‘Avatar: Way of the Water’ reviews vary wildly by critics

To Stephen Mackintosh for the BBC

Avatar: Path of Water It has received mixed reviews from critics, with ratings varying widely between 1 and 5 stars.

Some say it’s “dazzling,” while others describe it as a “soggy, trillion-dollar screensaver.”

road of water This is a follow up from 2009 Avatarwhich remains the highest-grossing film of all time.

Director James Cameron has suggested that the sequel would need to be the fourth-biggest movie of all time to break even.

of road of waterviewers are transported back to the planet Pandora, where the presence of the Na’vi people is once again under threat.

A one star review The TelegraphRobbie Collin of .

“The story crafted by Cameron and his four-person writing team is a classic piece of franchise extension, with no meaningful events or significant changes, all pieces put back in place, The next article is ready,” he said.

However empire’had the opposite view, giving the film five stars and describing it as “thunderingly funny”.

“It’s a leap beyond anything [Cameron] What succeeded in the first film is the fantastic, completely immersive, waking cinematic dream of the impossible happening on screen at almost every moment,” he said.

Directed by James Cameron.
Photo: AFPMore

Others had issues with the length of the film. “With three hours or more, I can quietly think about geopolitics, vacation plans, meeting schedules, and recipe ideas.” financial times.

first time Avatar The film saw disabled Marine Jake Sully (played by Sam Worthington) ride in the body of an avatar to infiltrate the planet’s indigenous population.

He eventually defected and joined the Na’vi tribe to protect the Earth from human attempts to obtain valuable minerals.

road of water Set many years later. Jake now has a family with Neytiri (Zoe Saldanha), and the film sees them join forces with the reef tribe as a new threat to Pandora emerges.

Guardian’was unenthusiastic about the film, likening it to a “trillion-dollar screensaver”.

Bradshaw, who gave the film only two stars, said:

Also select 2 stars, Times Kevin Ma described it as a “visually spectacular but extra” sequel.

He said he felt the film was repetitive, suggesting that main character Sally was “monotonous”, adding that “everything here is re-read, re-worded and regurgitated”.

“Avatar: Path of Water There are scenes that make your eyes pop, your head spin and your soul dance.” varietyof Owen Gleiberman.

However, he added:

hollywood reportersaid that the film “offers action, emotion and thrilling 3D visuals”.

“In terms of narrative sophistication, and even dialogue, this $350 million sequel is about as basic, and sometimes even weaker, than its predecessor.

“But the augmented biodiversity worldbuilding draws you in, and the visual spectacle keeps you captivated.”

independents Clarisse Loughrey was ranked midway with a 3-star review and was headlined: [about Avatar], but at least it’s very clean. “

“These films, much the same in tone, feel less like acts of love, but more like material achievements,” she wrote. exists to be respected.”

There was another 3-star review from Metrosaid Larushka Ivan-Zadeh of

“It’s an amazing spectacle. But is this a movie?” she asked. “It’s like a three-hour theme park ride.”

Critics are divided about the long-awaited sequel.
Photo:

Justin Lang of LA Times is more enthusiastic, suggesting that the film “cure your moviegoer’s blues”.

“Cameron drags you in so deeply and wafts so tenderly that sometimes it feels more like you’re floating in a movie than you’re watching it,” he said.

Agreed that going back to Pandora was ‘the best deal on the planet for the price of a movie ticket’ indie wireDavid Ehrlich.

He described the film as “enthusiastic and awe-inspiring”, adding that the viewing experience “doesn’t compare to anything else shown in cinemas”.

Elsewhere, digital spysaid it was “a visual masterpiece that is often beautiful to look at, but doesn’t always have substance to match its considerable style.”

awarded the film four stars, “Evening Standard”Charlotte O’Sullivan of .

Daily Mail”Brian Viner was also positive, saying, “This sequel is a lot of fun, bigger and better than the original, but also ridiculously bladder-testing.”

– BBC