Ghostbusters: Afterlife

Director: Jason Reitman
Starring: Carrie Coon, Finn Wolfhard, Mckenna Grace, Paul Rudd, Logan Kim, Celeste O' Connor, Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson, Annie Potts, Sigourney Weaver, Bokeem Woodbine
Running Time: 124 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

After waiting decades and surviving the ill-fated 2016 reboot, many fans have long wondered what an actual Ghostbusters sequel would look like. Jason Reitman's Ghostbusters: Afterlife isn't exactly that, and the fact it doesn't misrepresent this can be viewed both positively and negatively depending upon your perspective. But the biggest surprise is it doesn't seem much like a Ghostbusters film at all, at least until it eventually tries too hard to be. And if someone were to be blindly seated in front of their screen and asked to speculate what this was, they'd probably say it was the first episode of the upcoming fourth season of Stranger Things. While that inspiration was evident in the trailer, little can prepare you for just how much the film resembles that Netflix series, nearly qualifying as a certified spin-off. 

At first glance, all of this seems like a great idea, if not for the nagging reminder that we've desperately wanted a second Ghostbusters sequel for so long that it almost feels like we're doing this just to get it out of the way. But if anyone can do it, Jason Reitman (son of the original's director, the late Ivan Reitman) would be the ideal candidate, despite it being the kind of escapist entertainment he's consciously avoided dabbling in for much of his career. Within its genre and entering with the barest of expectations, this is a fun, entirely predictable and obvious entry into the franchise's canon, even if you can argue we're not truly given what we came for until the final minutes. And by that point, it tracks so closely with the 1984 film that it could be mistaken for a full-blown remake, only with different actors in the roles. 

If the female-lead 2016 reboot was justifiably criticized for its gimmicky casting (though the real problem was always more about whom they chose and the execution), it's only fair to examine a similar call here by Reitman to cast an all kids team. While the intent is clearly to establish the next generation characters to carry the franchise forward, that's assuming it won't take another thirty years to get another one made and again convince the originals to return, especially the notoriously picky Bill Murray. And what would that film even look like? This doesn't offer many answers, as the casting decision was obviously intended to reel in younger audiences and get this particular project made and released now. Well, that worked, even while this doesn't quite fit the spirit of how the franchise was originally envisioned, or more importantly, where it could have possibly gone.

It's June 2021 and original Ghostbuster Egon Spengler has recently passed away, attacked by a creature at his desolate farmhouse in Summerville, Oklahoma. When his estranged, financially struggling daughter Callie (Carrie Coon) inherits the farm after she and her kids Trevor (Finn Wolfhard) and Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) are evicted from their Chicago apartment, they try to acclimate to their new surroundings. While the reclusive Egon was known locally as the "Dirt Farmer," his decaying residence can best be described as post-apocalyptic in appearance, further fueling Callie's resentment toward her late father, whom she feels abandoned her as a child. 

Phoebe adjusts the best, enrolling in a summer school program taught by seismologist Gary Grooberson (Paul Rudd) and making a new friend named Podcast (Logan Kim). Meanwhile, Trevor becomes infatuated with local drive-in restaurant waitress, Lucky (Celeste O' Connor), prompting him to take a job there. But when Phoebe discovers the farmhouse is haunted and learns more about her grandfather's legacy from Gary, it soon becomes obvious that Egon was onto something huge happening in town. Upon locating his underground lab, equipment and even the dormant Ecto-1 Cadillac, Phoebe, Podcast and Trevor must get to the bottom of what's causing this seismic supernatural activity, bringing them face-to-face with an indescribable evil lurking beneath Summerville's mysterious underground mine. 

Reitman takes his sweet time introducing the characters and situation, putting us far ahead of the central players in terms of grasping this family's current connection to the supernatural occurrences in New York City thirty years prior. It's almost about halfway through the film until those events are openly acknowledged (via YouTube no less) and that kind of works since Reitman already has a knowing and willing fanbase at his disposal that doesn't need anything spelled out for them. Most of the trailer took care of that anyway and he's in the rather fortunate position of being able to postpone the payoff as long as possible, spending most of the time building the story before blowing the roof off in the last act. The  character-centric shenanigans, while predictable and sometimes overly cutesy, is mostly a success, especially when it comes to the more emotional story arc of Callie's bitterness toward her late father and how it's affected the relationship she currently has with daughter Phoebe, an awkward, self-professed science nerd. 

