Avatar Superthread

Richard Dower

I'm not blind in one eye, but my brain has been trained as a child to "look" through the left eye, i mean i did see elements of the depth of field, as in you'll see characters in thr foreground seem lifted off the screen or move independent of the background, or scenes in the forest, like that snowflake stuff seems to lift off the screen.

I can see through both eyes but i don't "look" through both...if thst makes sense. The movie...Unobtainium....um, hello!....that mineral has been used lots in other movies + they never explained WHY they wanted it, just for profit?

And why the breathing masks?....can't they breath the normal atmosphere?

KerranJast

Richard Dower wrote: »

And why the breathing masks?....can't they breath the normal atmosphere?

Who said it was normal atmosphere? Just because the air is "clear" coloured doesn't mean it's good old 70% Nitrogen 20% Oxygen. The look of the Na'vi suggests that Pandora has lower gravity and a thinner atmosphere than Earth and the huge amount of fauna could mean the atmosphere is mainly methane or similar greenhouse gases.

Galvasean

KerranJast wrote: »

Who said it was normal atmosphere? Just because the air is "clear" coloured doesn't mean it's good old 70% Nitrogen 20% Oxygen. The look of the Na'vi suggests that Pandora has lower gravity and a thinner atmosphere than Earth and the huge amount of fauna could mean the atmosphere is mainly methane or similar greenhouse gases.

Not to mention the germs and bacteria that the humans would be exposed to. The human immune system would most likely be susseptable to such things.
Wouldn't be the first time the would be conquerors invading a far away planet were undone by microscopic organisms in a sci-fi classic!

hotspur147

i was dissapointed.the cgi cannot be faulted but its basically "dances with wolves" in space

phinny55

This film kicked my eyes in their, head like nothing else. Absolutely amazing. Cannot stress it enough that this needs to be seen in the cinema. DVD or downloads will not do it justice. Get out and watch this, folks!

Reginald P. DuM

hotspur147 wrote: »

i was dissapointed.the cgi cannot be faulted but its basically "dances with wolves" in space

Disappointed eh?! Bad luck. Care to elaborate, critique it as you saw it?
Not baying for an argument now, I'm just interested in how it let people down.

Just like to say that people should remember to spoiler any posts relating to details which could lessen ones enjoyment of the film.

Been waiting 12 years for this and with my college essay nearly down and my birthday in less than 4 hours, seeing Avatar tomorrow could make it the best day ever.

Blazher

superfly wrote: »

how can you say The Abyss wasn't good!? it's up there in my top 10 list of films ever

as for this film it was too cartoony and District 9 was much better as a film, even the battle suit fight was better in D9
Don't get me wrong, i enjoyed it immensely but the plot was by no means original
Other films such as Dune, A man called Horse and Battle for Terra kept springing to mind while watching it especially Dune with it's whole messianic message going on
overall i would give it a 7.5

I honestly dont know what to say.. Where you watching the same movie as everyone else?

Deleted User wrote: »

Just like to say that people should remember to spoiler any posts relating to details which could lessen ones enjoyment of the film.

Been waiting 12 years for this and with my college essay nearly down and my birthday in less than 4 hours, seeing Avatar tomorrow could make it the best day ever.

All i will is "EPIC". The movie is easily one of the best movies i have seen in years. The story is great. It is really moving. The movie pumps you up at times and bring you down just as fast. Its a real ride.

I honestly don't like wasting my money going to the pictures, But i am going to go again to see this. maybe a few more times.

I could go on and on,

But as said before. This is a MUST see.

Tusky

Fantastic. Exciting. Amazing. Mind blowing.

Loved it - Visually stunning. I advise everyone to see it in 3d and on the biggest screen possible.

mancduff

Deleted User wrote: »

Just like to say that people should remember to spoiler any posts relating to details which could lessen ones enjoyment of the film.

Been waiting 12 years for this and with my college essay nearly down and my birthday in less than 4 hours, seeing Avatar tomorrow could make it the best day ever.

Happy Birthday

Richard Dower

hotspur147 wrote: »

i was dissapointed.the cgi cannot be faulted but its basically "dances with wolves" in space

Simplistic to say that, i didn't see any Wolves parraels myself....beyond yer man hanging with the tribe and adopting their ways.

