So how did you spend Avatar Day last Friday?
What's that? You didn't know it was Avatar Day? And you don't know what Avatar is? Uh… well…
Scheduled to hit theaters this December (and not to be confused with Avatar: The Last Airbender, which is being brought to the screen in 2010 by M. Night Shyamalan), Avatar is the first fiction film from James Cameron (Terminator 1&2, Aliens, Titanic) in over a decade, a fact that has fanboy geeks quivering with excitement like chihuahuas in the rain…or Twihards at a Robert Pattinson signing. (In fact, those two worlds collided at Comic-Con last month when the New Moon presentation was held just before the Avatar presentation, in the same hall.)
A sci-fi action-adventure-romance, Avatar tells the story of Jake Sully (Terminator Salvation's Sam Worthington), a paraplegic Space Marine who is assigned to the planet Pandora, where the heavily armed and armored Earthlings are trying to wedge themselves between two warring tribes of the alien Na'vi. In order to both survive the planet's beautiful-but-super-deadly flora and fauna and to make better contact with the natives, the humans develop "avatars": Na'vi bodies that humans can "upload" their consciousness into. Naturally the headstrong Sully volunteers to get an avatar and then goes all Dances With Alien Wolves when he falls for a Na'vi huntress (Star Trek's Zoe Saldana).
Oh, and the Na'vi, Pandora, and much of the film is rendered in state-of-the-art CGI. And in 3D.
Last Thursday, 20th Century Fox released the first Avatar trailer online, but because of Cameron's longtime obsession with pushing the envelope of film technology and in an attempt to generate some PR hype, it was decided that people really needed to see the footage on the big, BIG screen and in 3D. So 16-minute presentations were set up at IMAX theaters across the country for Friday evening. Hence, Avatar Day.
Just the idea of the presentation ruffled some geek feathers–free tickets had to be reserved online (and of course the Fox web servers kee-rashed), and many complained that they had to have a ticket to see a "marketing presentation" that was only a small part of the entire film. (Many of the complainers were the same folks who spent three days at San Diego Comic-Con standing in lines for hours to see… studio marketing presentations of parts of upcoming films. It would seem some of the anti-Avatar Day sour grapes were from folks bitter that their "exclusive" SDCC peek at Avatar last month was now being shared with everyone across the country.) And some of the backlash is simply aimed at the Cameron fanboys, who are a bit, well religious in their enthusiasm for and defense of anything JC does.
Once the online trailer and IMAX scenes unspooled, there was quite a bit of grousing that the much-ballyhooed CGI Na'vi looked… well, kinda cartoonish and goofy. A satiric "Delgo Remake" meme has caught fire among the snarksters. (A CGI sci-fi cartoon feature from last December, Delgo holds the distinction of having the lowest box-office numbers ever for a widely released film.)
I did roam out to Chicago's Navy Pier IMAX Friday to catch the 3D Avatar footage, and I came away with mixed, but (despite all the nitpicking that follows) mostly positive reactions.
Join me over the jump for my impressions.
For starters, it's very tricky to write about seeing 16 minutes of a 2-hour-plus film. I'm always warning against judging a film based on just its trailer. But that said, Fox and Cameron wanted this footage seen early in order to build awareness and buzz for Avatar, so it seems fair game to judge what we were shown on its own terms–though I'll try not to extend those judgments to an entire film none of us will see for four months.
We saw several full scenes: Of a salty military commander (the great Stephen Lang) warning new arrivals of their impending deaths amidst Pandora's deadly lush, loveliness. Of Sully getting his new Na'vi avatar body (the lead scientist is Sigourney Weaver). Of Sully and other humans in avatars meeting Pandora's very large, dangerous wildlife (including a sort of giant hammerhead rhino and other critters with lots of spines, armor, and teeth). Of Sully (in avatar form) being rescued and scolded by Neytiri, Saldana's sexy Na'vi huntress. And finally, in the presentation's most spectacular and impressive scene, of Neytiri and other Na'vi teaching Sully how to wrangle and ride a big dragon-like flying creature. The clips finished off with the rapid-fire montage from the online trailer that included Earth warships and soldiers doing exciting battle on land and in the skies above Pandora.
