Share submit to reddit

About an hour into Avatar, a strange feeling washes over me. No, it’s not the inherent sexual attraction to blue alien women. That strange feeling came more than half an hour ago. This new feeling is tied directly to it, though – the ultimate realization that the people I’m seeing on screen don’t exist.

Because, in a very real sense, they don’t. A computer made them, and made them so well that my brain was completely tricked. Even my skeptical eyes were drawn in by the ruse. Now, an hour and one minute into the movie, I’m sitting there struggling to reconcile what my mind knows to be true with what my eyes are claiming. A minute later, my mind loses, a smile spreads across my face, and I let go of that internal struggle to let the fantasy envelop me completely.

Despite a large box office take, the debates will continue about whether Avatar really is as big an achievement as some say it is. Whether it showed us something new. Whether it wasn’t dragged down to earth by a lacking story. Whether it stands as a purely technological achievement. Perhaps hobbled by hype, the film is now going to be overshadowed by opinions about its flaws instead of celebrations of what was actually on screen.

And what that was, was complete, eye-fooling magic.

Granted, the visual illusion is nothing new to film or escapism, but normally the audience has to suspend their disbelief precariously over a chasm of doubt. Especially in our current cynical film culture. But what is tragically being glossed over is the sheer level of trickery at play here. With most escapism, our brains are telling our eyes to relax and not to be so damned picky. But with Avatar, our eyes are the ones screaming at our brains to shut up about its preconceived notions about the non-existence of aliens. Of other worlds. Or great beasts we’ve never seen in biology books.

This movie has turned the mental tables. A grand achievement, and one we all know the story behind: James Cameron and company invented new technology to make that achievement a reality. But now that the achievement is being lost in the forest while critics and fans search for the trees, it’s got me thinking about what James Cameron really should have done with that new brilliance.

He should have made a movie set in modern time, set in a normal American town, with zero science fiction or supernatural elements.

Actually, what he should have done is a more elaborate, three-part plan:

  1. Veil his project in secrecy (much like, you know, he actually did). Explain that he’s developing a new technology to create it. Ramp up the hype machine exactly as he did with Avatar, except with the added bonus of a huge cattle casting call for actors and actresses.
  2. Release a film from a great screenwriter that features a few known entities and mostly up-and-coming talent living in a world very similar to our own. A world devoid of special effects. The mood of exiting audiences would be a mixture of surprise and massive disappointment, especially the fan boys. We waited years for a character study with no flash?
  3. Reveal to the world that the entire film was made on computers through CGI and that the lead actor doesn’t exist in real life. Watch as heads explode.

I contend that the only reason my brain knew somewhere deep down in the root cellar of my subconscious that the aliens of Avatar were fake is that I know that aliens don’t actually exist. Show me a bunch of CGI-created human beings at that level of detail, and my brain wouldn’t stand a chance. Tell me there’ll be nothing to hand the Oscar to, tell me that the known actors of the film simply lent their images to the computers, tell me the world I just saw isn’t standing on a back lot somewhere. My vision of reality would fall away.

And make no mistake. That’s what Cameron has done here – made the non-existent exist. We don’t seem to be holding onto that as strongly as we should, but I can guarantee that if he’d made a film with no actors or sets, you never would have known it. None of us would. And when he produced proof that we’d all been had so profoundly, some of us would faint, some would turn to religion to make sense of a world gone mad, and others would revel in the sheer insane beauty of technology.

That sheer insane beauty that we should be raising up on our shoulders right about now but don’t seem to. Maybe if James Cameron had produced a film that got us to call a bunch of pixels the Next Big Actor in Hollywood, we’d think twice about what’s been done. Maybe we’d be having a conversation about the future of filmmaking. At the very least, maybe James Cameron would have forced us to take a second look.


RELATED ARTICLES
ARTICLE TAGS
  Previous Article
Next Article  
Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!
  • James
    The only reason he got away with the price tag on this film is because he projected a cost efficiency increase by the elimination of "extras" and then supporting actors over a certain period of time, and has a major inferiority complex involving The creator of the star Wars..

    He is a micro-managing yin yang that could not give one iota of compassion to anyone but himself and this movie "did NOT" fool me in the least as I have seen better renderings then he produced.. even the motion capture is so 1980's in technology and I have yet to see any movie that can fool my senses..
  • Something else you mention that I like a LOT is PROJECT SECRECY. I think that AVATAR did a lot to hide what they were doing in general until the end and just dancing on the overall arc of the project. Sadly, gone, are the days where projects like this one CAN be veiled and a sense of anticipation and "congenital" cinema hype can be pulled off and I so want to be able to revisit that.

