Submitted by Professional-Rip-519 t3_127wqqj in movies

I love James Cameron he's my favourite director but this has to be he's second worst movie after the Spawning. I need to rewatch Parahna 2 again to see if it's better than my memory serves. But as for Way of the Water the plot feels forced since we all know how much Jim loves the ocean. There's no need for Sully and fam to go stay with the water blue people. And why do the water Navi react like their seeing aliens when they see the forest Navi I'm pretty sure both tribes has been around for thousands of years. There's also so much exposition it feels like their explaining a hole movie that happened in between. Why are the sky people so dumb attacking wise . All the characters seem flat except for Spider (unexplained) and the Sigourney Weaver Kid (unexplained) . Why is the Imbd score so high am I missing something?



You must log in or register to comment.

4a4a t1_jeg9tz5 wrote

I felt the same way about the first Avatar movie. It seemed like it had been written by a 13 year old boy, but it looked amazing. I've had no desire or intention to see the 2nd one.


[deleted] t1_jeh2gfl wrote

There is no difference with the quality of writing of Aliens or Terminator and the Avatar films.

Seriously. Rewatch those beloved classics. Cameron was always about spectacle and concept. His dialogue and stories were never the appeal.


KomithEr t1_jegaj96 wrote

it looked like a video game tbh, or maybe just my eyes are too used to cgi by now


TheShadyGuy t1_jeg91fh wrote

I guess you should have paid more attention to that exposition, because it explained what you seem to be missing about the plot.


izza123 t1_jeg7451 wrote

No you didn’t miss anything it was terrible. People had decided ahead of time to enjoy it and set aside its many faults but it was objectively bad.

Edit: well you’ve alerted the horde now


Professional-Rip-519 OP t1_jeg8r6y wrote

It's beyond me how people can say this is good but something like Black Adam is bad .Both had wooden lead characters, both had little to no story with exposition as dialog covered in pretty cgi why are we making apples and oranges here.


izza123 t1_jeg8xje wrote

Black Adam was also pure shit. Both of them are part of a larger trend of Hollywood passing off low effort garbage and calling it gold. Their marketing is heavily social media based


k_albasi t1_jegg1ma wrote

Yeah but the water looked like water.


le66669 t1_jeg6paj wrote

Agree 100%. It also annoyed me that they are now only there to get fancy sperm whale oil (no mention of unobtanium).
I do think the vibrancy in his world building is amazing and not to be underestimated in its impact on reception.


TheShadyGuy t1_jeg944x wrote

> (no mention of unobtanium).

Except for the part where it was mentioned, of course.


le66669 t1_jeggf51 wrote

Sorry, I watched it last week and never heard it mentioned so did some digging.

>While Avatar: The Way of Water shared many similarities with its predecessor, the mineral wasn't mentioned once.


TheShadyGuy t1_jegtji6 wrote

It was mentioned very briefly while explaining that now the mission is to terraform the planet for colonization. That author is wrong.


divinitia t1_jegops3 wrote

They mentioned that they're not only there for a single resource anymore. That was the reference to unobtainium.


MisterB78 t1_jegaxnj wrote

What did you expect after the first movie? It's a decidedly mediocre movie with spectacular visual effects. Enjoy it (or don't) for what it is, but if you're expecting it to be some opus magnum then that's pretty much on you


Sks44 t1_jegdpof wrote

Cameron has become a painter that enjoys painting the background and gets annoyed when he has to deal with figures.


Saoirse_Says t1_jeg6vir wrote

I dunno I saw it in IMAX and turned my critical thinking off for 3.5 hours and had my mind blown by the audiovisual experience lol


Professional-Rip-519 OP t1_jeg8alr wrote

That's my point it looks gorgeous and sounds phenomenal but there was no meat with the potatoes. Very weird for a James Cameron movie.


Saoirse_Says t1_jegokv7 wrote

Yeah but I had a craving for French Fries and I don’t like the way James Cameron cooks meat so it worked for me XD


Futur_alliance t1_jega3gt wrote

That's all it is. Movie could have been 2 hours without the enhanced visual experience and all of the under water unecessary stuff for the 3D experience.


Saoirse_Says t1_jegooi5 wrote

It was definitely too long, but that kinda helped with the immersion I think. It’s a movie to get lost in y’know?


TheOnlyJurg t1_jegq41r wrote

I do love how you people still don’t get it. It’s the first film to use underwater performance capture technology, the first avatar was also groundbreaking. There’s more to films than just stroking peoples perceived intelligence, lmao.

Imagine if every film was just some complex plot so viewers like you can feel special about themselves. Cinema would be fucking awful.


izza123 t1_jeg76us wrote

By that standard a fireworks show should be best picture at the Oscar’s


Saoirse_Says t1_jeg7orn wrote

Well I don’t believe that Avatar should have won Best Picture lol. But it was a damn fine fireworks show


muihuddin t1_jegc2l8 wrote

One of the worst movies i have seen

So freaking long and absolutely pointless

The ducking general keeps getting his children and still does fuck all


Tonyhillzone t1_jegckyr wrote

How did the bad guys know that Sully had left the forest and to go looking for them?

Why did the water tribe abandon Sully and family half way through the big fight, and just reappear and the end to tell them that they are family now?

How many times did the kids get kidnapped and yet left in an unsecured location by supposedly badass military people?

What happened to the bad guys going native like they said they were going to do at the beginning?

And it's pretty much a rehash of the first movie, just in a water setting.

Also, they talk about needing to pacify the locals so humans can settle Pandora because Earth is dying. Why would you settle a planet/moon that had an atmosphere so toxic it renders you unconscious in seconds?

Stunning film, but more of a David Attenborough nature documentary than a coherent story. Enjoyable though.


Professional-Rip-519 OP t1_jeggx0u wrote

Yeah the military guys had the perfect disguises but why would the wear military clothes with huge guns it made no sense.


tempaccountinterval t1_jeg742f wrote

I was too busy taking in the spectacle to care to be honest. That aside, they did explain the need to switch bases. Water guys reacting that way makes some sense at least considering how some people do react that way here on Earth - not too far to consider that happening with tribes. Exposition, I guess, not trying to defend it too much because I can't recall exactly where they did too much of it, I did'nt really care too much because it was with friends and we had a blast just looking at the film - I guess exposition would be a subjective thing - maybe too little/maybe not enough Unsure. Yeah but sky people not just killing off certain characters etc. just made me feel like its a bit too much sympathy to expect from them. Film is subjective, if you felt that way its perfectly fine. For instance, I abhor Space Odyssey 2001 and consider it a snoozefest but I'm aware of its merits and why people like it. Honestly, looking forward to Avatar 3 just to see the fire spectacle of it - and that's the prime reason. Just like how I'll likely watch the upcoign transformers film for the crazy big screen effects.


SnooDoodles5894 t1_jeg9cm1 wrote

The public school system has failed you