Carrie Coon gives the film's best performance as this single, frazzled mom in over her head and broke, still suffering as a result of her father's tainted legacy, but determined to be the parent she thinks he wasn't. Reitman and co-writer Gil Kenan have a really good idea there and when that's front and center is when the picture's at its best, most notably in the final minutes. Grace McKenna is basically the lead, and while it's easy to question the reasoning behind having a tween character carry this, she's very believable as Spengler's quirky, likable granddaughter. The realization of who he was and how it helps her see what she could be is well handled, a standout amongst lesser scenes of the kids busting ghosts. And given screenwriters' recent obsession with podcasting characters, it was only a matter of time before we actually got one named "Podcast." Logan Kim's fun in the part, but when his supporting role is elevated to a co-lead, it's hard to argue that his goofy charms didn't work better in smaller doses. 

It's a bit jarring to see these kids with a proton pack and ghost trap, stepping into such iconic, identifiable roles even if they aren't necessarily being touted as "replacements" for the original actors who are now too up in years to carry this again.  Stranger Things' Finn Wolfhard already briefly wore the uniform on that series so you have to wonder if Reitman cast him as a deliberate attempt to further incorporate the tone of that show. He acquits himself fine, even if the sub-plot involving his crush on Lucky seems thrown in and doesn't really land. Paul Rudd is entertaining as usual in what can best be described as an oddly written science teacher/seismologist character who shows horror movies in class and bonds with the kids, while also trying to woo Callie. There's enough going on with this guy that he comes off as a composite of multiple characters, but Rudd is Rudd, so that helps.

The special effects and CGI are top notch, and while some have complained, the mini Stay Puft marshmallow men are a clever touch that calls back to the '84 film in much the same way a new ghost nicknamed "Muncher" does, making for a suitable Slimer stand-in. While it's not exactly a well kept secret that Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson all respectively return as Venkman, Stantz and Winston (along with Annie Potts' Ghostbuster secretary Janine Melnitz and Sigourney Weaver's Dana Barrett), the nature and extent of their roles vary some (Weaver's basically non-existent). No one's likely to be disappointed, as the core three are mostly back at the top of their games, with Aykroyd arguably turning in one of his more memorable recent supporting turns as Murray and Hudson smoothly slide back into their parts as if no time has passed. 

Its last act most feels like a Ghostbusters movie, both for better and worse. The performances are a highlight (including a great but uncredited Olivia Wilde as Gozer), as is the emotional payoff involving the late Egon and his family. In terms of providing fan service, Reitman's approach is to basically recreate the original's ending with a new cast, with Coon and Rudd's purpose becoming distractingly familiar. Viewers are put in an odd position when the entirely new touches are hit or miss and what's faithful to the original is almost too slavishly faithful, resulting in another one of those soft reboots that straddles the fence in not wanting to alienate anyone. Stranger Things aside, Close Encounters of the Third Kind is also a noticeable influence, so when you throw some of that in there it's all kind of a mess, albeit not an entirely uninteresting one.

The first Ghostbusters is largely thought of as an action comedy appealing to kids and nostalgic adults with a key difference being that 11 and 12 year-olds weren't the leads. But at least Afterlife prevents embarrassing The Karate Kid remake comparisons by leading with a multi-generational story that elicits high quality work from the young actors despite a questionable conceit. The movie is slick, well made and probably the nearest of near-misses, but it's arguably more effective as a Harold Ramis tribute than a Ghostbusters entry, at least in terms of whatever we now perceive that to mean.    

Rampart

Director: Oren Moverman
Starring: Woody Harrelson, Ice Cube, Ned Beatty, Ben Foster, Anne Heche, Sigourney Weaver, Robin Wright, Brie Larson, Steve Buscemi, Cynthia Nixon, Jon Bernthal
Running Time: 108 min.
Rating: R

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

I spent half the running time of Rampart wondering when the main character would bite the dust and the other half wondering why I didn't want to see that happen more. It's a frustrating film with isolated flashes of greatness and an electrifying lead performance, starting off as a focused character study, before unraveling as an overplotted mess. It's a compelling mess to be sure, but goes in a bunch of different directions when it really just needs to be going in one. The result is an effort that occasionally impresses but ends up being muddled by bureaucratic and political nonsense, too often tying the film up in as much red tape as its main character.

