Maria and I both experienced the Avatar sequel, and yet left with differing opinions. We wanted to create a balanced review, and so wrote our discussion down – presented below.
Spoilers past the first question.
Is it a logical continuation of the first film, and do you need to remember context?
Way of Water picks up where the first film left off but fast-forwards through the mundanities of Neytiri and Jake’s family life over the next couple of years after the humans were sent back. The only context that is helpful (as someone who saw Avatar 1 a very long time ago) is that Quaritch is a Na’vi-hating marine who was shot by Neytiri, and Grace was the scientist studying the planet of Pandora and its inhabitants.
There is no doubt that these two films are strongly connected. The characters essentially stay the same, with the addition of their children and a new tribe of Na’vi. Remembering the first film comes in useful in the initial understanding of the importance of their relationships and the importance of Eywa – as her divinity is a thread that weaves through the plot of both films.
Is the plot worth three hours?
I would argue yes. At no point did I think there was an unnecessary scene, or actions that were out of line for the characters in a specific situation. James Cameron definitely wrote the film to be a rich storyline – but it didn’t feel like he had to simply fill a quoted time. One of the biggest themes throughout was the importance of family, so it made sense for the plot to include characters going back into a burning ship to rescue yet another sibling, and in a way that wasn’t necessarily predictable.
This is where I disagree. I found that the plot was underwhelming and slightly lacklustre – stretching it out for three hours did not help. The main villain stays the same (because he somehow managed to survive being killed in the first film), all the actors come back playing themselves or their miracle children (Sigourney Weaver, I’m looking at you.) The first hour of the film is just pretty pictures of the forest and Jake’s family, the next is them trying to assimilate into the new water tribe and the last is the main battle – which, mind you, ends without the main villain dying – AGAIN. To round up, the cinematography is astonishing and beautiful, which made the film worth the time in the cinema, but the plot was – for the lack of a better word – lazy.
Is the world original and creative?
Absolutely. It’s breathtaking, and the artists and animators that worked on the visuals would get most of the box office money if I was in charge. Having seen the film twice (once in 3D), the colours and the inner workings of the different locations are stunning. Cameron thought everything through – how Eywa manifests herself underwater, how the tribes differ, how they speak, how they show affection. I personally love the Na’vi culture being centred around their environment, and the way they link with the creatures within it.
Cannot argue here. The world is absolutely magnificent and when watching it in 3D, you cannot help but feel the wind as they fly though the incredible flora of Pandora. The whole film feels like a National Geographic documentary of a land that does not exist but feels incredibly real. The aesthetic and honest beauty of this film is what makes it worth watching, and Cameron’s vision cannot be faulted.
Are the characters authentic and interesting?
To me, Kiri had the most well-established personality – in almost every scene it was clear she is more comfortable with plants than with her peers, which paid homage to her mother’s (Grace) interests. Lo’ak was the “outsider” – a seemingly clichéd trope, yet in the context of Avatar it felt real – he befriended an outcast tulkun and thus proved himself to his parents. Neteyam, however, didn’t get the same level of character arc as his siblings. He was just the oldest. Which is why him dying didn’t have the same effect on me as the mother tulkun being killed; we had had more of a connection with her through the Metkayina than with him through the protagonists.
On one hand, the film did a great job at fulfilling every family dynamic. You want an angsty and misunderstood teen, Lo’ak is your friend, but if you are looking for a reliable and responsible older brother – Neteyam is the guy for you. Jake did a great job at being a stereotypical strict military dad, so in this sense the character felt slightly predictable, but that’s not to say I didn’t enjoy their family scenes. They were important to this story and highlighted the importance of connection and nurturing relationships. On the note of Kiri, even though I think she was there to return the amazing Sigourney Weaver, she was the most interesting character that led the film’s nature loving and respecting agenda. She was clearly in touch with Eywa and every being on Pandora, which are the saving grace of the whole franchise.
What didn’t you like?
Spider saving Quaritch at the end was a move that I understood the reasoning of, from the character’s point of view, however it still felt sour. It was very much a moral obligation after the “son for a son” sequence (and it also allows future films to include Quaritch), but the fact that Cameron purposefully chose to script Spider finding him, and not Jake, first, is a little frustrating.
I didn’t like that either – to me it felt like an excuse to use Quaritch in the next film, once again recycling the original villain, which is a little disappointing. The film is also too long; the original shocked the audience with its novelty and technology, but now we are much more demanding. Three hours of amazing imagery is great, but I would say that a better developed plot would have made this film much better, especially knowing other works by Cameron. In essence, it’s a great watch if you are looking for the aesthetic, not substance.