KerranJast

Richard Dower wrote: »

Simplistic to say that, i didn't see any Wolves parraels myself....beyond yer man hanging with the tribe and adopting their ways.

Which is a story as old as time itself. There are Celtic, Norse and Greek myths based on similar precepts.

m83

Just came out of it. Easily one of the best films ever made. Easily.

kilkennykitten

Anyone see it in Liffey Valley yet and will they be open On St Stephens day?

Basq

Christ... some real high praise here indeed.

Got my ticket booked for Sunday evening.

PeakOutput

saw this last night with 2 non sci fi girls and on on the fence guy

everyon loved it

we saw it in 3d which at the start was a problem as we got rubbish seats at the front and it was killing my eyes but once i realised you should not try and focus on the 3d stuff but on what was the center of whatever scene it got alot better

very very visually impressive


very very long but it was only the last 20/30mins that i started noticing it and thinking wow this is along film, wasnt bored at all

well worth seeing

Roger Ebert's closing paragraph of his immensely positive review really says all you need to know about the film.

It takes a hell of a lot of nerve for a man to stand up at the Oscarcast and proclaim himself King of the World. James Cameron just got re-elected.

ravydavygravy

Galvasean wrote: »

Not to mention the germs and bacteria that the humans would be exposed to. The human immune system would most likely be susseptable to such things.
Wouldn't be the first time the would be conquerors invading a far away planet were undone by microscopic organisms in a sci-fi classic!

Plus the fact they mentioned in the first 5 minutes that the athmosphere was toxic to humans.

Slideshowbob

bibbly wrote: »

Saw this last night, and it lived up to my expectations. I would strongly recommend viewing this movie in 3D and sitting in the centre of the cinema. Smack bang in the middle of Screen 17 in Cineworld is the best spot.

The dialog at times was a bit cringey at times another sterotypical soldier with facial scares saying "come get some". The first half in particular was outstanding.

You can spot one or two musical and visual similarities to Aliens which i thought was kind of cool.

Visually the most impressive movie i have every seen. Well worth the money.

other than the facial scars its all totally believeable ya?!?

Zoodlebop

Wow! Really, really fantastic. Cameron took several classic sci-fi and fantasy strands and wove them all together into a superb, groundbreaking film.

Spoiler:

Has anyone ever read the Dinotopia books? If so, you will have noticed that the whole, bonding-with-your-flying-beast, thing is lifted straight out of it. Not that that matters. Ferngully was also HEAVILY referenced. The Matrix, Gaia in the Asimov Foundation Series. I absolutely loved it!

I really recommend 3D. At first it is weird but when you get used to it, you become fully and amazingly immersed in the film.

Some real one-line-fully-mature-stiltons though. Beware!

hotspur147

Reginald P. DuM wrote: »

Disappointed eh?! Bad luck. Care to elaborate, critique it as you saw it?
Not baying for an argument now, I'm just interested in how it let people down.

its just my opinion.yes the film was visually stunning,groundbreaking and worthy of all the acolades of the previous posts.but as for the story?....it's been done soooo many times before.
"outsider is taken in by by the natives,he learns their ways and leads them to victory against the evil oppressors".
even the characters fell into every sterotype of this genre,the noble tribe leader,the wise old "shamen",the fiery warrior princess even the warrior that hates the new arrival at first then learns to call him brother...and so on.its dances with wolves,braveheart,dune,man called horse and even pochahontas all rolled into one big bright cgi fest.
dont get me wrong.i can think of worse ways to spend 3 hours of my time.but to spend so much time and money on the effects side and to have a cliched story and script that was probably written in less than the films running time left me a little dissapointed.

Goodshape

Incredible. Visually perfect.

Not the greatest story ever told (and yes, one that's been done in various ways before) but a decent story all the same.

And the rest... just wow. Really not to be missed.

L31mr0d

Wow... words fail me. Absolutely fantastic. It blew all my expectations out of the water. Overall Cameron has created a world so perfect in its detail that it completely sucked me in for the entirety. I literally feel like I've been to a planet named Pandora. As the credits began to roll I felt this wrenching feeling like I didn't want it to end. It is an uplifting film, there really is no other way to describe it.

Not since... ever actually, have I ever come out of a film and wanted to walk right back in and watch it again.

There is one scene where

Jack explains that his human body was starting to feel like the dream

and honestly, this is what it felt like as the credits rolled, like I'd been to a real world that was better than this.