It's Los Angeles circa 1999 and LAPD officer Dan Brown (Woody Harrelson), is a 24-year veteran of the Rampart division, which is recently reeling from scandal. He's also a racist, mysogynistic, homophobic, corrupt, womanizer with anger management issues serious enough to have earned the nickname, "Date Rape Dan" (for when he allegedly murdered a date rapist in cold blood). Now with video footage surfacing of him assaulting a suspect within an inch of his life and his department under a microscope, his troubled career is called into question by assistant district attorney Joan Confrey (Sigourney Weaver) and Internal affairs investigator Kyle Timkins (Ice Cube) who both are just trying to avoid further embarrassment.  He could have been set up, but that point's almost irrelevant when you consider he'd do something like this anyway, and has. His home life isn't much better, as he's living with his two spurned ex-wives (Anne Heche and Cynthia Nixon) who are sisters. With each he shares a daughter, the eldest of which (Brie Larson) can't stand him. Plagued by scandal and personal demons, Dan's reached the breaking point and must now confront his failings head on or risk losing his job, and possibly his life and family.

Early on, it appears this is going to be a brutal character study of a protagonist who's actually the antagonist. The opening scenes set that stage as Dan verbally abuses a female officer and roughs up a suspect. A portrait of a racist cop out of control with seemingly no conscience or remorse for his actions brings to mind 1992's Bad Lieutenant or its recent New Orleans-based remake starring Nic Cage. But then the film seems to back off that. Then a little more. Then a lot. By about the midway point, the screenplay gets so lost in its corruption plot (which never pays off in a meaningful way), that we almost forget who the story is really about. Worse yet, we keep hearing what a terrible human being this guy is but there just isn't enough evidence presented on screen to support it. He's supposedly this monstrous deadbeat dad, yet most of the scenes he shares with his family aren't nearly as destructive as you'd expect given how much of a ticking time bomb he is on the job. Most of these home scenes work though, at least until they're interrupted by the machinations of what feels too much like a police procedural.

Though the movie frequently seems to lose its grip its the main character, Harrelson doesn't. He can pretty much do anything and they should have let him, rather than just shoehorn the actor into the kind of formula cop movie we've seen far too often. Moverman previously directed him to a supporting actor nomination in 2009's war film, The Messenger, a far more focused effort that knew exactly what it was and where to go. But what's stranger is how he and crime novelist James Elroy's script seems to be in complete conflict with the directorial style and execution. It's shot in almost a frenetic, hand held, docudrama-like way that wants to bring us onto the streets of L.A during the 90's, yet the screenplay is far more conventional than that in how it incorporates familiar elements of dirty cop movies.

Robin Wright plays a suspicious defense attorney Dan starts sleeping with, and while it's a substantial supporting role well played by the great actress, I'm glad I'm not being quizzed on its purpose.  The legendary Ned Beatty also appears as a retired dirty cop who still has his hands in everything in the city, making the most of his intense scenes with Harrelson. A bearded Ben Foster is wasted as a wheelchair-bound homeless man while Steve Buscemi cameos. And doing a complete 180 from her recent turn in 21 Jump Street, an almost unrecognizable Brie Larson goes head to head with Harrelson in the emotional family scenes as his rebellious daughter, but even that sub-plot's impact seems diluted amidst everything else. And Heche and Nixon's sibling ex-wives spend most of the movie admonishing Dan or threatening to kick him out the house.    

It's always a shame when a movie that should be a home run falters, especially when it comes at the expense of skillful performances that deserved top notch material. If any of this feels like a gripping character study it's due to Harrelson, who provides enough gritty realism to convince us we're watching the movie we really wanted to see instead of the one onscreen. Officer Dan Brown isn't the kind of character you can just plug into a formula plot and expect a thrilling result. He's difficult, requiring a challenging script. You'd figure an independently financed production would have the leeway to take some risks, so it's especially disappointing to see a small film playing it so safe with a hot-button issue like police brutality. On the acting front Rampart definitely delivers, but most of its failings stem from spoon-feeding us more plot than was even necessary.

