I like Avatar. I’ve always liked Avatar.
I was swept away by the visual splendour of Pandora, it’s fair to say that the plot is utterly meaningless when it comes to an enjoyment of the film. The appeal of Avatar is that it’s visually stunning, it’s world and creatures are incredibly well thought out and it utilizes its visual effects to create something truly out of this world.
If you haven’t seen Avatar, I’ll summarise. Jake Sully is a human who is sent to an alien planet, Pandora, in order to study and interact with the natives. He uses an synthetic blue body, or Avatar, to look like the 9 ft. tall Na’Vi natives and over the course of the film falls in love with Pandoran Princess Neytiri . He then becomes the Na’Vi’s saviour when he defeats the US army led by General Quaritch who was on Pandora to mine an invaluable metal.
In the sequel, Jake has had four kids, he seems pretty happy with his new life as a Na’Vi. Then Quaritch and the humans return, and Sully is forced to take his family from the forest to the reef in order to learn the titular “Way of Water”.
Avatar: The Way of Water (Or Avatar 2) starts out really strong. It looks stunning which is, for me, the most important thing. When the action moves to the sea my jaw dropped. If you’re not as into CGI as I am you may not understand the complexity of simulating water, but each droplet is unique and must refract thusly - the fact that a computer can simulate that is a beautiful concept and in execution… it’s just incredible. I was in awe before any of the marine creatures even appeared.
Then as we are introduced to the marine life of Pandora, I became even more enamoured with the film. I can admire the artistry of the Na’Vi, but they look too similar to human beings to escape the
uncanny valley. The marine life, on the other hand, is so perfectly realised, so detailed that I could suspend my disbelief. They are similar enough to whales and jellyfish that they feel conceivably real and yet we have absolutely no frame of reference for them. The models are so detailed, no rubbery textures or lack of contact shadows here, that I often forgot they weren’t real.
The third act of both Avatar films is one long battle. The first film utilises the setting of Pandora, the size and strength of the Na’Vi and their creatures to great effect. The battle is unique to the universe and thus remains interesting, it feels like the more exploratory and calm aspects of the first half compliment the action packed second half. Jake uses the skills he’s learned (like flying) to attack the humans. And the whole battle takes place in stunningly rendered, well-lit areas of Pandora – constantly reminding you of the scale and scope of the world.
Avatar 2 feels like somebody took a David Attenborough documentary and then cut in some generic action sequences. The final battle has moments that are unique to Pandora but devolves into a typical punch-up in the water. The scenes are dark, claustrophobic and take place on a human built sea vessel that wouldn’t look out of place in Aquaman. For many people the focus on mindless, dull action has been a positive change, more in line with what is popular at the moment. But if an action scene feels like it could take place in any superhero or Fast and the Furious film – then I’m not interested.
Basically the third act felt generic. I guess that means the CGI succeeded because I forgot that it wasn’t real. But I was bored because what I was seeing looked like something I’d seen before. If a sequence was achievable practically, at a much lower cost, then why should it be done digitally. In the first film I had obviously experienced the plot before (In films like Fern Gully or Pocahontas) but the visuals were only possible on Pandora.
Your enjoyment of this film is entirely dependent on what you enjoyed about the first film. I liked the slower, more exploratory aspects of the first film, because it felt like something unique and inherently cinematic. Others enjoyed the final battle. And while the action is good, I don’t know if fans of the action in Avatar will actually enjoy the final act of Avatar 2 because it’s so much lazier than the end of the first film. The fact that both the villain and the hero are Na’Vi makes for some interesting conflict earlier on – but by the end the scale of the scenes is hard to judge as there’s no human presence to contrast them – in the dark they just look like two normal guys hitting each other in the water. Which is a far cry from the final confrontation between Quaritch and the Na’Vi in Avatar.
My main takeaway from the film was that if Blue Planet had been released in 3D on IMAX screens, then it would’ve elicited the same feelings of awe and wonder that the first half of Avatar 2 provided. But without the sloppy final act.
If you haven’t seen Avatar 2 yet, which judging by the box office takings ($2billion and counting) seems unlikely then watch it in 3D on the biggest screen possible. It’s made to be seen that way, you simply won’t get as much out of it otherwise. Like the first Avatar it’s an experience more so than a film. But a ticket for Avatar 2 is very, very expensive so you need to think carefully about whether you want to go. In my opinion the visuals are worth the price of admission alone – but I also got to see the Barbie trailer on a gigantic screen before it started so I may be biased.