Qualcuno ha visto Avatar

Noi saremo tra gli ultimi a vederlo ma intanto sembra essere un dato di fatto che il film è ottimo ma imperfetto.
Cameron reportedly wrote the story, if not the full script, for "Avatar" at least 15 years ago but decided he had to wait until visual effects capabilities advanced sufficiently to credibly render his imagined world and its inhabitants. On this fundamental level, the picture is a triumph; it's all of a piece, in no way looking like a vague mish-mash of live-action, CGI backdrops, animation, performance capture and post-production effects.
Thematically, the film also plays too simplistically into stereotypical evil-white-empire/virtuous-native cliches, especially since the invaders are presumably on an environmental rescue mission on behalf of the entire world, not just the U.S. Script is rooted very much in a contemporary eco-green mindset, which makes its positions and the sympathies it encourages entirely predictable and unchallenging.


Avatar is unequivocally, completely, 100% the film that has been percolating in James Cameron’s head for the last fourteen years. It is not, in all probability, the film that you had in yours when you first heard that the man who directed Aliens and The Terminator was returning to sci-fi with a movie so ambitious that he had to build the technology to make it happen. If you can let go of your version and embrace Cameron’s – if you’re not, in other words, one of those splenetic internet fanboy types who’ve apparently made their minds up about Avatar before seeing it – then Avatar is a hugely rewarding experience: rich, soulful and exciting in the way that only comes from seeing a master artist at work.

Let’s address the Big Question first: to use the key phrase so often used in connection with the movie, is it a game-changer? Yes, and no would be the cop-out answer, but it’s also the truth. Avatar employs technology necessary to render its largely computer-generated, 3D world that will give directors, including but not limited to Cameron, one heck of a sandbox to play in over the next few years. That’s how the game has changed off screen.

On it, it may not be a game-changer, but no director to date has built a world of this scale, ambition and complexity before, and Avatar – much as the arrival of Raymond van Barneveld forced Phil ‘The Power’ Taylor to up his game – will have rival directors scrambling to keep up with Cameron. Avatar is an astonishing feast for the eyes and ears, with shots and sequences that boggle the mind, from the epic – a floating mountain range in the sky, waterfalls cascading into nothingness – to the tiny details, such as a paraplegic sinking his new, blue and fully operational toes into the sand. The level of immersive detail here is simply amazing.
The Na’vi, each of whom has clearly distinct features (no small feat for a clan of some several hundred creatures) may not always seem photo-real, but they do seem – and this is crucial – alive and extremely expressive, helped by the fact that the dead-eye problem, which has plagued mo-cap movies since their inception, has been well and truly solved.
Mind you, despite all the advances and groundwork laid, we might be not quite ready to see two CG characters effectively dry-hump each other. That’s just wrong…
At times – and this is perhaps Avatar’s biggest flaw, even beyond that bloody awful Leona Lewis song which mars the end credits – this manifests itself in New Age-y, hippy-dippy language and images that suggest that Cameron is one mung bean away from dropping out, man, and going all Swampy on our asses.
But it’s hard to imagine even the most jaded and cynical having any issues with the last forty minutes, in which Cameron uncorks the action and shows all the young pretenders – the Bays and the Emmerichs and the Von Triers – how it’s done. The human attack on Pandora and the subsequent fightback, led by Avatar-Jake, is a largely sustained setpiece of quite staggering scale, imagination and emotion that manages to compress both the truly epic – a human attack on a Na’vi landmark that recalls 9/11 in its devastating imagery – and the thrillingly intimate, as Jake finally faces off against the excellent Stephen Lang’s Quaritch, a scenery-chewing bad guy so badass that he can breathe the Pandoran air without a mask.


The film does not make you feel sick and it is not a disaster. All journalists watching the movie in Fox's Soho headquarters had to sign a form agreeing not to publish a review or even express a professional opinion online or in print before Monday. So by saying Avatar was really much, much better than expected, that it looked amazing and that the story was gripping – if cheesy in many places – the Guardian is in technical breach of the agreement. It is not a breach, however, to report that other journalists leaving the screening were also positive: the terrible film that some had been anticipating had not materialised. It was good.
The Guardian
Per chi vuole continuare a seguire (in attesa del New York times) ovviamente sta tutto qua.

7 commenti:

geimsbond ha detto...

qualche giorno fa in non mi ricordo quale radio (non tu cmq) l'hanno definito come un film che cambierà la storia del cinema....considerando che in ogni caso io non lo andrò a vedere perchè già solo dal trailer mi sembra 'na cazzata....è vero?non vedrò mai un film che cambierà il cinema?o li hanno pagati per dire quello?

p.s. tengo a precisare che non sento altre trasmissioni radiofoniche sul cinema...è stato un caso fortuito di zapping...

gparker ha detto...

Questa cosa del "cambiare la storia del cinema" la si è ripetuta per mesi e solo ora arrivano le prime recensioni che in parte danno conferma.
Dico in parte perchè la sensazione comune (leggendo) è che il film ha una storia già sentita ma a pelle non si era mai visto nulla di simile, nulla di così coinvolgente ed immersivo.
Se cambierà la storia del cinema è impossibile da dire, ci vogliono anni per capirlo, di sicuro sarà influente.

Per dare una risposta chiara alla tua domanda: sbagli a non andare a vedere un film che per certo sarà un'esperienza come non ne hai mai fatte.

geimsbond ha detto...

ma quindi in cosa dovrebbe cambiare la storia del cinema?per come è fatto, per la storia raccontata, per cosa?

Anonimo ha detto...

certe cose cambiano una disciplina per come vengono dette: dopo di esse, man anche contro di esse, la cosa che e' cambiata e' che non si puo non tenerne conto, ripeto nel bene e nel male


gparker ha detto...

concordo con uccio.
La storia non sarà una svolta grossa ma l'esperienza della visione lo sarà.
Il film è fatto in performance capture cioè i personaggi digitali sono recitati, ci sono attori che recitano davvero e i loro movimenti poi sono attribuiti alle creature digitali, ma il punto è che Cameron ha portato tutto questo ad un livello superiore, chi l'ha visto dice che non si capisce che sono personaggi finti.
In più c'è un 3D diverso dal solito perchè Cameron ha messo a punto una sua videocamera 3D particolare e più avanzata. Insomma pare (e ripeto pare perchè mi baso su quel che si legge) che è davvero di un coinvolgimento raro.

frankie666 ha detto...

continuate a parlare tutti di rivoluzione senza averlo ancora visto...

ancora 48 ore, per citare un film del grande Walter HIll.

Domani sera vedro sto fenomeno....

Anonimo ha detto...

Appena visto in Svezia, è da paura, gli effetti sono fenomenali, si è letteralmente immersi nel film. È sicuramente un modo di fare cinema che farà scuola. Molto bella anche la storia, coinvolgente.

Creative Commons License
...ma sono vivo e non ho più paura! by Gabriele Niola is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione-Non commerciale-Non opere derivate 3.0 Unported License.