In 2009, a film was released that won acclaim from moviegoers around the world and attracted attention with its box office performance and incredible visual effects: Avatar. The film by internationally acclaimed Canadian director James Cameron became the highest-grossing film of all time, grossing $2.92 billion. So the sequel to the production, which millions of moviegoers from all over the world have been waiting for with excitement for a long time, came out on the screens.
Once again directed by James Cameron, Avatar: The Way of Water has arrived after a long wait. In fact, the sequel to the film Avatar, which had a significant impact on the world of cinema many years ago, also caused a stir among moviegoers and film critics. However, the reviews of film critics about “Avatar: The Way of Water” are very diverse. Let’s look at the details together…
Released in 2009, Avatar garnered attention for its filming technology and the visual feast it presented to viewers.
The film was praised for its quality technical elements as well as its screenplay and storytelling. Thus, “Avatar” became the highest grossing film in history. The continuation of “Avatar” moviegoers would have to wait a long time …
The sequel to the series “Avatar: The Way of Water” recently met with viewers.
Avatar: The Way of Water is set 10 years after the events of the first film. Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), a paralyzed Marine, once again comes to the aid of the Na’vi people in the Pandora universe with his “Avatar”… The sequel features names such as Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Kate Winslet, Bailey Bass and Trinity Joe – Lee Bliss.
James Cameron, creator of the Avatar universe and director of the films, has announced that Avatar: The Way of the Water must be the fourth highest-grossing film in order to be profitable.
In other words, after a long wait, the film must be seen by millions of people around the world in order to recoup the cost of producing the film. However, according to some film critics, the film, which was released recently, is not easy to achieve such success!
The film divided film critics in two!
There are people who didn’t like the movie, and there are those who liked it. Moreover, the film received “extreme” reviews from critics. Some critics think the movie deserves 5 stars, while others give it one star!
Daily Telegraph reviewer Robbie Collin notes that Avatar: The Path of Water is “choking on turquoise cement”!
Collin states that there was nothing meaningful or significant changed in the script written by Cameron and the team of four. However, Avatar: The Way of the Water is “a typical sequel that leaves the door open for the next movie,” he says.
Film critic Nick De Semlin is one of the people who gave The Way of Water 5 stars.
While Semlin stated that he “remarkably enjoyed” the film, “Exciting daydream; In every moment of the film, something incredible happens on the screen, this is a fantasy game.” uses expressions.
According to some critics, “Avatar: The Way of Water” makes you think about “anything but the movie.”
Financial Times columnist Danny Lee also mentioned the film’s long running time of 3 hours and 12 minutes.Three hours of quiet reflection on geopolitics, vacation plans, meetings and recipes” uses expressions.
The length of the film, which can be considered long, is also criticized by other critics. For example, Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian compares a film he gave two stars to a “trillion-dollar screen saver”. Bradshaw describes it as “3It’s as if a story that could fit into a 0-minute cartoon is turned into a 3-hour fake movie by an AI program.explains in words.
Avatar: The Way of the Water looks quite visual, just like the first film.
However, according to many film critics, this alone is not enough to make Avatar: The Way of Water a good film. Kevin Maher of The Times describes the film as “visually effective but overkill”.
One of the film’s most critical points is the “dimension” of the characters.
Owen Gleiberman of Variety said:Avatar: The Path of the Water has mind-blowing and exciting scenes that will not leave you indifferent. But there is no consistency in the characters. Dimension exists only in imagesputs it into words.
The superficiality of the film’s characters and the inability to convey them deeply to the viewer also negatively affect the film’s narrative. Hollywood Reporters writer David Rooney states that the film is good in terms of action and visuals, but the narrative lacks that richness.
- 6.7 magnitude earthquake
- Hollywood renaissance! American New Wave Cinema and 8 Film Samples
- Trump’s Terrible Statement
- What is shamanism? What are shamanistic rituals and symbols?
- Will my new home project solve the housing crisis?
- What does a makeup remover do? 7 product recommendations and more
- Broccoli could be a stepping stone in the search for life in outer space
- World famous names with family ties
- They removed a 2-meter jump rope from his penis!
- An ancient holiday of the Jewish community: what you need to know about Hanukkah