America's best-known critic falls off the 'Avatar' bandwagon
Way, way back in December -- meaning all of five weeks ago -- Roger Ebert was saying that "Avatar" was a huge, groundbreaking film, calling it the kind of "sensational" movie that made him feel "sort of the same as I did when I saw 'Star Wars' in 1977."
But now, the ardor of America's leading film critic for "Avatar" has -- ahem -- cooled considerably. As Ebert twittered: "The year's best picture? Give me a [bleep] break."
Is this the beginning of an "Avatar" backlash, now that the film has made untold billions of dollars and is the prohibitive favorite to win the Oscar for best picture? As we all know, critics love to champion underdog movies. But when you're the top dog, you become the target for all sorts of nasty critical revisionism. If I were Jim Cameron, I'd get ready to duck. The brickbats are heading his way.
Photo credit: Chris Pizzello/Associated Press.








It's sad to watch Ebert's career these days. From his weak attempts at political commentary (mocking Sarah Palin's glasses was one highlight) to his nasty Tweets during Rush Limbaugh's hospital stay to his arrogant reviews of late (like reviewing a film he hadn't seen) Ebert simply isn't his old great self.
Posted by: Christian Toto | January 19, 2010 at 02:03 PM
There's a difference between a good review and best picture. Wake up.
Eberts own best list of twenty films didn't include 'Avatar.'
Posted by: Ben K | January 19, 2010 at 02:29 PM
It was a lush and gorgeous film but ask anyone: The plot was a straight shot from Point A to forgone Point B and the dialogue was lame.
No one learned anything from this film. No one was challenged in any way. It was a mishmash of standard film cliches.
Posted by: Avatar - Best Film | January 19, 2010 at 04:10 PM
I don't think that Mr. Cameron gives a damn about the so called "film critics" especially now that his movie is about to become one of the most successful movies of the century. Criticizing is easy, creating is not, it needs real talent!
Posted by: one | January 19, 2010 at 04:36 PM
Best picture? Seriously?
Technically, it's stunning, it's beautiful, Weta and everyone else did incredible work bringing it to life, but the plot is shallow and obvious and the characters are all one dimensional.
A great movie has to evoke passion, it has to evoke emotion, tell me, did ANYONE think anything other than "ooh, pretty" throughout the entire movie?
Seriously, if it didn't look so good, nobody would have bothered with it.
It's going to sweep the VES awards and it's certainly going home with the best Visual Effects Oscar and a number of other technical awards, but I can't see the Academy handing out Best Picture for what is ostensibly a retelling of Dances with Wolves.
Posted by: kyoseki | January 19, 2010 at 04:41 PM
I agree with Roger. Just because a film is 'groundbreaking' and 'sensational' doesn't means it's the year's best picture.
Posted by: gerritv | January 19, 2010 at 04:48 PM
I went to the ArcLight on Saturday to see this pile. I figured an 82% on Rotten Tomatoes was a good sign ( I seldom use IMDB for anything other movie times) and I dragged my boyfriend to see this film. Needless to say I was obligated to buy his dinner as reparation for 2 hours and 42 minutes of pure #%*&. What is happening in America people?
Posted by: kristin k | January 19, 2010 at 05:07 PM
"Avatar" has great animation and great 3-D effects, but it also has a predictable plot, terrible dialogue, bad acting, and annoying characters. It's as if James Cameron decided to express the Greenpeace/Huffington Post worldview in a remake combining "The Emerald Forest" and "Dances with Wolves." Are people getting paid to write good reviews of this movie?
Posted by: Kevin | January 19, 2010 at 05:10 PM
I have to agree with Ebert on this over-marketed, over-hyped movie. All 'Avatar' has going for it is the visual effects, which is all I shelled $12 to see. I could have cared less for the predictable plot and storyline. If the academy gives 'Avatar' the Best Picture Oscar, ignoring the more deserving 'Hurt Locker', 'Invictus', or even the animated 'Up', they have lost all credibility.
Posted by: Sudhir | January 19, 2010 at 05:30 PM
It would be shocking to see The Academy hand over best picture to such a shallow story and some truly mediocre - poor acting on some of the human characters.
The Golden Globes are a joke, everyone knows that, but the Oscars do have some real clout. Let's hope the Academy sees fit to give their awards to a more deserving film (there were many of them this past year).
Posted by: Ryan D | January 19, 2010 at 06:01 PM