Archive for the ‘Reviews’ Category

Avatar (2009)

At last, I’ve seen Avatar! There were two reasons I put it off so long:

  1. The 3D factor: I’ve mentioned before that I dislike wearing 3D glasses. They’re uncomfortable!
  2. The length: Clocking in at 160 minutes, it’s not a film for the restless! I can get very restless and bored during long movies if they aren’t entertaining enough. Some movies are just too long, and should really have a cap placed on their length.

Avatar film posterHowever! Neither of these perceived problems were really problems at all. I know that some cinemas offer 2D versions of Avatar, but I’ve heard so much about the très awesome 3D, that I, yet again, decided to give the glasses a try. My verdict is that the RealD glasses I used for Avatar at Village Cinemas, are less bad than the XpanD 3D glasses I used for Coraline at Hoyts, in terms of level of comfort and perceived brightness of the screen.

Yes, they did hurt my eyes a bit and did get uncomfortable, but holy wow were they worth it. Use of 3D in Avatar was best ever. And all this stuff I’ve said about 3D film not being any better than 2D? I take it all back. The visuals were pretty remarkable, and I don’t think it would’ve had nearly the same effect on DVD, which is why I suspect I’d give it a lower rating if I were to view it on DVD instead.

It’s true that the storyline isn’t the most original, but I feel that it was still decent, and I didn’t get restless or bored at all, which is a pretty excellent accomplishment on James Cameron’s part. Someone on IMDB summed it up nicely when they wrote “Technically outstanding. Originality: oh well…”.

One thing I noticed, however, is that Sam Worthington needs to improve his American accent. Unless his character was supposed to have hints of Australia in his voice? I suspect not.

Australia

Australia (2008) film poster

Today, I watched Australia. I’ve been wanting to see it for a while, but only got around to it now. I didn’t see it in the cinema, because it is rather long (over two-and-a-half hours), and I’m likely to get restless and fidgety sitting in a chair for that long.

I enjoyed it! It wasn’t amazing, but if I were to rate it, I’d give it a solid three-and-a-half bottles of rum out of five. It was not without some flaws, though. In particular, it provided but a cursory glance to the Stolen Generations, which would be fine if it didn’t set out address the topic. However, the film both opened and closed with text approaching the topic, yet failed to spend more than a few minutes of storyline acknowledging the Stolen Generations. I poked around the Internet, and the idea that the film was made more for overseas audiences popped up, which could be very true, especially considering where the funding came from. If so, overseas audiences not knowing much about the Stolen Generations is probably good enough motivation to look at it only superficially.

The wide aspect ratio that comes with film was a great asset to Australia. It really is a beautiful country, and there were so many beautiful, wide shots of the landscape from all sorts of angles. Kind of inspires me to spontaneously go on an outback adventure. If only it wasn’t for my inability to withstand hot temperatures…

I’m secretly a Nicole Kidman fan. I like her now, and I like her “old school” stuff, too (Bangkok Hilton is some of the best television I’ve seen). She’s a great actor, and is pretty beautiful. Come to think of it, I must be a Baz Luhrman fan, also! I have seen, and enjoyed, all his (four) films.