The CGI is perfect. Not once did it pull me out of the experience. The uncanny valley effect has been definitely broken. Not only did Cameron manage to create characters I thought looked real, but I genuinely cared for them.

It's up there, definitely in my top 5 of all time... I'll have to let the dizzying experience wear off and watch it a second time though.

But right now, when I close my eyes tonight, I'll be thinking of Pandora.

hotspur147 wrote: »

it's been done soooo many times before.

Regardless, this film is now the standard of how to tell this story.

_Turismo4

Waiting along time for this, Booked my ticket today and just like bibbly suggested >

(I would strongly recommend viewing this movie in 3D and sitting in the centre of the cinema. Smack bang in the middle of Screen 17 in Cineworld is the best spot.)

Will do.

projectmayhem

Saw it today. My mind is absolutely blown. I was well impressed with the 15 minute preview in September, which was my first exposure to 3D cinema. The full thing is so good it's scary. A new standard for film graphics rendering.

Yes, the story was by-the-numbers, but it was a perfectly told, well scripted/acted etc. story that was solid enough to support the mind blowing visuals.

The only problem I had with it is that the film was so good it's hard to see what's next. I hated Titanic so Cameron's next move had to be better. Shame it took so long. He has said his output will be less sporadic now that the tech is in place. I just don't think many will replicate this level of realism in the film like this anytime soon. 10 years and 300 million is too much to give most directors.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Just back from seeing it here, too. have to go along with the formulaic predictable storyline, but it easily the most visually beautiful film I've ever seen. I also liked the time spent on the sheer depth and of the Na'vi culture.

bullvine

very disappointed. it was too long and I really didnt find it that entertaining. I am a huge fan of camerons, I just cant beleive how boring it was in parts. Yes its beautiful too look at and the 3d was not at all distracting but I think the fact that it was set in the one location didnt help. I got sick at looking at the same colours on the screen. A bit of variety might of helped.

RAUL DUKE

Absolutely amazing movie!!Loved every single second of it.

BlitzKrieg

ok first of all let me make one thing absolutely clear

I DID NOT SEE THE 3D VERSION, BUT I INTEND TO GO BACK OVER THE WEEKEND FOR THE 3D ONE so take some of my comments with a grain of salt as I may correct them after seeing it in 3D. My sister is not fond of 3D films and I'm personnally not pushed about them, so I went to a 2D screening with her today. I intend to go back to see it in 3D as this is the make or break film for me if 3D is a stupid gimmick or can work on another level.


But at the end of the film I'd have to give it an enjoyable *meh* it wasnt bad by a long shot, but by Cameron standards it hits around the same level as titanic maybe even a bit below titanic.

And most of my criticism comes down to one issue really, I thought the characters were mostly quite two dimensional by cameron standards. The biggest offender being the antagonist colonel, who had such an extreme warlust streak that it was unbelievable at times and there was nothing else to it. Alot of characters fit into easily definable archtypes, most painfully with the Na'vi where the characters were literally their roles within the tribe and nothing more. Equally so on the human's side, Michelle Rodriquez in particular felt like a parody of a Cameron staple (Vasquez) then a character at all, equally so for Weaver.

THe film is helped though that Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana are mostly strong in their roles, especially Worthington, I disliked his Voice over's personnally and felt they were uneeded, I thought there was almost a Blade Runner esque feel to them being forced onto scenes where they originally didnt exist, especially at the start. But when he hits his stride 20 or so minutes in Sam knocks the likeable and interesting character elements out of the ballpark. Zoe Saldana suffers a bit of native syndrome like the Na 'vi initially but once the film (rather quickly) got past introductions and onto them bonding she opened up as a likeable character, but

the imense lack of depth to the rest of the Na'vi makes the whole tree tragedy segment rather diminished, especially when she is crying over her father. You were more moved later on when her banshee died then when her own father was killed

Honestly if it was almost any other director I wouldnt be so hard on the weak characters but this is Cameron, he is the man that has proven over and over that action films can have dynamic and interesting characters, it has always been his greatest strength, its what sold the terminator and aliens. Its particulary disapointing with the villian because Cameron does really good villians normally, not only in them being cool but also in developing them and fleshing them out. It particulary hurts because the villian of avatar hits so close to Micheal Beihn's character in The Abyss, very similar backgrounds and dynamic within the plot.