Cedar Rapids

 

Director: Miguel Arteta
Starring: Ed Helms, John C. Reilly, Anne Heche, Isiah Whitlock Jr. Kurtwood Smith, Stephen Root, Mike O' Malley, Sigourney Weaver, Alia Shawkat
Running Time: 86 minutes
Rating: R

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★) 

Cedar Rapids makes for an interesting case study of a how a comedy can be intelligently made and well-acted yet still not measure up because it doesn't bring the laughs. There just isn't much there and when it ended it almost felt as if I'd seen nothing at all. If this were a drama (which at times I wondered) it could almost be chalked up as a success because it's so character driven and the performances hold your interest. But it's a comedy and in director Miguel Arteta's defense I'm not sure a really good one could have even been made about an insurance convention in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The idea in itself doesn't exactly elicit a wealth of comic possibilities, with the action unfolding not disproving that theory. If someone asked me what this were about, I'd tell them just that: an insurance convention in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. There's some other stuff thrown in that's sort of a mess, yet also very predictable. For huge fans of Ed Helms' Hangover character or those clamoring for an Anne Heche comeback this may do the trick, but otherwise it's a skip.

Nerdy and naive Brownstar Insurance agent Tim Lippe (Helms) has lived a very sheltered life, having never left the small town in which he grew up, to the point where he's carrying on an affair with his former junior high teacher Macy (Sigourney Weaver) who seems far less into it than he. His world gets turned upside down when his co-worker dies in an accident and he's called on by his boss Bill (Stephen Root) to represent the company at the regional conference in Cedar Rapids. The pressure's on for him to make sure they take home the prestigious "Two Diamonds" award, which they've won for the past 3 years but takes on an added importance this time as a victory would help keep the small, struggling firm afloat. A fish out of water in his new hotel surroundings, Tim meets wild man Dean Ziegler (John C. Reilly) and Ronald Wilkes (The Wire's Isiah Whitlock Jr.), notable only for how normal he is and his obsession with The Wire. He also carries on a romantic fling of sorts with the married, free-spirited Joan (Heche) and gets involved with a prostitute named Bree (Alia Shawkat). Having never been exposed to much of anything before, the newly independent Tim is set loose in Cedar Rapids, having the time of his life but possibly compromising his company's award chances in the process.

I get what writer Phil Johnston is going for in attempting kind of a 40-Year-Old Virgin meets Superbad in the midwest but something got lost on the way to the screen and it doesn't exactly come together like it should. Ed Helms is sufficient in the lead but this is just Dr. Stu Price from Hangover. It's almost literally the same character with very few adjustments made, resulting in him giving the exact same performance as in that film. It's possible Helms has more to offer than that but we certainly won't ever find out if he continues being typecast as the uptight, middle-aged geek who has to come out of his shell. At this rate, he'll turn into the adult Michael Cera. But besides having a predictable story arc, where the movie ultimately misfires is in overestimating how funny this whole scenario (or lack of one) at the hotel really is, especially when these strange people Tim encounters are actually fairly normal, at least from a cinematic standpoint. The ads and commercials would have you believe John C. Reilly is as out of control here as he was in Walk Hard or Step Brothers but through little fault of his own that guy never shows up here and his supposedly sleazy character is stuck in neutral the entire time, never really contributing much in the way of laughs. They keep telling us he's crazy but considering Reilly's playing the part, it's probably up there with some of the more restrained work he's done, which is fine, just not comical in the slightest.

What's so bizarre is that at many points the dialogue seems to mock how boring Cedar Rapids is (except to the wide-eyed protagonist), but if that's the case, why would you set this there, then openly acknowledge that detail in the script?  In a way, it's a strength that the film was confident enough to not go too over-the-top but even when it tries to aim in that direction with Tim going on a drug bender and picking up a prostitute it just feels like something we've seen before in far too many other comedies and doesn't really mix with the material in this one. What surprisingly does work well is the romance, as 90's legend Anne Heche (don't pretend you don't remember Six Days Seven Nights, Volcano, Wag The Dog and Return to Paradise) ends up giving the most charming performance in the film as the loopy, eccentric Joan, reminding us again how she became a star by giving many scenes bite that wouldn't otherwise have any. I also found the Sigourney Weaver sub-plot one of the few laugh-out-loud funny scenarios, but that's unfortunately dispensed with after the opening minutes. Alia Shawkat is pretty much wasted in the thankless hooker role, her screen presence these days serving only to rub salt in the wound that we probably won't get that Arrested Development movie anytime soon, or maybe ever.  

