ferris209, you do realise that exact same treatment could be given to Star Wars?

No one is interested in originality before this, they never use the word "deriative", after all, they're on a a Star Wars site, everyone knows Star Wars is far from original, it's the execution that makes it great (OT that is).

Yet Avatar is here, and suddenly "it's bad because the story is not new"? What has quality got to do with originality? What the story is isn't important, it's the storytelling ("a movie is not what it is about, but how it is about it"). I found Avatar's story simple, well told and resonating. It's been done before, but who cares? That doesn't make it bad.

The rest of the film's areas, to me, were fantastic. The visuals were flawless (every Cameron and WETA did with the CG in this film is what Lucas wanted to do with the Pt and failed), the 3D was great, the acting was superb, the music was good, and as per usual in a Cameron film, the script was slightly cheesy but very memorable.

One of the best blockbusters I've seen in many years, easily, and definitely lived up to the hype.