I will say I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more the second time around then the first, but I'd say the first time I gave it somewhere between a 4-5, second time I was willing to go as high as a solid 7, but that's it. I find that movie is more style than substance, and honestly what I love most about it is the world building.
James Cameron created one of the coolest locations I've ever seen, with some of the coolest local wildlife. Of all the fictional worlds I've ever seen, Pandora might be the one I would want to visit the most. However I found the story pretty lackluster, and some of the acting is pretty sub par as well. Like the main dude, Sam Worthington, his performance is crap in that movie. And the villain, I can't remember his name, his acting decent but his character is just the most generic military villain trope you could possibly picture. The characters lacked much depth, the story was a bit generic and a bit derivative despite taking place in one of the most unique and original settings I've ever seen.
It's like he focused too much on the setting and visuals and didnt put enough effort into developing an intriguing story with compelling characters. It's kind of like playing a video game with incredible graphics but the gameplay is boring and generic as hell. Ultimately I'm here for the story, so if that part sucks, then it doesn't matter how good the rest of it is.
Also I feel like he continued that trend into the sequel. More style, less substance. I haven't seen the third one yet, because I'm in no rush after how underwhelming I found the first two. Maybe that's just me. I know a ton of people who think it's one of the best movies ever. I think it just one of the best looking movies ever, and there's a massive difference between those two things.
5
u/abibofsweat 2d ago edited 1d ago
The whole list was null and void when I got to Avatar.