Cedar Rapids is one of those comedies that feature likable, intelligent characters you don't mind spending time with and you're smiling much of the way through, but you end up forgetting you watched it the next day. Or even possibly the next hour. That it comes from the same director as last year's mild creative success Youth in Revolt is ironic considering that film was edgier and had a much sharper script, despite being targeted to a younger age group. This is more of a sophisticated adult comedy, and maybe too much so since most of its laughs come in the first five minutes with the set-up, before resembling a coming-of-middle-age drama for the remainder of its running time. It doesn't misstep much within that framework, but part of the problem could be attributed to so many male-driven comedies revolving around the tired plot point of a man-child having to grow up. Cedar Rapids is a somewhat solid, but needless entry into that genre, proving it's not good enough for a comedy to just be smart when it doesn't bother to also be funny.

Avatar

Director: James Cameron
Starring: Sam Worthington, Stephen Lang, Sigourney Weaver, Michelle Rodriguez, Giovanni Ribisi
Running Time: 162 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ 1/2 (out of ★★★★)

How do I praise a film I think the movie industry would have been better off without? That I couldn't care less that I've gotten to Avatar this late reveals a lot about my interest level. Despite being presented with many opportunities to check it out in the theater over the past few months I passed on every one. I just had no desire to see it, which isn't unusual. There are a lot of movies released in a given year that don't interest me, it's just that none of them have been the most popular, highest grossing movie of all-time until now. I'm a huge sci-fi fan, but also sometimes a picky one who prefers character driven stories to fantasy, so this didn't look like it was in my wheelhouse at all.

I also disagree with those who believe a movie has to be "experienced" in a theater for maximum impact. If it does, chances are it probably has little else going for it other than special effects. That was probably my biggest beef with the film's success and why I stayed away from it. That and I hate the fact that every movie (whether warranted or not) is now being released in 3-D and they can jack up the ticket prices as long as everyone's eating it up. It's fair to blame James Cameron for all of this, yet it isn't. He tried to make the best movie he could and can't be held completely responsible for studios trying to capitalize on its success. When Star Wars was released in 1977 the same charges were leveled against George Lucas, and though that film negatively impacted movies in a similar way and ushered in the era of big effects driven blockbusters, the story and characters were the primary focus.

From my perspective the fallout from Avatar has been disastrous, but I promised myself if I ever saw the film (and there was legitimate doubt whether I would) I'd be objective in judging what's on screen, not the numerous problems it's release caused. So no, it isn't the most amazing thing I've ever seen but I enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would, and as much as it pains me to admit, it's an undeniably great piece of entertainment that still plays very well on DVD. While mind-blowing visuals rule the day, the narrative is never sacrificed because of it and the few small issues I did have were the opposite of what I expected. Of course, the effects are unlike anything we've seen but given the amount of time and effort Cameron poured into the project and the hype it got, anything less would almost be considered unacceptable. Still, they're astounding, even on a flat-screen LCD.

What really threw me for a loop were the performances and how how caught up in the drama I became. What I didn't care for was all the spiritual and metaphysical mumbo-jumbo that fought for dominance over the actual story, especially in the film's action-packed final hour. It seemed someone (I'm guessing Cameron) had an inexplicable desire to make an obvious eco-friendly message movie that would best be appreciated by Al Gore. To an extent, every film is a message movie in that it has a point of view but in this case beating us over the head with it isn't necessary because everything else works so well. It's a minor complaint, but a worthy one especially when the lesson is so trite and fails in telling us anything we didn't already know. But that the picture only suffers slightly from this is a real credit to Cameron's skills as a storyteller and action director.

The plot is practically common knowledge by now. It's the year 2154 on the planet Pandora and paraplegic ex-marine Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is selected to replace his deceased twin brother in a corporate-run program in which humans are remotely immersed in the indigenous population of the gigantic, blue-skinned Na'vi via "avatars." As the new chosen one, Jake's allegiances are torn between Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) and scientist Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver), who have opposing philosophies regarding the goals for the operation and how interaction with the Na'vi should be handled. Whereas Quaritch wants Jake to gain their trust in order to procure valuable intelligence so he can violently displace them, Augustine is interested in opening the lines of communication with the species and protecting their culture. Jake is taken under the wing of a Na'vi named Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) who teaches him the ways of her people and he becomes emotionally attached, questioning his allegiances. This sets him and the Na'vi people on a violent collision course with Quaritch.

