I drafted this review awhile ago, and while I'd like to have rewritten some, the films are too dull to revisit.
Last year on Mastodon I said, "watching avatar for the first time the way james cameron intended: on a standard def hotel tv where the white balance is fucked up for some reason". Mr. Cameron may be thankful I saw only the ending rather than the whole film in that venue, but he'd be dismayed to learn that a few months later I watched the full film on a friend's much better projection system and I didn't find the experience to be much of an improvement. I've also watched the sequel since then and my reaction aligns with what Cameron served up: more of the same.
The Avatar movies are proven money makers (Cameron has multiple planned sequels), yet their only notable cultural impact appears to be a meme questioning how such financially successful films have had so little cultural impact. As a late viewer who avoided the early hype, the answer is obvious: the films are utterly forgettable in every way other than the technical wizardry required to make them. The plot for each is so basic that a mere reference to one or two other films adequately summarizes the story (e.g., Dances With Wolves (1990) and Fern Gully (1992)). The acting and dialogue fall flat. Fatally, the digital imagery, the film's supposed triumph, the reason to watch them at all, is actually largely uninspiring to my eyes. The blue Na'vi faces are so stiff they may as well be plastic action figures. Perhaps the actors did emote and the technology failed them. Landscapes are occasionally pleasant in a desktop background way. Animals have more creative and visually interesting features, particularly the whale-like creatures in the sequel, which have eyes that are more expressive than the main humanoid characters.
The techno-industrial form juxtaposes, without irony or acknowledgement, the films' own rejection of technology and uncritical industrialism in favor of a natural mysticism. A 2D film pretending to have depth.
Rated: not liked.