AVATAR: THE WAY OF WATER is awesome

James Cameron weaponizes wonder in this spectacular sequel.

Growing up at the height of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles craze, several teachers took the time to cluck their tongues at my friends and I when we used the word “awesome.” 

“Everything can’t be awesome,” they said (unaware that Lonely Island would one day prove them wrong). “Overusing that word cheapens it.” 

And I guess they’re right. A word that was traditionally used to describe the way beauty can overwhelm us, it fits best for trips to the Grand Canyon or star-gazing on a summer evening. It doesn’t seem to apply to a really good slice of pizza or roller coaster. And the way we toss it around in regard to movies is silly; I may enjoy the MCU or a good Star Wars movie, but is it really awesome? Does it really leave me with my mouth agape, grasping for ways to describe it? 

So, please take it seriously when I say that Avatar: The Way of Water is awesome. It is a visually overwhelming feat of technical mastery that, on the biggest screen, left me stymied and dazed. It’s a three-hour-plus movie in which neither me nor my 10-year-old son moved from our seats once. Every director hired to do a superhero movie or similar piece of blockbuster filmmaking should be forced to watch it and take notes – it is a constant reminder of just what we mean when we describe these movies as spectacles. 

I’m going to try and be vague with spoilers, but I’ll have to discuss the plot as we go along. So, consider this your warning. 

Now, let’s go back to Pandora. 

Remember wonder? 

Before we discuss the movie itself, it’s probably wise to talk about how I saw Avatar: The Way of Water, which was announced to be released in more formats than any other movie. There’s the traditional format, 3D, IMAX, IMAX 3D and IMAX High-Frame Rate (HFR), and a variety of mixes and matches between the formats. When I saw Avatar: The Way of Water last Friday night, I saw it in IMAX 3D, but our local AMC only showed it in the traditional frame rate. There was a theater near me showing it in HFR, but not IMAX, and I figured the latter was more essential to the experience. 

Truth be told, part of me was relieved. I’ve only seen one film in HFR; Peter Jackson’s first Hobbit movie, and it was the worst moviegoing experience I’ve ever had (compounded by the fact that it’s an awful movie). Everything moved too fast, was a bit too clear and looked a bit too cheap at 48 frames per second. I didn’t want to dedicate more than three hours of my time to a movie that was going to constantly look like a soap opera, particularly on my first viewing. I will say, however, that I’ve heard several critics remark that the use of HFR in Avatar 2 (as I’ll be referring to it interchangeably from here on out) is the most successful they’ve ever seen, even if they disagree on how the usage of variable film rates works for them. If I see it again (and I hope to), it will be in HFR. 

But honestly, I can’t imagine this film looking any better than it did on that giant screen, in bright 3D. The first Avatar wasn’t my first experience with IMAX 3D, but it did provide my first glimpse at how powerful those tools could be. The sequel blows that away. Cameron shoots with immersion in mind; he foregrounds objects, often having something in between the camera and his actors to give a sense of depth. He’s considered every shot; he doesn’t use 3D as a gimmick to toss stuff at the camera. He uses it, instead, to create a world full of weight, dimension and depth. On the giant screen, you feel like you could fall right in. The (few) zero-gravity scenes are dizzying; giant holograms seem to wash over the audience; scenes in which the characters fly and swim have weight and speed, but also grace and splendor. We can debate later about whether this is in service of a noteworthy story, but I can’t imagine anyone arguing that this is not an impeccable work of craftsmanship. 

There were stories after the first film’s release that people experienced depression from not being able to visit Pandora (something Disney remedied nearly a decade later). I imagine they’ll be calling their therapist for new consultations after seeing the sequel. The 2009 film focused largely on the rainforests of Pandora, filmed with their vibrant colors, with gorgeous bioluminescence giving the world an ethereal glow in the evening. In this film, Cameron extends the setting to the moon’s seaside worlds, and it’s simply breathtaking. The ocean has long been Cameron’s second home, and I’m hard-pressed to think of another director who has spent as much time immersed in the beauty, mystery and the danger of the deep than Cameron. He’s in his element here, imagining a colony where huts stretch out over the water, giant whale-like creatures form bonds with the sea-dwelling clan of Na’vi, and a menagerie of sea life is discovered under the water’s surface. 