Speaking of the plot, its fine, the background to the Na'vi is very good, if the human side is a bit weak, motive (again tying back to characters) was an issue with alot of the extended cast that was never really affirmed. If I was to draw a complaint on the plot, it would be that

It has a deus ex machina (literally) moment in the climatic battle which while they led up to it, still sort of irked me when it happened especially with the dialogue its coupled with, though quickly forgiven when giant alien panther reappeared

Overall it was mostly a predictable plot, but not labourously predictabel, you knew where it was going but you enjoyed the motions.


Aside from characters the negatives is mostly nitpicks, as I said I didnt like the Voice over most of the time also the film despite its long length rather ploughed through the setting a bit fast for my liking, but alot of films do that these days, I never genuinely got a feel for what it was like to be a marine on Pandora, thankfully though I did get a feel for what it was like to be a Na'vi and the film scores a wonderful point for the atmosphere there, especially with the biology and the relationship with the nature. It was just disapointing that the human side of it felt like a mess hall, command deck and a hanger bay and little else. Again this is another disapointment because Cameron is usually good at setting his locations, say what you may about Titanic, but the film took out time to really set what life was like on the ship, equally The Abyss and Aliens took alot of time in the initial hour of the film to set the location and characters.


Visually its fantastic, the mech suits looked a bit strange around the legs, but the ships looked fantastic and the animals were amazing. Cameron has the right idea for CGI over other directors which is to get the movement down first and people will accept it more then trying to make the object as realistic looking as possible and messing up the movement. THe Na'vi pretty much define this, what sells them throughout the film is their movement because once you get past that, they are not very complicated visual designs.


THe music was fine, though not really outstanding at any point, I did enjoy a number of bars from the aliens soundtrack durin the battle theme and the editing was despite the rather fast pace pretty good except for one or two noticeble covers in the initial scenes. The only other nitpick was the credit at the end...OH GOD IT WAS AWFUL, who picked that font, completely killed the small high the film had built up at the end, not the mention it was a pretyy meh texture aswell.


In the end the characters pull an otherwise enjoyable visually impressive film down for me. Its not a bad film, its tone and theme is something of a mixture of titanic meets the Abyss with a sprinkle of Aliens on top. But it lacked the character of either film and that causes it to drag its heels as it went through a formulaic and predictable plot. It was fun, alot of fun, but nothing ground breaking.

A 7/10 at best for me


edit: Also on a side note, has cameron become less and less cynical and jaded about the world and human nature as he gets older? When you consider how dark his old films were he has gotten lighter and more positive as each movie goes by since...

narwog81

loved this film so much that i have sought out this forum for the first time to comment on it! stunning visuals and while the plot was slightly wellworn i think it was a good rendition of a familiar story, i genuinely cared about the characters by the end of the film..

have an exam in the morning, should have been studying but stayed up talking about it til now, knew about 10 others in the cinema and not one bad comment, everyone was blown away.

unreggd

Best film I've seen in years

Was unreal in 3D!

Story aint amazin, but they more than make up for it in every other aspect

More emotional than a series of Oprah!


Seriously, everyone should see this film

billyhead

Folks,

I am not mad into Sci-Fi films myself and was wondering if you don't really like sci-fi movies would it still be worth your while seeing this?

Basq

This might be a stupid question but..

Do you need to leave on the 3D glasses at all time, or is there some visual indication on screen of when to put them on and take them off?

Surely leaving them on for almost 3 hours couldn't be comfortable!

blues2

Anyone know the significance between the 3 versions of the movie that are available?

I guess 2D to 3D will be a big change but does anyone know is 3D imax much better than standard 3D?

KerranJast

basquille wrote: »

This might be a stupid question but..

Do you need to leave on the 3D glasses at all time, or is there some visual indication on screen of when to put them on and take them off?

Surely leaving them on for almost 3 hours couldn't be comfortable!

Yeah you need to leave them on for all of it. A message comes up before the trailers (which are all in 3D - Alice in Wonderland one is class ) telling you to put on the glasses. The trailers will then get you used to the effect (although nothing can prepare you for the immersiveness of Avatar).

It's just like wearing sunglasses. They're surprisingly comfortable.

billyhead wrote: »

Folks,

I am not mad into Sci-Fi films myself and was wondering if you don't really like sci-fi movies would it still be worth your while seeing this?

