Denis Villenueve. A solid lineup. A different take on first contact. I loved Sicario but went in expecting a cerebral epic sci-fi.
That was a mistake.
Good things:
- Some really nice visual scenes
- Interesting aliens Calligraphy aliens!
- Clear theme of communication is omnipresent
- A neat score that might be awesome in a different movie
Bad things:
- The acting
- The lack of emotional reaction to ALIENS! The students asking to turn on the TV, all of the main characters
- Lack of useful characters Only the aliens and Louise actually did anything the entire movie.
- Supporting characters are very stupid in an attempt to foil the main character slightly
- Very clumsy exposition. Genre-typical news reports, voice-overs, dumb characters asking stupid questions.
- Very slow pacing. This worked in parts of Sicario, but didn't work in this movie because there was no tension. The main characters never seemed remotely threatened.
- Lousie showing up at school thinking everyone will be there after aliens arrive and there's a state of emergency
- Why can't you translate alien language like you can translate Farsi. This is a paraphrase but in the spirit of what Colonel Weber was saying.
- Useless love interest when the costars have no chemistry.
- Ultrasecure military base lets someone steal a ton of explosives and put it in an ALIEN SPACECRAFT without anyone noticing.
- Many unbelievable plot points
- Poor dialogue Let's make a baby - real quote
- Poor handling of the major plot points Looking through time seems to undermine the fact that the aliens need help. Why did one have to die if they could see the future? Why did only one die when they were right next to each other?
- Very heavy handed moral messaging that didn't align with the rest of the movie.
- Why couldn't Ian also see into the future as he studied the language, or any of the others?
Overall extremely disappointing. I'm honestly surprised critics or general moviegoers like this. The premise was very good. It's a real shame the execution failed so miserably.
The movie is BEAUTIFUL, and if you're looking for an action movie I definitely recommend it. However, if you're an actual fan of Avatar 1, you will be disappointed.
Overused plot twists :
- bad guy that comes back to life (terminator like),
- a boy raised by the Na'vi that is actually the son of the bad guy (jungle book / star wars like)
Remakes of scenes from the first movie :
- Jake riding sea horses for the first time,
- his son becoming friend with the most dangerous Tulkun (VS Jake and the big Leonopteryx making him Toruk Makto);
- Colonel being overconfident while getting his Banshee (just like Jake);
- Earthers burning the houses of Metkayina (VS when they burnt the Mother Tree);
- the wife of the chief (Ronal) losing her Tulkun and accusing Jake for bringing the Earthers (VS Neytiri losing her ikran and saying she never wants to see Jake again);
- exact same sentences ("The people say that the energy is just borrowed and you have to give it back");
- Jake's son behind chased by a very agressive fish in an unfamiliar environment (VS Jake chased by the Thanator in the forest;)
- the obvious end with a close up shot on Jake's eyes... (was thrilling once but come on...)
The apparition of useless characters :
- Spider makes no sense. He hated his dad, then decided to save him and then joined back Jake and the others???? so obviously the bad guy will come back;
- the Earthers who stayed from the first movie (they just appear 10 seconds to help Jake's daughter),
- the female colonel who brings nothing to the plot,
- Neytiri's mother who appears for 5 seconds maybe...
The lack of character development : they pretty much have 1 personality trait at the start and don't really grow from there, which is very different from the first movie -
- the colonel still hates the Na'Vis even after learning their language and getting his flying pet (his personality is basically "I hate Jake" throughout the entire movie),
- Neytiri hates Spider from the beginning,
- Jake is insufferable with his sons until the very very end where he softens up a bit...
The lack of plot coherence :
- Where the hell did the Metkayina go once the fight actually started?? (because their chief was supposed to get his daughter back);
- Why would the Earthers risk to lose the amrita (product from the tulkuns) that is funding all the actions on Pandora just to satisfy the seek for revenge of a soldier??
