Blog

Avatar: First Look

Avatar: First Look

Adam Woodward analyses preview footage from James Cameron's ambitious oeuvre.

Related reviews and interviews

Following the official online release of yesterday’s trailer, today at long last comes a first proper glimpse at James Cameron’s futuristic fantasy epic. Today is Avatar day, and LWLies got an exclusive seat at the BFI IMAX this morning for the world premiere of specially compiled footage from the film.  As you can imagine our appetites were well and truly whet with anticipation. So has the wait been worth it?

Thrown into complete unknown, the multi-layered world of Avatar is nothing I could have prepared for. The action sequences are astonishing (if a little disorientating at first) and the cinescapes utterly breathtaking. By the looks of it Cameron has got it spectacularly right. The sprawling landscapes are dense and vibrant, but there seems to be a rich story woven into this vast tropical tapestry. For all the innovative special effects on show a film of such grandiose cannot survive without some sort of narrative, and from this sneak peek Avatar seems remarkably closer to home than I initially presumed.

Our protagonist, a wheelchair-bound marine named Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), is given a new lease of life after being transported to Pandora, a distant forest-soaked moon; where he takes host of an alien body. Here we see his first encounter with Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), a native Na’vi warrioress who fits the bill as Sully’s extraterrestrial love interest. So there is some heart here, which could prove a vital narrative element if the film is to transcend a fanboy audience.

There is certainly plenty to get your juices flowing then, but let’s not forget in the end it is just a film. So far much of the attention has been on the immense budget – anywhere between $250 and $300 million is the ballpark – but Cameron and co have sensibly kept exact details closeted. It would be easy to get carried away, of course, but it is refreshing to see a filmmaker with the clout of Cameron retain an air of modesty. In any case, it will be interesting to see how the marketing campaign continues after today.

While it may look spectacular, however, I couldn’t help feel disenchanted by the CGI overload. Such saturation transports you to another world, but once there, there is no escape.  The main problem, however, seems to be that it looks less like a film (in a traditional sense) and more like well polished video game, albeit a bollock-bustingly spectacular one. Ultimately it might not be to everyone’s taste, but there is no question Avatar is hugely significant; it’s revolutionary new motion capture “fusion camera” system, which Cameron and his crew invented, is already being prophesied to pioneer a new era of digital cinema.

When it hits cinemas this winter there will be no avoiding Avatar, but it is difficult to predict how the film will fare. After all it is Cameron’s first fictional film since 1997’s Titanic, the concept is entirely original and therefore unfamiliar, and it is very, very geeky. Whatever the anticipatory buzz, Avatar is unlikely to reach the wearying heights of The Dark Knight, though, and in that respect it is hard to see how Cameron and 20th Century Fox can possibly make a financial return.

Regardless of how audiences respond come December 18, it is unlikely this sci-fi extravaganza will be forgotten in a hurry. From the looks of things the 3D revolution starts here and from now on it’s all eyes on Avatar.

Adam Woodward

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments (3)

  • I pretty much agree with Adam. I got collared by IGN afterwards, so you can check out a tiny snippet of what I had to say to them here: http://uk.movies.ign.com/dor/objects/800318/avata...

    They've cut out most of the cynical stuff I said. It's hard to escape the feeling that no matter how fantastic the footage looks today, it's all going to seem a bit silly and rubbish in 10 years time. That's why, if the film is going to be 'revolutionary' (and I don't think it will be) it needs to be in the integration of technology and filmmaking, not because of the technology per se.

    Written by Matt Bochenski on August 24th, 2009 at 11:10

  • I love how you've used Adam's blog as an excuse to plug your own appearance.

    I was invited but I couldn't be bothered to go, I'm actually sick of all this hype already (which is a blog I'm currently writing) and you've said exactly why. The effects may be great but in a few they'll be rubbish so I hope the film has more than that to go on.

    Written by Lim Salt on August 24th, 2009 at 11:55

  • I'm a little concerned about this now after the trailer. I wasn't expecting quite such a cgi overload and i'm not sold on the look of the Na'vi either. I have faith that Cameron will deliver a great film first and foremost but it looks like he's made the film he imagined 10 years ago, when it would have been jaw-dropping. He said that he saw 'Lord of the Rings' and then realised that the technology was finally there to do Avatar. Correct me if i'm wrong but isn't it usually other film-makers saying that of Cameron's work? My expectations are lowered, but i'm still looking forward to it.

    Written by Shane on August 24th, 2009 at 12:36

Leave a Reply

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Follow us on Twitter
latest comments
  • I think the relationship between Bad Blake and Tommy Sweet is self-explanatory and has a lot of depth in the film. We...
  • I did actually mention Maya Deren's films, as well as Dali/Bunuel-Un Chien Andalou – for some reason...
    Thom Harris Art On Film
  • A fine piece if you ask me, I think it's got a good amount of depth for the length and plenty of names for...
    Thom Harris Art On Film