As people gush about Avatar, allowing the beauty to make up for a storyline that seems to leave most fans disappointed, I wonder: By buying into this whole love-the-pretty-visuals bend, are we helping to end the art of storytelling? Actions have a reaction. Money talks. Merge those two together and it seems like we're sending a loud and clear message to Hollywood that we don't care if the story sucks as long as everything looks pretty. It would certainly account for the neverending barrage of crappy, big-visuals, big-action features.

Of course, it's not so easy to just ignore a film like Avatar. It's been buzzed about for eons. It has infiltrated television shows and plastered its message near and far. We've got to see it. The curiosity is too high. At the same time, however, how the frak can James Cameron have cooked this story up for a decade, waiting for technology to catch up with his vision, and not want the story to be killer? How can he not at least work that script into a form that can at least begin to rival the visuals it's matched with? It seems like an insult. Sure, as Todd Gilchrist pointed out, the man isn't known for his stories. But they usually don't have the push, the marketing, and the time that this one did. While waiting for that technology to meet your needs, why not get some trusted opinions and hone the script? Make each word, each moment, and each scene parallel the beauty of Cameron's cinematic eye -- imagine what the film would've been then.
categories Movies, Cinematical