Water is one of the most notoriously difficult things to create using CGI. Even as recently as last month’s Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, big-budget movies have struggled to create undersea settings that don’t look too cartoony or murky, and have largely failed. Cameron and his Weta wizards create underwater worlds that look pristine and real, lavishing detail on every creation, and paying careful attention to scale. The water looks clear and natural; my mind knew it was all created with computers, but I refused to believe it. It’s completely organic-looking; it fleshes out Pandora  to create a lived-in world that is more real than any cinematic world I’ve seen, save for Lord of the Rings (and that had the benefit of a mammoth tome behind it). 

There is an hour-long stretch to Avatar 2 that plays almost like a nature documentary, as Jake and Neytiri and their children explore this new habitat, bond with the new tribe and discover their world. It’s the best stretch of the movie, the rare blockbuster to take time to step away from the action, breathe, and look at its world with awe and joy. The nature of today’s action movies is that they’re constantly moving, relentless shark-like creatures that have to keep our adrenaline up lest we get bored. Avatar 2 has thrills (we’ll get there), but it’s also content to just look at its creation and enjoy it. That’s not just boasting about impressive technology, by the way; when you can create a world that audiences enjoy visiting, it creates stakes. 

Also, it’s worth noting this movie has very few human characters. There are some space Marines and a young human named Spider who lives with the Na’vi. But other than that, all of the main characters are motion-captured CGI creations. I never once questioned it. There are no dead eyes, no skin that looks too plastic-y (I saw The Polar Express on IMAX 3D the day after this, and the difference was astonishing). Every interaction between the characters and any humans is utterly believable. The Na’vi have emotion and expression. Cameron takes everything that worked so well in 2009 and doubles down; Avatar: The Way of Water is a big and bold use of filmmaking tools and technology that consistently works at delivering a believable, tactile and immersive world. I was originally skeptical of Cameron spending the rest of his career in Pandora; now, I don’t want him to stop finding new corners of this universe to explore. 

The Sullys’ story 

Very few denied that Avatar’s visuals were impressive in 2009; it was the story that raised eyebrows. When I revisited the film recently, I admitted that those flaws were there. It’s a derivative story. Jake Sully is not a compelling protagonist. Its lessons were deeply simplistic. None of that really bothered me; the simple story was a way to draw us into the bigger world of Pandora. But my hope was that Cameron might dig a bit deeper in the sequel. 

And I’ll admit that, for much of Avatar 2’s first hour, I was worried he was going to just repeat himself. The film picks up about 15 years after the first film, and we get a crash course in recent Na’vi history: Jake (Sam Worthingon) and Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) have married and had three kids. There’s also an adopted daughter, Kiri, who mysteriously was born to the avatar of Sigourney Weaver’s character in the first film (Weaver plays Kiri and gives my favorite performance in the film). There’s also Spider, a human who was too young to take off with the rest of the “sky people’ after the events of the first film and has become something of a pet; Jake finds him endearing, but Neytiri doesn’t trust him. It’s all economically conveyed, but I got a sinking feeling when Jake and Neytiri noticed an approaching spaceship, bringing the “sky people” back to Pandora. 

The film’s reintroduction of humans, particularly the resurrection of Steven Lang’s Col. Quaritch (he’s back, this time in Na’vi form!), is its sweatiest and least successful element. Lang was an intimidating presence in the first film, but here he’s largely just spouting a bunch of Marine hoo-rah one-liners, and the film only pays lip service to the struggle he feels with being resurrected in Na’vi form.  It’s also worth noting that while it’s good to see Edie Falco in anything, particularly here, in a mech suit, her character (who isn’t named General Exposition, but probably should be) is largely abandoned after the film’s first hour, the second time this year a film has wasted a Sopranos cast member (although she comes off much better here than Lorraine Bracco does in Pinocchio).  

