Diane says: "From Variety: 'a film of universal appeal that just about everyone who
ever goes to the movies will need to see.' Who's going to see this? If you've seen it, do you agree?

"I watched the trailer, and found it sufficient. But should I be running to the theatres?"

Shannon responds: "I saw it over the weekend in 3D.  It is a stunningly beautiful film, but the story is formulaic, the characters are not really developed and the acting is subpar.  However, the world that Cameron creates is breathtaking--it's more than worth it just for that, in my view.  I do agree--you need to see it in the theater, as it breaks completely new ground in filmmaking technology.  PLUS, there is a 3D trailer for Burton's new ALICE IN WONDERLAND film!"

Thom responds: "I never would have chosen this film to see over the weekend but 3 of my movie-going pals insisted. We even had to wait for 1.5 hours so they could see it in 3-D. To my surprise, even in its 2nd week, the auditorium was packed to the rafters. I basically agree with Shannon’s review except I loved Sigourney Weaver in her thankless role. Giovanni Ribisi was all snotty & business-like in his unrewarding role. CCH Pounder is an addition to any cast. And, it was rather difficult to judge the acting of the aliens due to adjusting to their look. Plus, would someone please tell me how Sam Worthington went from a non-entity to superstar of three world-wide smash, mega-grossing monsters in TERMINATOR SALVATION, AVATAR, & THE CLASH OF THE TITANS, in less than a year. Whose butt did he kiss? But, at 2.5 hours the film never lagged and the 3-D effects were gorgeous. I did feel transported. I also loved the anti-American military point-of-view of the film. If you love visuals, be certain not to miss. 4 cats"

Jason responds: "I went to Jordan's Reading and saw it on opening day (http://www.jaysmovieblog.com/2009/12/this-week-in-tickets-14-december-2009.html), since I had some vacation time I had to use by the end of the year.  I thoroughly enjoyed it.  It's a movie that makes sweet, sweet love to one's optic nerve, and is good enough in the other areas so as not to feel like a hollow experience.

"If part of the reason you enjoy movies is to occasionally say 'holy cow, that is an AMAZING sight!' especially in the realms of the fantastic, then, yes, you should absolutely head for a place where it's screening in genuine IMAX 3-D (if you're in the Boston area, the Orange Line and 137 bus drops you off right at Jordan's Furniture; I suspect it will eventually play evenings at the Aquarium when "A Christmas Carol" has run its course).  James Cameron has made a thoroughly amazing spectacle with a little bit of heft to it, and waiting for video is strongly discouraged.  If the visual and science-fictional is much further down your list of likes than the character and subtlety of the films that this list is usually devoted to, it may not be your thing."

Jeff responds: "In IMAX 3D it is, as a purely visual experience, spectacular. I wouldn't be as kind as Shannon was, though, about the rest of it. The plot and script were bargain basement hokey, the music was lifted right out of THE LION KING, and the sentiments expressed were an amalgam of every New Age/Noble Savage/Back To Nature/Fanboy Videogame idea that ever came down the pike. As a roller coaster ride, it was great. As a film, it's just the greatest 3D demo reel ever created. Now we just need Guillermo Del Toro to marry the technology with a story that matters.

"For the record, I'm a tree-hugging Oregonian with a penchant for Hobbitiana."

Kate responds: "Visually stunning, plot moribund.

"It took me about 45 minutes to get past the 3D effects and actually pay attention to what was going on, and once I started paying attention, I thought it was far too predictable.  My son Robin described it as DANCES WITH WOLVES with aliens instead of Indians (to which I'd add, set in the rain forest instead of the Great Plains).  Cameron is working so hard to make a message picture, only his  message, while admirable, is hardly new or controversial, it reeks of political correctness:  'The Man is bad and exploitative.  We should be nicer to indigenous peoples, flora and fauna.'

