Sunday, November 29, 2009
Sorry I haven't been around the last few days. I'm still recovering from my Thanksgiving food coma. But I came across this article that seems to have the same qualms about James Cameron's Avatar and it's heavy reliance on CGI. And it now appears that an anonymous reviewer who has seen large portions of the film doesn't like the computer generated effects either. I watch a lot of movies, and am especially obsessed with watching horrible films with inflated budgets. I was delighted to find that Avatar didn't disappoint in the absolutely horrible fetishizing of azure humanoids that James Cameron has obviously been drawing on the back covers of his notebooks since middle school and secretly getting off to in the gym locker room. The new technology they've been using to eliminate the headaches and sickness conducive to old 3D tech has not been used properly in the action scenes throughout Avatar. The problem is with cutting in between 3D focal points and perspective - the mind cannot adjust to it without a buffer - thus, Avatar is literally vomit inducing. But the movie itself, the story/acting/tone are alienating and weird. Of course there are very beautiful moments, with great editing/sound/art direction, but overall it's a horrible piece of sh**. The entirety of the Hollywood marketing machine is behind it, however, so it's going to make a boatload (eh I could slip a Titanic ref. whatever) of money. I don't know if this is the real deal. But if it is, the more than $200 million that has been spent making this movie could make Waterworld (Kevin Costner's mega bomb) look like a roaring success. We'll know soon enough.