when I saw sensors all over Zoe Saldana's face, because she is about 500 gajillion times hotter in real life than her on-film blue-person counterpart. Just saying.
So all I'm trying to say is this: go see Avatar and really be amazed that technology and James Cameron have put a lot of time and work into creating a really photorealistic future that is unlike anything you've ever seen and appreciate it for that. But you know what else? Go check out District 9 again, or maybe for the first time, and enjoy that spectacular movie too.
Avatar is also totally like Dune.
Oh god, I hope not.
Could not disagree more about District 9. I was really taken aback, and disappointed, by how broadly comic it seemed. No dramatic tension for me, no dramatic anything. It was The Office with aliens. I wanted the moody, atmospheric thing the trailer had suggested.
REALLY? When the main character was going through all of his "issues", you weren't totally ___ for him?!?!!? (I'm trying to be vague to not ruin it for anyone who hasn't seen it.)
I just thought he was a goofball. I remember that JR Jones' review in the Chicago Reader also dismissed the whole transformation plot as lame.
Nice Robocop stuff near the end, I guess, but I didn't sign up for that.
Sounds like you're sorta in agreement with The Onion AV Club: "As the film’s technical marvels grow commonplace, it will look like a clunky old theme-park attraction, a Captain EO for our time." Something new to see, but not something to savor.
I haven't seen it but on this point dude from the onion is wrong. A milestone is a milestone, and if Avatar truly is what just about everyone is claiming it to be, it will be appreciated a such for a good long time. Not to compare, but have you seen Blade Runner lately?
God, did Terminator 4 really cost $200 million to make? Because it looked … well, not *terrible*, but boring. It just felt like a very underimagined post-apocalyptic future, especially the bits that were supposedly built by robots for robots, and yet they just looked like … vaguely light industrial buildings that people would use? I assume that Avatar does not have this problem
District 9 DESERVES a best picture nom for DAYS. That movie was increds. And Sharlto for shure-to deserves a best actor nom. NOMS.
He won't get it b/c Clooney will take his spot for Up in the Air.
Mr. Cho, I just saw Avatar, and am now reading feedback, and I strongly agree with you! Thank you for making me feel so less alienated. Also, I saw it in IMAX 3D and now my head hurts like a motherfucker, so whoever says 3D has been fixed does not have my contact lenses or my IMAX 3D glasses. Now on to that Hurt Locker comparison I briefly perused earlier this morning, trying to contain my fury, because that is just wrong.
It's good and really fun to watch, but a lot of the critics praise is kind of coming out of no where right?
Like, at least with Mary, she explained why this movie was made for her and what it meant, but like, Guy X for random Newspaper/Magazine Y has no reason to fawn the way they're fawning.
Mentioned the stoner film aspect in another thread but since this is geekier, will say this: I wonder if Tron Legacy will bite a lot of tech from here.
The more Tronguy and general cosplay motion capture performance content ends up in Tron Legacy, the more it will sizzle with the critics.
I'm pretty sure that I would have noticed the similarities even if I hadn't read this before seeing Avatar, but YES, they are most definitely there. Although maybe that's because neither's plot is incredibly groundbreaking? This is not to say that I didn't like both films.