I've read a lot of people saying that the DiF guys didn't really say why people actually liked the film, but I'm fairly certain they did so near the front of the commentary.

The reason Avatar did so well is because it appeals to the common audience in a very OOH-LOOK-AT-THAT way. It's high spectacle on a simple story -- a night out at the circus for the American family.

Now, what I don't understand is why The Dark Knight did just as well (well, Avatar topped it) at the box office, yet had just complex enough of a story to keep people interested. Is it the power of an already known character mixed with an amazing story or was TDK really just lightning in a bottle?

I think it's a bit of both. The only reason Avatar does better than TDK is because of James Cameron's star power and OOH-LOOK-IT'S-IN-3D.

Finally saw this. I haven't listened to the commentary just yet but thought I'd put my initial reaction to the film itself.

An awful first half. I couldn't believe how bad some of the early dialogue was, and how clumsy and forced the exposition was as well. And that godawful narration....

That said, there are some very powerful moments in the film; lots of wow moments and crowning moments of awesome which I'm pretty sure is what made the film so successful. It's good manipulative entertainment.

And the world looks great, so great in fact that I wish Cameron had removed all the human elements from the story and created a sort of Apocalypto -like movie. Granted this would have changed the core story, but then that feels like a regurgitated Dances with Wolves anyway.

That said, my favourite 'human' bits were probably the video logs. A bit of wry humour in there and probably the best acting from Worthington.

Is the re-release even out yet?

Really? Wow...that one just totally flew under the radar. I don't think it was even in theaters out here.

I still get the feeling that the special edition is supposed to have all those bits of character development that were thrown to the cutting room floor, i.e. making the already 3 hour-long movie into a longer movie that's bearable, but i guess I have to wait to see if that's true. (Until I hear from someone about it)

EDIT: Actually, I just checked a review of the special edition. It's only 9 minutes longer. Because, of course, 9 minutes would have made the difference.

...

Yeah, no.

Good commentary. I feel you covered all the flaws of the story and why it's not a 'great film'. I very much doubt that this will be on any of those greatest films list - and because of the very visual CGI nature of the film I think it will date very quickly.

Anyhow, I can't help but think that the very premise of the film is founded on rocky ground. If Pandora is so hostile to humans and is occupied by bothersome natives, and the human corporation are a bunch of shits, why did they not just glass the entire planet years ago?

I still get into arguments with some of my best friends over this movie.  The friends in question still think the movie is a good film.  I say it's just a good looking popcorn thing.  The first time I saw the flick, I was jazzed about it, but then I thought about it;  and things didn't make sense.  Also, it took me an hour and a half to get used to the 3D!  A fucking HOUR AND A HALF!  That just ruins it for me.  I told my friends that by it's nature, 3D film is limited by the fact that it's... on film.  IF you want to be able to immerse yourself in the world of the story, go get in a holideck for Crying out Loud!

Okay...  I'll stop her before this turns into a rant post.

I love (love) Avatar, and can't wait to see the extended version of the movie.

This 'family language audio track,' is this something they're doing these days?

Wow, y'all are making me feel like a dummy for liking Avatar, but there you go.  I like Avatar.

I like Avatar, and I like Eddie the Eddie Doty.