Of course, I can't speak to Avatar's plot or dramatic worth after only
seeing 16 minutes–I did get a Dances With Wolves vibe, but when seen
in the context of the full, completed film's story and scope, that may be completely irrelevant.
But yes, I have a problem with the design of the Na'vi. Twelve feet tall, thin, and blue, to me they look like exactly the sort of cartoonish Elves we were all so afraid Peter Jackson's live-action Lord of the Rings would feature (and did not). I know the look of the Na'vi faces is intentionally shaped (big eyes set far apart) to steer clear of the Uncanny Valley–the description of what happens when robotic or CGI faces get too close to human but still have a subtle, almost subconscious alien disconnect from actual human faces, leaving viewers feeling a bit disturbed and turned off.
Still, with all the money and creative energy being poured into Avatar, I expected something a little more innovative and exciting; I wanted alien designs that I had never seen or imagined before. That's not what Avatar is going to deliver. Cameron clearly wanted to keep his alien natives and creatures well within the realm of the familiar. (I was particularly put off by a shot in the footage of Sully's new Na'vi feet–they are completely human feet, with human arches, swirls, toes and toenails… only blue.) As for all the crowing about how Cameron is going to forever change the live-action CGI game (as he did with The Abyss and T2), I remain skeptical–the Na'vi are well done, but nothing I've seen so far is any more impressive than what Peter Jackson, Weta, and Andy Serkis did with Gollum seven years ago.
I did feel Saldana's Neytiri character comes off more visually natural and gracefully realistic than Sully's Na'vi avatar, which could be intentional to underscore Sully's fish-out-of-water-ness. And I also feel Fox is letting us see so much of the Na'vi now in order to let us get our whining and griping out of the way and slowly get used to their design–the hope is that by December it'll be a non-issue.
Pandora looks incredible–all floating islands and neon tropical colors glowing. But again, it feels very much like a really amazing, vibrant presentation of every sci-fi "alien world" (or Myst-like video game) cliche ever. Some have pointed out the planet's design resemblance to the paintings of fantasy artist Roger Dean, who did the covers for Asia and Yes albums in the '70s and '80s. Still, Cameron is bringing all of this alive on a scale not yet attempted, and if he only gets 75% of the way there in terms of realism, he'll still have achieved something stunning.
Then there's the dialogue and drama. Cameron is rightfully revered for redefining sci-fi action with Aliens (one of my favorite action films ever) and Terminator 2: Judgment Day. But from what we saw Friday, he seems a bit stuck in the hokey action-film bravado and cliches of 20 years ago. Sully talks with action-hero swagger, Neytiri intones condescending native wisdom, and everyone acts like they know they're in a James Cameron film. The sleek military designs are cool but feel a bit clean and polished, not gritty and used (more prequels than A New Hope), and the action gags are familiar. (Ooh there's something scary right. behind. you.)
Now having griped about all that, there's no doubt that–outdated tone or not–Cameron knows how to conduct an action film. (Titanic was a huge success in spite of its clunky, awkward dialogue and probably because of its broad emotional strokes.) Even if familiar, all of the CGI vistas, foliage, and critter menagerie are delightful and exciting–it's going to be an fantastic-looking spectacle. The flying scenes, especially in 3D, are absolutely terrific.
With all that visual bombast coming at you for an entire film, it's very possible that Avatar could have a predictable story, deadly dialogue, and distracting alien designs and still come off as the most amazing, jaw-dropping action film of recent years. I honestly hope that's true–as much as I might nitpick what I've seen of Avatar, I hope it's just that: minor nitpicking. Like all of us, I'd much rather have a triumphant, mind-blowing sci-fi action film than not.
Posted on August 24, 2009 at 2:34 pm
The teaser was a major disappointment in my book. Nothing about it made me want to see the movie, and I’ve been so excited about the stupid thing. It just all seemed so cheesy.