Despite claims to the contrary, this is a strong story with performances to match it. There's no mistaking that the CG and visuals take precedence but none of it would have mattered if not narratively presented in a way that do them justice and makes sense. Cameron, like George Lucas, will never be be accused of being a master scribe or having a great ear for dialogue but he's an effective storyteller who knows how to craft a compelling sci-fi tale around action scenes and write strong characters. There are very few surprises in the story and there's never any real doubt how he's going to get there but he really knows how to get there better than most.

Summing up the well-told but not completely original plot as Ferngully meets Pocahantas might be a little harsh and overly reductive, but there's some truth to it. That didn't bother me though since it is presented in a visually fresh and interesting way. There are so few original stories out there and everything seems taken from something else, or at least incorporating elements from something else, that I'll just settle for the story not being told stupidly or coming off as a total knock-off. This didn't even come close to doing either, but when the focus was on the action the film flowed much better for me than when it was attempting to make viewers feel an emotional or spiritual connection to the story. In that regard the inter-species romance in the story surprisingly fared better than anything else.

I was absorbed and impressed throughout, but never really moved and part of the problem is that it's message of being at one with nature is being told to us rather than being shown or felt, as it was in superior films like Into The Wild or The New World. Both of those carried similar themes, but it needed to be extrapolated and discovered by the viewer along with the characters. I didn't get that impression here. We were clearly being told what to feel through the dialogue, which is fine to an extent since everything else is perfect, but less would have been more in delivering that message. This is partially representative of the current state of movies and entertainment in general today with studios primarily aiming to reach a demographic between the ages of 5 and 15, which isn't a problem unless you're not in it. The evidence of that is everywhere these days and could help explain the juvenile delivery of its message. It's admirable to make a movie the whole family can see but the more interesting action and sci-fi elements took a backseat when the movie probably would have been slightly better off grittier.

Ironically, as much as the scenes on Pandora break new cinematic ground, I preferred the human scenes at the station and the political tug-of-war taking place between the military and scientific factions, mainly because of Sigourney Weaver's performance. Cameron's always been a pro at writing strong female characters and Weaver is so determined in conveying Dr. Augustine's purpose that she brings a credibility to the story it probably wouldn't have otherwise. It contrasts well with Stephen Lang's no-nonsense, bad ass Colonel who's as entertaining as a villain can be in an action film while Giovanni Ribisi is the least irritating he's ever been as the greedy corporate head behind the program. The whole idea of avatars, how they work, what they mean and their consequences were more interesting to me than Jake's immersion into the Na'vi culture. As I watched I kept thinking that the big payoff should be the humans connecting with the Na'vi not as avatars, but themselves, and Cameron was smart enough to know that it was and build to that moment in the final hour so it really means something.

Worthington deserves more credit than he's gotten as the lead and in a way he acts as our avatar into this world as we see everything through his eyes, experiencing this world for the first time just as he is. He doesn't doing anything special, but doesn't need to and is smart enough to know that. He has a quiet charisma that works well for this and while another actor conceivably could have played the role and done equally well he's great nonetheless. It was also a smart detail on Cameron's part to make Jake a paraplegic so his journey ends up meaning more to him than it would your average Joe action hero. It's a small thing, but I'm not sure many other screenwriters would have thought to include it and the decision made the early scenes play that much better. You could argue the most overlooked performance comes from Zoe Saldana as Neytiri. Or does it? With this motion capture technology it's difficult to gauge just how much she really did and what was contributed via CG in post-production. That's why Cameron's claims that this new technology represents a new approach to acting and the future of moviemaking seem ridiculous. I sincerely hope he's wrong on all counts and can completely understand why actors are pissed about it.

Uttering the phrase, "You don't go into a movie like Avatar for it's story" is a total cop-out and really shouldn't be said in regard to any film, much less this one. Luckily, this does have an involving story but we may not be able to say the same for future projects abusing this technology so studios can make a quick buck. Cameron took a big risk and it paid off. Do I think the film would have been more exciting if seen on the big screen in 3D? Probably. But a film's quality shouldn't be entirely dependent on the format or circumstances in which it's viewed. Either way, Avatar holds up and there's nothing the slightest bit average about it. While each aren't without their issues, I'd slightly favor Avatar over its Best Picture rival The Hurt Locker just because this gave us something we've never seen before. But that doesn't mean I want to see anything like it again.