Quaritch is ostensibly brought back to lead a team of Marines/Na’vi clones to wipe out the Na’vi so that humans can colonize the planet, but really he’s on a revenge mission against the person who killed him (as I assume we all would be). It’s a very one-note introduction of the villain, although I like the shot of the Quaritchtar contemplating and then crushing his human skull. But I braced myself for another repeat of the Marines trying to exterminate the Na’vi and Jake leading his tribe to victory.

Instead, the film does something different by having Jake and his family leave their tribe and find shelter with a seaside clan. For the next hour, the film focuses largely on the Sully family, particularly the children, as they integrate themselves into a new way of life. I don’t know that any of the characters are particularly deep, although I find Kiri’s search for the truth of her father and quest to learn more about her mother interesting. Jake and Neytiri’s two sons kind of blend together until the plot gives one of them a friendship with a whale that is surprisingly affecting. And while I think Spider’s relationship with Quartich could have been delved into a bit deeper, it does leave the characters in an interesting place at the film’s end. 

Avatar: The Way of Water’s story is less derivative than the first one’s, but it’s still simple. But, again, that simplicity doesn’t bother me. Cameron has stated in interviews that he wants to explore what has, historically, happened to Indigenous cultures when colonizers move in. And he’s setting up a story in which the Na’vi are hunted and, perhaps, eventually displaced by humans. Those are the broad strokes of what he’s telling, but this time around, there are themes he’s interested in that make it a bit richer. 

The story of the Sullys trying to adapt to a new culture gives depth to the world Cameron’s created. Kiri’s attempts to learn more about her mother aren’t just key to understanding her personality; they’re also a way to see how the connected world of Pandora works, a mixture of science and spirituality that might be fascinating to explore in future films. Likewise, the relationship between the seaside Na’vi and the whales, known as Tulkun, brings beauty and earnestness to the story; allowing one of Jake’s sons to bond with a Tulkun that’s been isolated from its tribe creates one of the story’s emotional anchors. And Spider’s relationship with Quaritch gives the lone human character an opportunity to explore the evil done on both sides of the fight, but also presents him with a choice to indulge his own violent instincts or choose a better way, a choice that will likely have huge ramifications on the sequels. I wish Cameron could craft better dialogue – the “yeah, bro” speak of the kids is grating, but after listening to my 10-year-old son play videogames with his buddies, I can vouch for its authenticity – but I appreciate that he gives us these characters as our windows into this world. Viewing the sea with childlike awe and wonder goes a long way toward selling the awe of this world. 

Centering the story on the Na’vi kids also drops Jake and Neytiri to the background, a decision that is a double-edged sword. Zoe Saldana was the standout performer in Avatar and she’s also strong here – when the movie allows her to show up. Neytiri is largely tossed to the side, save for a standout scene near the end, and Saldana’s presence is missed. Kate Winslet seems to take that role as the doubting member of the seaside Na’vi tribe, but she doesn’t do much more than hiss and offer grave portents. 

But putting Jake Sully to the background is actually a benefit because, let’s be honest, he’s one of the weakest protagonists we’ve had in a blockbuster. No disrespect to Sam Worthington, who plays the role with appropriate lunkhead energy and feels much more natural this time out, but Jake’s kind of the worst. He’s the last film’s white savior, a skeptic who initially invades and betrays the Na’vi only to come around and assume position as their leader. In Avatar: The Way of Water, the film acknowledges that Jake is not a great leader. He makes bad decisions and is, honestly, a bad parent (his favoritism for one son is laid on really thick). But there are enough glimpses of his regret, or of the children watching their parents engaged in constant conflict, to suggest that this series understands its protagonist’s flaws, and that a part of the story moving on will be the Sully children learning to be better than their elders. In an age of blockbusters where superheroes (or Tom Cruise) should never be questioned, it’s interesting to have a big movie suggest that its hero might not always be correct. 