It really, really is. This is akin to Jurassic Park & Star Wars 1977 in the effect it has on an audience.

Underneath it all its a love story and deals with what it means to be human. Are we fundamentally a race of brutal conquerors, no better than a virus as excellently summed up by The Matrix's Agent Smith ->

"I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you aren’t actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we... are the cure."

or a we an enlightened, inquisitive, race of explorers who seek to understand our place in the Universe without destroying that which supports us. Both sides of humanity are well represented in the film.

Otacon

@basquille: Its a 3D film throughout so you really should leave them on. Taking them off just means you see a blurry screen. It tells you after the trailers when to put them on.

@billyhead: The two people I went with are not sci-fi heads but they enjoyed it immensely. As many people have said, the story is basically a re-jigged version of 'Dances with Wolves' but it just changes the setting. I'm confident you will like it.

As for my own opinion on the movie, it is my favourite this year. Every aspect of the film was great, except maybe the story [only as it has been told before, not that its bad]. Obviously the talking point will be the CGI, which is utterly flawless: the Na'vi look fantastic, their movements are fluid and natural, the creatures are captivating, the environment itself is spectacular. Will this change cinema? Possibly the way big films are made from now on, all we will see is fantastic CGI.

The acting is pitch-perfect from everybody. I was not sure about Sam Worthington in Terminator Salvation, he seemed stiff or something. You realise how good he can be when he has a good director. Zoe Saldana is brilliant as Neytiri. The scene where

she and Jake admit their feelings is superb. You can see when Jake agrees with her point about another female being the best warrior, she panics a bit.

Just one of many moments that made me smile.

By the end of the movie, I felt like I had been to another world. Something that hasn't happened since LOTR.

10/10

Basq

Otacon wrote: »

@basquille: Its a 3D film throughout so you really should leave them on. Taking them off just means you see a blurry screen. It tells you after the trailers when to put them on.

Cheers Otacon!

Can't imagine it being comfortable but we'll see Sunday evening.

KerranJast

Otacon wrote: »

As many people have said, the story is basically a re-jigged version of 'Dances with Wolves' but it just changes the setting.

Which is a rejigged Lawrence of Arabia, which could be based on something from the Middle Ages or the fate of Carthage at the hands of the Roman Empire. The explorer going native story is eons old but it doesn't mean it can't be reexamined and tweaked to great effect.

Kashkai

Saw it yesterday in 3D and enjoyed it immensely. I wasn't sure about the whole 3D thing prior to seeing the film but it worked well and wasn't overdone, i.e. every loose item being thrown at you for effect.

However, its not a classic like LOTR as its not an original storyline by any means as others have said. However, it is one movie that you will come out of thinking that you got your money's worth which is not something that you can say about a lot of overblown, overhyped dross that are passed off as blockbusters. Cameron has another string to add to his overburdened bow of landmark films (though Aliens and T2 will always top my list).

Otacon

KerranJast wrote: »

Which is a rejigged Lawrence of Arabia, which could be based on something from the Middle Ages or the fate of Carthage at the hands of the Roman Empire. The explorer going native story is eons old but it doesn't mean it can't be reexamined and tweaked to great effect.

As I said in the brackets after, the story is certainly not bad. It has been done before though. TBH you could boil down almost any story to a basic premise and find that there are only a few story strands around. Its the execution that matters and Cameron has executed it perfectly.

CyberGhost

OK that's it, I'm going.

Should I watch it in 3D or normal cinema?

Never seen a 3D movie before.

L31mr0d

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

ok first of all let me make one thing absolutely clear

I DID NOT SEE THE 3D VERSION, BUT I INTEND TO GO BACK OVER THE WEEKEND FOR THE 3D ONE

You really do need to see it in 3D. Although I don't know how much it will impact on your other opinions. With a clearer head this morning I can still say it's been one of the best films I've ever seen. Maybe it's because I'm such a CGI aficionado but it was such a high to finally see a film produce it to these levels, it was like witnessing a turning point in cinema.

What Cameron utilizes with 3D, which I felt was different to other 3D films I've seen is that he doesn't just use it for gimmicks where things fly at the camera, it's constantly being used to give the viewer a sense of depth and scale of the environments. When the camera moves, often, an item will appear in frame in the foreground and move to the background as the camera pans. This is pretty much used in every scene to some extent and keeps the viewer with a constant sense of space.