"James Cameron has a good eye for what looks good up on the screen, but apparently he cannot read, nor can he hear bad dialogue when it is being read to him.  I question his credits as 'screen-writer' on his films, unless he dictated these ideas aloud to his personal assistant (who should have known better than to take them down verbatim)

"I thought TITANIC was one of the worst films of the last century, despite its being the biggest money-maker of all time.  I enjoyed ALIENS, for the most part, and THE ABYSS up to the final third of the film, and I liked the special effects used in TERMINATOR 2.  The rest of his work sucks. 3 cats, for prettiness and wow-factor with regards to special effects, but only 1 cat for dialogue and plot. 

Tom responds: "It was purely awful and I couldn't wait for it to end. If I wasn't there
to see it with a large group of friend, I would have found something else to do about an hour in. Here's the little blurb I put on Facebook:

"'Avatar: The Last of the Bluehicans. I can't be the only one who kept expecting lady nightcrawler to break into Color of the Wind at any second. Nor could I have been the only one who kept praying for the last hour to end so I could take off the goofy glasses and go have a beer.'"

Marilyn says: "I wouldn't say run to see this movie but do see it.  And do not wait for the dvd...This movie is about visual effects and they are amazing.  I saw it in 3-D and will try to see it in Imax.  The story is a little thin and Cameron counts on the love story to keep you in your seat (ala TITANIC) which it does.  No money was spent on the actors but they needed every dime for the computer graphics. This is not a 'great' movie but there are many out now that don't measure up as well. This is pure entertainment."

Nathaniel T. says: "Hi everybody, I'm new/returning to the Chlotrudis family, and I just saw AVATAR two nights ago, so this seems like a logical intro repy.

"If you hate the archetypal Pocahontas story so much that you are driven to drink, AVATAR is not for you. However, if you don't mind the simplicity and familiarity of the narrative, there is a ton of stuff to love here.

"Cameron's references to 2001, THE NEW WORLD and LAST OF THE MOHICANS are all a
little heavy-handed, but they make sense and contribute thematically.

"What really fascinated me was the subtextual engagement of Cameron's own
filmography. For example, the iconic fight between alien and mech-suit from the end of ALIENS is restaged; but this time, the alien is the hero.

"I'm not sure I can say too much more without my thoughts getting jumbled, but I'll just say that this is a dense and worthy piece, especially seen in its intended 3D format."

Shannon responds again: "I was thinking about this film and noted that it's pretty much the exact antithesis of ALIENS--with Sigourney Weaver playing the yin/yang roles to boot!"

"The year is 2154 and the plot is simplistic.  Jake Sully (Sam Worthington)’s twin brother has died and he is stepping into his brother’s role as an astronaut who is being genetically manipulated to be accepted by the people of Pandora, a phantasmagorical planet inhabited by tribal dwellers of the jungle, plains and seaside.  They rely on bow and arrow, their most advanced technical achievement, to hunt and defend themselves.  The American (we can assume American because the actors don’t have British or colonial accents) military industrial complex wants the resources of Pandora and will stop at nothing to achieve that goal.  Sound familiar?  The stress is on the military because Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) is the only corporate type much in evidence throughout the film and he only has one line about making Quarterly profits, which gives us a clue as to his intense interest in the outcome of the mission.  The rest of the time Selfridge shouts orders like 'I want it now.'

"Jake gets to Pandora by sleeping in a techno-coffin where he dreams himself into a new reality.   The Pandorans are suspicious of one who looks like a member of the tribe but who does not speak their language.  Amazingly several people on Pandora are fluent in English.   Neytiri, the daughter of the tribal chief, takes Jake under her wing and shows him the ropes.  They fall in love.  She with him; and he, with her, plus he becomes enamored with the uncomplicated life on Pandora.  They harness Jurassic beasts together.   

"Together they fight the American forces when planet Pandora is under siege.  The 3-D effects are particularly amazing during the battle (although some of the jungle scenes look as though they are layered stage sets meant to look like 3-D rather than the real thing - a new kind of fake).  Will good triumph over the ever imperialistic evil?  Personally I was more relieved that the film was over than interested in the outcome.  Sigourney Weaver plays Dr. Grace Augustine, the good scientist; Stephen Lang is the ruthless trained-to-kill Colonel.  The technical credits list more people than were ever in any Cecil B. DeMille film.  2 cats"