I’m going to be honest, the broad strokes and heartfelt themes felt refreshing. As I was watching The Way of Water, the thought occurred to me that it had been a long time since I’d watched a giant piece of spectacle simply tell me a story. Say what you will, but Avatar 2 feels like a tale that comes straight from Cameron’s beating heart, not a piece of studio-nitpicked content. There are seeds for future movies, but they’re casually laid out; nothing feels like a trailer for the next one. There’s no predictable mystery villain or obligatory twist at the end; the climax largely hinges on stopping whale hunters. There’s no post-credit tease or set-up for a spinoff or prequel. Cameron’s usual sweeping emotions, big environmental themes and sweaty tension between peace-loving heroes and badass warriors is all present and accounted for. It’s obvious parenthood has been on his mind in recent years, and the exploration of the role of fathers and the protecting children makes it feel like a more personal and emotional endeavor than most of his work. It can be clumsy and clunky at times, but Avatar: The Way of Water also feels like a movie only James Cameron could make. It’s auteur filmmaking on the world’s biggest and most expensive canvas. 

And every blockbuster director should be paying attention. 

Epic action 

Ever since The Terminator , no one has done action better than James Cameron. The man knows how to build a set piece, and he knows how to deliver chases, fights and escapes in a way that commands our emotions and releases tension with a fist pump. 

Avatar: The Way of Water might be at its best when it slows down and luxuriates in the awe, but its final hour is one of the most spectacular and cheer-worthy stretches of action in Cameron’s career. The final third of the three-hour movie features an exhilarating whale hunt and its even more exhilarating reversal, a chase aboard a sinking ship, and a brawl between the film’s hero and protagonist. The sequences are free of the choppy edits or clunky staging we get in today’s superhero epics. Cameron continues to prove that he understands the importance of geography and clarity in action scenes, and it might sound like it should be obvious that we should know exactly what’s happening in every fight scene, but it’s a lesson that too many of our large-scale epics still need to learn. 

Most importantly, Cameron understands the key rule of action cinema: every action scene needs to tell a story. Every beat needs to have stakes and a mini conflict inside of it. Consider the film’s action high point: a whale-hunting journey that goes really bad for the whale hunters, culminating in a gnarly ending that earned first a gasp and then a cheer from me. And it’s because, step by step, Cameron and his team of editors show us exactly what’s happening, create tension throughout and wait for just the right moment to deliver the payoff. It’s a mini-movie in itself, as is every action sequence. Throughout the film, we know what the stakes are in every action scene; we understand what’s happening at every second; the build up and release of tension is exquisite. And because we’ve spent three hours with these characters and the movie has given us the time to fall in love with this world and understand the heroes’ needs, we’re invested throughout. Again, it’s basic, but it’s something our biggest action movies too often forget, whether it's the choppy editing of most Batman movies or the muddled gray haze of the MCU. 

Much like with my revisit to the first film, maybe I’m elevating Avatar 2 simply because the majority of our blockbusters are so bad. But I don’t think that’s the only case. Your mileage may vary, of course, but this was just filmmaking on such an epic, broad scale that I just got lost in it. I held my breathe. I cheered. I cried. I loved pretty much every moment of this return to Pandora – more than I did with the first film – and I can’t wait for Cameron to return us there (and thankfully, Avatar 3 is already shot and scheduled for December 2024, so there’s no decade-plus wait this time). 

Is this one of the year’s best movies? I find it hard to argue against it. Sure, it lacks the depth, nuance and heft of several other films. But it’s also immersive in a way no other film is this year. It’s stirring and thoughtful. It’s emotional and epic. It’s a big swing, and Cameron connects. I know the adage “never bet against James Cameron” is cliché by now but, well, can you disagree with it?