And on the whole, I like #TheWayOfWater more than #Avatar 2009, if for nothing else because it has less in your face white saviourism than the original. But many of the storylines feel like they have to stop and start, and the high frame rate was hit & miss for me.” He added: “This movie sure is pretty to look at though. One can tell that Cameron really cares most about the world-building mid-section of this film, which is one of his greatest accomplishments, so he rushes through. The good news is that 3D is good again (yay!), and the action is pretty incredible (especially in the final act). 'Avatar: The Way of Water' struggles to find its footing at first, throwing viewers back into the world of Pandora in a narratively clunky way. But it’s also interminably, ploddingly overlong, and more impressive than truly absorbing.”Įmpire magazine’s Amon Warmann was a little more generous, but still equivocal, writing: “Liked it, didn’t love it. The Guardian’s chief film critic Peter Bradshaw has led the charge, saying “Avatar: The Way Of Water is a silly, soggy, motion-smoothed epic of solemnity without a single interesting visual image”, while the Daily Telegraph’s Robbie Collin posted a cryptic “grimace” emoji.Ĭhristina Newland, lead critic of the i newspaper, was also less than impressed, writing: “Avatar: The Way of Water is a film to be admired more than loved – some remarkable spectacle, some throwback to Titanic set pieces, some really lovely visual flourishes. However, reaction in the UK has been less uncritical.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |