You haven't gotten lost in the woods, have you?

There's not a lot here that I can say that hasn't already been said, what with this being the most (over)hyped movie in some time. But I figure why not go ahead and put in my 2 cents anyway? Let me start by saying I wanted to see this movie despite the hype, not because of it. When something gets that much exposure it usually has the opposite intended effect on me, making me sick of it and uninterested before it's even released. It almost even got to that point for me with The Dark Knight, but with an established franchise like that I knew I was going to see it anyway (and of course I'm glad I did). With Avatar there were 2 things that kept me interested: 1)my morbid curiosity about this whole "changing the way you see movies" crap, and 2)it's freaking James Cameron. There is no way you can't at least respect the guy, and this being basically his life's work I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and see it in 3D IMAX in the way he says it was intended to be seen. Was it worth it?

Every penny.

James Cameron does absolutely everything right in this film (even though I guess it's almost inaccurate to call it a film, but more on that later). He does what he's best at. He takes a simple, yet intriguing story and tells it well. Some people have complained about the plot being weak and whatnot, but it isn't. It's simple, yes, but not weak. It's essentially Dances with Wolves on another planet, and that's ok. I actually listened to an interview with Cameron the other day and the interviewer brought up a good point that I agree with. The fact that you've got such a classic storyline actually makes the experience more engrossing. It gives your brain a rest from trying to find subtle nuances in the story and lets you instead get swept up with the characters in this world that he's created. Not to say this is a "turn-off-your-brain-and-watch-shiny-things" kind of movie, because it isn't. It isn't a passive watching experience, Cameron wants you to be engaged; to feel like you're in the middle of this alien world, and in limiting the amount of suspension of disbelief you have to wrestle with, he accomplishes that.

So the obvious: the effects. Just the term 'effects' doesn't even seem to fit in the context of the movie because there aren't really just impressive, flashy effects sequences. Cameron literally creates an entire world, akin to Peter Jackson with Lord of the Rings. Not only are the environments so insanely well-rendered that you simply can't tell what's real (if anything) and what isn't, but does an impeccable job of sort of easing you into this world. You're introduced to the avatars in a live-action setting and kind of get a feel for the space that they take up, then we move the avatars outside to kind of see how they work in space, then we take a helicopter with a mix of avatars and humans into the jungle to get a feel for the environment, then suddenly we're in the middle of a world that doesn't exist and we never even noticed the switch. Absolutely brilliant. He and his editing team have the right mindset too of having the goods and wanting to show them off. There a few big time action sequences in the movie, and instead of taking the now very popular "fast-cut-the-crap-out-of-everything-because-not-knowing-what-the-hell-is-going-on-on-screen = action!" he is not afraid to cut slowly. It really engages you much more with the action when you can actually see who's winning.

I really was beyond skeptical with all the "game-changing" talk the studio has been spouting for months now about this movie. I mean look at what the norm is out there for CG, it's gotten pretty damn good...so you're what? Adding 3D? And I should be impressed? Well I ate every single one of those words and they were delicious. Because of the level of hype the technology was getting I was paying extra attention in some scenes trying to figure out what was real and what wasn't and I simply couldn't do it (I know now that more than likely depending on the scene none of it was real, but still). The indigenous Na'vi people (and the avatar Na'vi) of the beautiful world of Pandora have real skin textures and move organically. They even avoided a personal pet peeve of CG characters...stretchy mouth. When they growl and hiss and yell their mouths move naturally. Also, they completely avoided dead-eye, which interesting given how big their eyes are. I think the thing that sold me on them taking up actual space was the teeth, especially Sigourney Weaver's avatar's teeth. Something about them just made them seem that much more human. And again, with these characters convincingly taking up space in the environment, it's much easier to suspend disbelief.

There were great performances all the way around in the film, but the stand out was definitely Zoe Saldana as Neytiri. Especially since it is a glorified motion capture acting gig (for everybody else too) she really gives a fantastic savage/sad/sympathetic performance. Whatever the scene called for she answered it, not to mention looking beautiful while doing it. Granted it's not actually her on screen, but still...close enough. I'd say she's having a pretty good year between this and Star Trek. Sam Worthington actually does a pretty good job too with Jake Sully ...not fantastic, but not nearly as flat as his recent Terminator Salvation outing. Yet another thing that allows you to be completely drawn into the movie is that it centers around Sully. It's so much easier to get swept away when dealing with such a focused storyline. The other standout role is Stephen Lang as Col. Quaritch. He's a very one dimensional character but damn he nails it.

