Why Avatar was not the best film of 2009

Undoubtedly the most hyped cinema release of 2009, from the director of the overblown piece of self-indulgence known as Titanic, and the unintentionally funny Terminator series, is Avatar. All the hype regarding this film caught my attention. So I went to my local cinema to see what all the fuss was about.

I wont bore you with a description of the film, I am sure you can look on Wikipedia or IMDB for that. So here are my thoughts. And I voice these thoughts with the fear of reprehension from the drooling masses who have blindly labeled this as "oMG!!! BEST MOVIE EVER!!".

My first impression of Avatar was good; visually the movie is absolutely stunning, with full credit due to the boffins in charge of creating the amazingly detailed world of Pandora and its inhabitants. It is remarkable to see how far computer animation has come and how well the synthetic interacts with the organic. But that is where my praise ends.

To me, Avatar at times lapses into little more than a Michael Moore film, dressed in some pretty clothes. James Cameron's overt political bias is so strong it detracts from the spectacle. We get it; you are pissed off about the Iraq War, you are opposed to American imperialism, you don't like corporate America. These dislikes in themselves are not necessarily unjustified, however some subtlety and wit may have helped in giving some legitimacy to the peddling of his tired left-wing agenda. Underneath the admittedly stunning visuals, the film is extremely formulaic, and seemed to me to be a blatant rip-off of the premise of Fern Gully, with a liberal sprinkling of unoriginal and horribly predictable sub-plots (Man infiltrates enemy, lives like enemy, falls in love with enemy, now empathises with enemy etc etc, sounds like My Best Friend's Girl, no?).

One moment stands out for particular ridicule, when the hilariously caricatured General in charge of the mission to find the rare mineral "unobtanium" (very bad attempt at a joke on Cameron's part) on Pandora lays down the plan of attack, he says that the earthlings will fight "terror with terror" and will use "shock and awe" in order to attack the natives and retrieve the precious mineral. A totally unsubtle dig at the Bush administration in a poor attempt to make the film topical, when in reality it actually highlights how untopical the film's political agenda is (hating on Bush seems a little futile and passe right now don't you think?). I have no problem with films making a political statement (I am actually quite partial to it), however Cameron's attempt left a bad taste in my mouth. Sharp political satire this aint.

This movie continually insulted my intelligence, lacked any semblance of charm or humour, was laden with trite plot devices and any attempt at subversion came across as obvious, awkward and preachy. I feel sorry for the CG guys behind this film. Their efforts should have been put towards a decent film. That was a bigger tragedy than the injustices that James Cameron tried to brainwash me about. This film is symptomatic of what I think is wrong with so many films today, in that it seems to be all about throwing millions of dollars towards making films with pretty colours, big explosions, massive superstars and forgetting about making something of actual substance. This is unfortunate, as it is this lack of substance that seems to make money at the box office.

If you want to see proof that you don't need $300 million to make a good film, watch my favourite film of 2009, (500) Days of Summer. A beautiful film that is proof that wizz-bang CGI is no substitute for clever, subtle film making. Or a decent plot.