    Ahh, the sweet irony of me conveying my affirmative opinion of project secrecy on an Internet Message System that helps to convey what's going on in Hollywood! :)

    A LOT could be garnered for both the film makers and watchers alike with things like that. I don't have the fix, but often, the more "in the dark" on movies I am the more satisfying the presentation. A true double-edged sword to be sure.
  • "...what Cameron should have made was a movie set in modern times, in a normal American town with zero science fiction or supernatural elements..."

    Oy - they're already calling Avatar "thin on story."Imagine removing the fantastical paradise of Pandora, the aliens, the flying lizard/bat things and all of the elements of culture that were represented for the Navi' to a suburb?

    Wow.

    I like your concepts but that sounds gooney at best. With the movement of a sequel, could the cries of "crappy story/Dances with Smurfs/where's the story" be quelled with more exposition and storytelling in another chapter? I say yes.

    With the DRECK that was much of cinema this year, I call Avatar satisfying. Does it cave Cameron's previous extravaganzas (Aliens, Terminator and T2)? Nope. But it IS a very solid addition to his gunbelt that I was happy to see pulled off and sorry that it took so long to do so.
  • jay
    I felt more emotional attachment to the robots in Wall-e and the characters in Up then I did to the Navis in Avatar. You tell me, why? Something was terribly missing in Avatar. Soul, heart, interesting characters, I don't know but I felt no emotional involvement to the film or the characters whatsoever. And I think that was Cameron's goal..to make people feel emotionally attached to computer generated things. Failed in my book. And the story was Ferngully and Pocahontas. Cameron, if you're going to steal a screenplay don't claim you've been hoarding it for fifteen years because the technology just wasn't there yet.
  • He should have made a movie more in this style. http://bit.ly/6f5nQc
  • moses
    The article reminds me of the Image Metric project thing. It surprised me, like James Cameron could have done with the whole CGI humans film. hahah (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYgLFt5wfP4)
  • Winnie_T
    Interesting idea. However I'd say all the extra cost that will be needed to make this work isn't worth it. If I could make the same movie with real actors that can deliver the same premise at a much smaller budget, why wouldn't I? It's the fantasy/sci-fi element, i.e. bizarre ecosystem, alien race, that makes this method worth the while. All the same, I think it'll be a great experiment; maybe add a dash of fantasy/sci-fi to thrill the premise up.

    Or do it documentary style, and finish the movie off with a short movie-within-a-movie. Or have the computer-generated characters observe the real human beings and learn off them, haha.
  • Hi guys..
    Pay attention to what James Cameron has done with his truly spectacular looking Avatar. This, my friends, is the right way to create a 3D film experience.
  • Mladen
    Cameron has already said that he's not interested in animation, but performance capture.
    No matter how your dress the physical appearance of the character, it still would have been performed by a flesh and blood actor.

    Either way, you couldn't justify the enormous budget needed for what you're proposing.
  • Chancethe Gardener
    Have you never played a video game? We are light years away from an audience being fooled that completely...light years.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Follow FILM SCHOOL REJECTS...


MOVIE NEWS | MOVIE TRAILERS | MOVIE REVIEWS | TV REVIEWS | FEATURES | INTERVIEWS | CONTESTS | ARCHIVES | ABOUT
Film School Rejects is the movie blog you've been waiting for. The ultimate commentary track on what's happening in Hollywood, FSR combines the freshest voices on the web and a swagger all its own to provide the best reviews, interviews and industry news coverage to millions of unique visitors from around the world every month.
FSR Team
Got a Tip? Send it here:
editors@filmschoolrejects.com
Publisher:
Neil Miller | Email
Managing Editor:
Cole Abaius | Email
Associate Editors:
Robert Fure | Email
Rob Hunter | Email
Contributors:
Adam Charles | Email
Amber Humphrey | Email
Brian Gibson | Email
Brian Salisbury | Email
Dustin Hucks | Email
Genevieve Blaber | Email
Contributors:
J.L. Sosa | Email
Jack Giroux | Email
Jeremy Kirk | Email
Jim Rohner | Email
Jorge Del Pinal | Email
Josh Radde | Email
Kevin Carr | Email
Contributors:
Landon Palmer | Email
Lauren Flanagan | Email
Paul Sileo | Email
Robert Levin | Email
Robin Ruinski | Email
Advertising:
sales@craveonline.com
All Rights Reserved © 2006-2010 Reject Media, LLC | Site Credits | Privacy Policy
Design & Development by Face3