Otacon wrote: »

Zoe Saldana is brilliant as Neytiri. The scene where

she and Jake admit their feelings is superb. You can see when Jake agrees with her point about another female being the best warrior, she panics a bit.

Just one of many moments that made me smile.

What makes this scene even more amazing is that they managed to convey all these emotions and facial expressions via CGI. Not once did I feel like I was watching computer generated people talking to each other.

Basq

CyberGhost wrote: »

Should I watch it in 3D or normal cinema?

I think there's plenty of testimonials on previous pages that says the former should be your priority.

CyberGhost

basquille wrote: »

I think there's plenty of testimonials on previous pages that says the former should be your priority.

I know but I like being personally reassured

Thanks!

Cupcake_Crisis

I saw it yersterday in 3d and was absolutely blown away! It was visually stunning! Pandora was just...beautiful! The action scenes left me speechless, it was just flawless! It was everything i expected and more. I was worried that it couldnt live up to the hype but it exceeded my expectations in everyway! Will definatley be going to see it again, i couldnt say enough about it!

The Sparrow

I saw this last night and I have to say I have mixed feelings. The CGI is no doubt mesmerising and it was by far the best thing about Avatar. It is amazing what they achieved. I could take or leave the 3D and it certainly didn't change my mind that 3D is mostly a waste of time. There were a couple of set pieces where the 3D looked good but none of it added to the story.

And talking about the story, it was by far the weakest element of the movie. It was cliched and you could see everything a mile away. And for a movie that was hyped as a 3D revolution, all of the characters were horribly one dimensional. Sigourney Weaver was terrible as the chief scientist also and much of the key plot points just didn't make sense.

I presume that this will be a minority opinion but I couldn't help leaving slightly disappointed. You can have all the CGI and 3D bells and whistles but what is the point if the story is not up to scratch?

I would have preferred if James Cameron had spent less time on the 3D graphics and more time on making the characters more than one dimensional.

Paul1979

i agree 100%, awful plot, awful one dimensional acting, overlong, all the characters were stereotypes...cant see the big deal about this film at all

KerranJast

The Sparrow wrote: »

I saw this last night and I have to say I have mixed feelings. The CGI is no doubt mesmerising and it was by far the best thing about Avatar. It is amazing what they achieved. I could take or leave the 3D and it certainly didn't change my mind that 3D is mostly a waste of time. There were a couple of set pieces where the 3D looked good but none of it added to the story.

And talking about the story, it was by far the weakest element of the movie. It was cliched and you could see everything a mile away. And for a movie that was hyped as a 3D revolution, all of the characters were horribly one dimensional. Sigourney Weaver was terrible as the chief scientist also and much of the key plot points just didn't make sense.

I presume that this will be a minority opinion but I couldn't help leaving slightly disappointed. You can have all the CGI and 3D bells and whistles but what is the point if the story is not up to scratch?

I would have preferred if James Cameron had spent less time on the 3D graphics and more time on making the characters more than one dimensional.

I found most of the characters very engaging, especially the main ones and there weren't any glaring plot holes sticking out as far as I could tell. Want to list some in spoiler form?

Tusky

blues2 wrote: »

Anyone know the significance between the 3 versions of the movie that are available?

I guess 2D to 3D will be a big change but does anyone know is 3D imax much better than standard 3D?

If you have the option of seeing it in 3d on an Imax screen, definitely go for it!

Paul1979

for me both the irish times and the guardian hit the nail on the head

irish times
"Yet, for all the cacophonous fun in Avatar, there’s no escaping the fact that large sections look utterly horrid. Dolly Parton famously remarked that “it takes a lot of money to look this cheap”. Well, by the most conservative estimates, it took Cameron $250 million to create a world composed of glow-sticks, pick’n’mix cola cubes and wadded potassium permanganate.

The Na’vi planet is so nauseatingly day-glo – imagine the cover of a Pan Pipes album reimagined by a sugar-rushing eight-year-old girl – that you end up savouring Jake’s periodic returns to the grey, anaesthetic space station.

Despite all the research and development that has gone into creating Avatar , Cameron has failed to produce something that looks any more real than the briefly sketched battlefields of his first Terminator film."