Posted on August 24, 2009 at 2:49 pm
To be fair, I understand why Fox was so keen to get the 16 minutes of scenes out to the public–you do get a much bigger taste of the epic visuals and scope on the giant 3D Imax screen and when watching whole scenes, not short bursts…
But that said, yes, there does appear to be a cheese factor–good word. It’s something I’m afraid we may have to get used to by December if we want to just enjoy the film’s action spectacle.
My impression is Cameron is NOT making a hard, innovative Sci-Fi film (like District 9 or Blade Runner–or even Aliens or T2) — he’s making a big Western melodrama with lots of shiny, cool SF trappings. The very humanoid appearance of the Na’vi and their tribal culture has to be intentional–Cameron wants Titanic and Dance With Wolves fans to be able to connect and relate to the (seemingly) simple story he’s telling.
Cameron has his strengths, and I think Avatar is going to blow us away on some of those fronts. But I have my doubts it’s going to be the “total” SF experience maybe some folks are hoping it will be.
But then, I’ve only seen 16 minutes. :)
Posted on August 24, 2009 at 4:35 pm
One more thing:
I love sci-fi and of course it often functions as allegory, with aliens representing the human “other.” (Blacks in District 9, Native Americans in Avatar.) But with CGI so advanced now, for once I’d love to see aliens and an alien culture that are just barely understandable to human eyes.
Both District 9, and now Avatar, have aliens that are somewhat recognizable as humanoid creatures (limbs, heads, eyes, etc) and who have very human mannerisms and cultural trappings. (Though you can argue D9′s prawns picked that up from living here.)
I know that’s done so that audiences can connect emotionally to the alien characters, but just once I want to see a film where everything about the look of the aliens, how they act and live, is just mind-blowingly weird and hard to comprehend. Alien tried to go for that 30 years ago, but they were still mostly stuck working with a man in a suit. Today with CGI, you could do ANYTHING you and your creative consultants can come up with. You can certainly do more than “well, they’re tall and skinny and blue and they have tails.”
I’d love to see someone go for it.
Posted on August 27, 2009 at 9:15 am
One of the consitent gripes about the Trek franchise from harder SF circles has been that all the aliens are just “humans with funny ears” — you can apply this both to appearance and to motivation and personality — something that was generally blamed on SFX limitations, but may have had more to do with the desire for universal storytelling appeal. (Insert Trek vs. Babylon 5 argument here).
How ironic and illuminating that even someone as imaginative as Cameron falls into the same pattern where SFX are limited only by imagination.
I’d sure love to see some of the classic SF stories of the ’60s and ’70s — when authors such as Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle, Stanley Schmidt and others were exploring what *real* aliens would be like — adapted using modern SFX technology.
Posted on August 27, 2009 at 12:19 pm
And I can also see the converse argument–that if your script has amazing ideas and a fantastic story, it doesn’t matter if the “aliens” are just actors with bags over their heads. (Or if your SPFX space ships consist of pie tins on fishing line.) Tell me a great story, make me think and I’ll forgive all sorts of visual shortcomings.
However, Avatar has been heralded as a SPFX “game changer”–the hype and buzz has been that it will blow away all previous technical standards of both CGI and 3D. But I fear that hampered Cameron in a couple ways–maybe too much time and energy was spent worrying about making it all look “real” instead of on coming up with something new and exciting to actually LOOK at.
More likely, the film’s enormous cost (thanks to all the 3D CGI tech) meant that both Cameron and Fox felt it best to take no chances with the character designs (and maybe with the story–you can’t judge the whole tale from 15 minutes, but it sure seemed dopey, and those who have read Cameron’s scriptment second that notion). You don’t spend all that money on a huge film and then drive away mainstream audiences by showing them aliens that are so weird, so ALIEN that they’re unsettling and very hard to emotionally connect to.
So we get cuddly, fuzzy, kinda nobly spiritual Native American blue lion elves.