Opening Pandora's Box

(Warning: This piece contains spoilers.)

So I saw Avatar: The Way of Water in theatres. It was absolutely…

…Completely…

…100%...

*Deep breath*

…Okay.

That’s it. It was okay. Not awful, not amazing, but okay. If you ignore the runtime and the gimmicks, you’ll have a good time. You won’t be blown away, but you’ll have a good time.

See? Was that so hard? We’ve been conditioned by expectations and frequently forget that not everything needs to be amazing. And while this movie isn’t amazing, it’s enjoyable. It’s no different from other James Cameron movies that way. So why is it controversial to say that?

Before anyone interjects, yes, there are issues with this movie. There are issues with Cameron as a person too, mostly that he has an ego larger than the villain from Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. But there were issues with the first movie too. Calling it “flawed” isn’t brave when everything man-made is flawed. And the commonly-utilized critique lobbed at this franchise? Congratulations on your one joke, but you should workshop new material.

I wouldn’t be so bitter if this franchise’s existence wasn’t considered poisonous for 13 years. But it has been. Right when the backlash started, people claimed that “Too many people like this movie!”. Then it was “Nobody likes this movie!” for the next decade. And when the sequel was released, it changed to “Where did the fans come from?”, as if the praise was retroactive and ironic. In all cases, the naysayers were wrong. All they had to do was remove their blinders.

Anyway, the movie. Despite not being friendly to those unfamiliar with the first entry, Avatar: The Way of Water did a good job expanding its world. While Avatar was about Jake Sully ingratiating himself to the Na’vi, here Jake and his family go into exile to save themselves from a resurrected Colonel Quaritch. It might seem like a lazy excuse to retread first movie’s plot, but enough is changed to feel fresh. It even avoids the infamous “Liar Revealed” trope of the first movie, so…improvement?

That’s not to say there weren’t issues with the storytelling. Aside from the pacing being lopsided in several places, most-notably the whale hunting set-piece, I don’t appreciate the movie teasing a mystery with one character, only to cop-out at the last second. Quaritch’s resurrection not leading to an existential dilemma was a missed opportunity, and his relationship with Spider could’ve been better. Also, the dialogue sucks. But the dialogue sucks in every James Cameron film, so...

Other than that? It’s solid. Its story, while basic, is more-engaging than every Mission Impossible movie since the 90’s, and the emotional beats land. It’s also really pretty and well-choreographed, which isn’t surprising because this is James Cameron. I especially liked the dénouement. And all while remixing set-pieces from the director’s previous movies.

And the tears? There was nothing on-par with the tree from Avatar in rawness, but there were smaller moments that made me cry. The most surprising one was the final scene. I won’t spoil it, in case anyone reading this is interested in seeing this movie, but anyone who’s experienced loss will connect with it. It was well-executed, essentially.

The movie was also gutsier than its prequel. It’s cliché to compare something to the most-beloved Star Wars movie, but Avatar: The Way of Water takes greater risks with its story and characters. It even ups the stakes by having a main character die. I was worried that having Sully’s kids constantly be in and out of danger would lose its shock value, but that was a big deal. It made the confrontation with Quaritch, and the final scene, more personal. It’s not easy to do that.

I’m not sure what else to add. Will this movie convert naysayers? Doubtful, though not impossible. But this is still a worthy sequel. It retains some of the iffy coding of the first movie, but do remember that True Lies is why CAIR exists. If anything, I’ve come to anticipate that from James Cameron, for better or worse.

I don’t know what people were expecting. Did they want an “original” story? Because that doesn’t exist. Did they want something more “in-depth”? Because the narrative’s deeper than some well-regarded classics. Did they want a director who isn’t arrogant and toxic? Fair enough, but Cameron’s behaviour isn’t new.

It speaks volumes that people feel a need to gate-keep based on that. Yes, Cameron’s difficult to be around. But no, that doesn’t make people wrong for valuing his art. Like JK Rowling and Harry Potter, art is personal and subjective. You can’t help how you connect to it, and it’s not your business to dictate how others do. Trust me, I used to be that type of person!

Ultimately, I don’t know how to convince people to be less-judgemental about this franchise. And yes, I’m probably projecting my own frustrations. But given how toxic it’s been to discuss these movies for the last 13 years, both online and offline, I don’t think it’s unfounded. Because I’ve been tired of being “disallowed” to share my opinions since day 1.

Does this mean turning a blind eye to James Cameron’s remarks? No! I’ve called him out before, and I’ll do it again! I also think he’s one of the most-irritating directors alive, irrespective of his body of work. But I can do that while appreciating what he brings to the table, and I wish more people could too.

In the end, writing this has been less about Avatar: The Way of Water and more venting my frustrations…again. It’s possible I’m not done either, as the third entry’s in a few years. But it’s important to get those frustrations out because I feel as though I’m being talked over. No movie’s worth being that obnoxious about.

But that’s me.