Lastly, and this is what frustrates me the most : the many stories started that do not have an end -
- Why is Kiri able to control Eywa? Why is Ronal not saying anything when she's supposed to be that spiritual??
- How is humanity actually planning to move to Pandora?...
Overall, I would recommend the movie if you decently liked the 1st one and want to stay in the same universe. But if you are looking for an actual sequel with a great plot and story / character development, be prepared to be disappointed.
(Note: This was the 70mm roadshow presentation of the film.)
This is a film about justice and tribalism and how the two lead to some strange, unsettling outcomes when the they are mixed together.
To the point, the film is filled with little moral thought experiments that underscore the idea of when we think it's wrong and right to kill, and explores how that's affected by which tribe they belong to. From Chris Mannix's tale of Major Warren burning down a prison, thereby killing a number of both Union and Confederate soldiers, to Warren himself goading General Smithers into trying to shoot him so he can shoot first, to Mobray's speech on dispassionate justice versus frontier justice, this is a film concerned with when dispensing lethal force is right.
But it's also concerned with how station and affiliation affect how others are treated and when something is truly just or honorable. Major West, despite his accomplishments and prowess, is derided and demeaned because of the color of his skin. Daisy Domergue is equal parts dismissed, patronized, and underestimated because she's a woman. It's no coincidence that one of the film's final scenes is a black former union soldier and a white rebel renegade cooperating to hang a woman in an excruciating fashion because it's the "right" way to honor a fallen comrade (who demeaned the both of them).
There's a lot to unpack in all of this. It's hard to say what Tarantino is saying beyond a broad level "who we are and where we're from shapes our view of what's right and who is fair game," but there's a lot there. The opening shot featuring a crucifix covered in snow hints at these broader themes, and details like the motley make up of Jody's gang to their wanton killing in order to save Jody's sibling lead in interesting thematic directions.
But apart from the larger thematic material, the film absolutely works at a basic narrative level. The first half of the film has a wonderful Clue vibe to it, with a series of characters slowly introduced and thrown together in interesting ways, where not everyone is what they seem, and the audience is left guessing, if not whodunnit, then who's going to do it.
The characters and performances are almost uniformly tremendous. Each of the major characters is well-sketched, and have interesting characteristics that lead to predictable but no less intriguing conflicts. The stand outs are Samuel L. Jackson, who is enthralling from the word go and nails the peak of the film with his monologue about the younger smithers; Jennifer Jason Leigh who gives a wonderfully unhinged performance as Daisy Domergue, and Tim Roth who has a delightful Christoph Waltz-ian flair to his bits of screen time. But everyone, from Russel to Goggins to Dern makes an impression.
The structure and performances help keep the tension high, whether in quiet moments in the stagecoach where it seems like things might become too rowdy, to the powder keg of the main cabin where mistrust grows and tempers flair. The first half of the film, where all the tension builds and is maintained, is more enjoyable than the second, where the answers are revealed, and the aftermath in interesting, but not nearly as engaging as the build of the mystery.
Still, despite (or perhaps because of) the usual Tarantino blood and guts and non-linear storytelling, the film in never boring, and while it works as a whole, the stage-like feeling of the production also allows individual scenes to feel like little vignettes, that could still be compelling or effective separated from the movie as a whole, even as they take on new meaning when juxtaposed.
I have my nits to pick -- Tatum feels a bit miscast (though his appearances are brief) and Tarantino's narration felt a bit obvious and unnecessary--but this is still a superb film from a great director. It's beautifully shot, with grand, frigid vistas that emphasize the isolation, and interesting camera movements that convey both the extra man spying on the proceedings and the heightened nerviness of individual scenes. It is also, for all its tension and thematic material, a damn funny movie, that had me chuckling more than a few times. I would not necessarily among my favorite Tarantino films, but that just speaks to the heights he's been able to hit. The Hateful Eight is still a fun, tense movie with some interesting thematic heft beneath the gunplay and quippy violence. It was well worth the cost of admission.
Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
Cons:
6/10