I hate that this is coming off so ass-kissy but I'm still just blown away. Sure there are some things it falls a bit short on, like the fact that the element the humans are on Pandora to mine in the first place is called "unobtainium" (come on....), but the shortcomings are so few and far between. The last movie I can remember being hyped as a game changer technology-wise was the Matrix, and it delivered and really did change the face of special effects forever. Avatar was being billed as that much hype and I really didn't think it would have that much of an impact, but it did. I'm sure Robert Zemeckis is just salivating over this motion capture stuff too since he seems to be so in love with it. That said, it takes more than technology to make a good movie, and Cameron sticks to his guns here. He takes a classic story and tells it well, along with creating one mother of a spectacle to go along with it. It's the cliche of the year dealing with this movie, but it's more than a movie, it's an experience. Go see it in 3D. Now.

we're just wild animals...

Here's the thing...people either like Wes Anderson films or hate them. I happen to fall into the category of liking them a lot, but it seems to me that even people that are in the other camp may take a bit of a vacation to my side with Fantastic Mr. Fox. I remember first seeing trailers for it and I immediately perked up because I thoroughly enjoy all things stop-motion anyway, and I remember thinking "hmm, this looks like what would happen if Wes Anderson made a stop-motion movie." Turns out I was right, and it made sort of a perfect storm of me wanting to see this movie.

Mr. Fox has a lot in common with previous Anderson outings such as the quirkiness of the characters, but it also has a lot of differences, and these differences I feel like make it a much more accessible movie than, say, The Darjeeling Limited. First off, this is probably the most outright funny film that Wes has put together. Usually he draws on subtle quirks and sort of off-the-wall plot devices to provide that dark, awkward humor. Mr. Fox has that too, but throws in a lot more things that had me on the floor just outright laughing. He sets the tone from the beginning when you get a little bit of exposition as to where the Foxes live and what they're up to, and immediately following a serious conversation between Mr. Fox and Mrs. Fox about not wanting to feel poor, Mr. Fox just goes ravenous and annihilates his plate of pancakes. It's hilarious, and that juxtaposition really sets up the tone for the rest of the film.

Another thing that seems to set itself a part from previous works is the plot. Anderson films usually have very (VERY) loose plots, and really just focus on the journey and development of the characters in them. Mr. Fox, however, has a very tight plot with a clear direction. Basically we have the Foxes, who have moved out of their hole into a tree as sort of a status upgrade, and also because Mr. Fox sees that it is in very close proximity to the Boggis chicken farm, the Bunce ranch, and the Bean apple cider factory. Even though Mr. Fox has promised his wife that he's given up his foxy ways of stealing poultry, he sees this as an opportunity for one last big score. Unfortunately Boggis, Bunce, and Bean (one fat, one short, one lean) are absolutely insane and will apparently stop at nothing to destroy the fox that seems to be out.....foxing..them. I assume that Anderson had to reign in the plot a bit since they were trying to target kids a little more with this one, but it still absolutely works. I'm still not quite convinced that it's a "kid's movie" simply because the a lot of the subtle humor would go right over their heads, but i think the smarter kids will love it.

Given the cast, it kind of goes without saying that the vocal performances were great. I mentioned in my Men Who Stare at Goats review that I'm somewhat of a Clooney fanboy, and he does not disappoint at all. Jason Schwartzman really impressed me as well, because a lot of times he can come off as trying a bit too hard to be melancholy and weird, but his complete deadpan delivery of the Fox son, Ash, is brilliant. I actually read that Anderson decided to record the voice-over sessions on location (in a forest, out in a boat, etc.) as to get a more natural feel as opposed to the stiffness a studio can bring. I personally think that is a genius idea and it absolutely worked. All the performances seem to have such a liveliness and character to them that sometimes gets lost in animation. Even the smaller parts like Bill Murray's Badger, and Willem Dafoe's Rat are still brilliant. My personal favorite character though is probably Kylie, the opossum handyman and Mr. Fox's sort of #2 guy (voiced by Wally Wolodarsky, who you might know as Brendan from The Darjeeling Limited). He's just so hesitant about everything but still goes in 100% even when he clearly no idea what he's getting into.

The last and most obvious thing that stands out about the film is the style. As I said I'm a huge fan of stop-motion work, and not just because I like the aesthetic of it, but also because I respect the process so much. When it's done well you can really see every bit of care and love that was put into each minute detail and movement and it just adds a whole nother layer of awesome on top of it. The models they used were amazing, and the fur on the characters really makes them come alive because it's constantly moving (that's the detail I'm talking about...the fur constantly moving because the filmmakers had to get their hands in there to move the models). The film would have been good regardless, even if they would have gone 2d or even computer animation, but adding that extra layer with going the stop-motion route just makes it....fantastic. [Dammit, I tried to get through the whole thing without using that word.]