Merrick here...
The folks over at Spoiler TV have some high res images from AVATAR. We've seen many (if not all) of these pics before - although I don't believe they've been made available to us in this size and clarity yet.

SEE THEM HERE!!!

I'm still working to process the AVATAR footage revealed last night at Fantastic Fest. It was quite a bit of material. As I understand the matter, some of this footage had been screened before (AVATAR Day, Comic-Con, etc.) and some of it was being revealed for the first time last night. Overall impressions? Fragments of James Horner's score could be heard throughout the footage - it's seems highly melodic and dreamy. In the sequences we saw, the music was more ethereal and understated than 'big'. The editing, camera movement, and fantastic (razor sharp & headache free) 3-D often create a mesmerizing effect that is pleasantly disorienting. In this regard, the footage triumphed.

The Na'vi....

I was surprised by how well the Thundersmurf's performances worked - i.e. their characterizations are what ultimately pulled me into the film, and very quickly. This is particularly true in regards to Zoe Saldana's 'Neytiri' - we've seen characters similar to her before, but you buy into this one fast. The Na'vi are believable, fully realized, and diverse characters - not just special effects. This is a commendable triumph, no easy task, and pleasant surprise which is not at all evident from the trailers. Hopefully future trailers will boost-up this aspect of the film - the CGI performances here are often far more impressive than the action surrounding them. Strangely, I was much less impressed with the Na'vi movements. In a few shots they didn't seem to have a natural range of motion or weight. Producer Jon Landau was on hand to talk about the making of the film (and the state of film making in general) - really fascinating insights I could've listened to all night. At one point, Jon more or less dismissed the importance of photo-realism, saying (paraphrasing here), "Since none of the creatures we see in the film actually exist, who's to say how 'real' they look." I get where he's coming from, but I would argue that most viewers have an innate sense of whether something FEELS "right" or not. We instinctively sense when the physical laws around us aren't being replicated on screen. And, even though a film may take place on an alien world, viewers NEED to be grounded in some kind of familiar physical reality so that we can better associate with the narrative. I'm not sure if this is making sense? Lemme try it this way: for me, the issue here isn't "photorealism" as much as - "Does the object I'm looking at feel like it's operating correctly in our physical universe?" "Does X character move like a living being with skin, or like Gumby?" In the footage we saw last night, the Na'vi...and the creatures around them...often felt utterly convincing. However, there were a number of shots where the Na'vi felt like they were gliding/sliding instead of hitting the ground. Or their movement felt more like very good stop motion puppet than a being that is fluidly alive. These glitches didn't feel like they were character traits - they felt like visual effects that were struggling to find their way over that fallen tree trunk, onto the dinosaur battle bird, or across the screen. When we've psychologically/emotionally invested in these effects as characters (which AVATAR nails), such imprecision pulls viewers OUT of the immediacy of the narrative...reminds us we're only watching a buncha digital stuff...at which point we have to let ourselves get pulled back into the film...only to be pulled out again...etc. Which...is kinda exhausting. And that was my overall impression of the footage we saw. There are moments/sequences here that are genuinely beguiling and beautiful - and effects that work as well as (or better than) any effect ever has. But there are also moments (creatures, settings, etc.) that don't feel much more evolved than stuff we saw in the STAR WARS prequels - a little cartoony, lacking a certain grounding, and never quite as immersive as they were probably intended to be. And when much of the film is told using these effects... On the whole, I'm thinking much of AVATAR will work nicely as a character driven piece. But I also suspect it may end up being a frustrating movie at times - possibly unable to sustain the magic (and I'd even say lyricism) it sometimes conjures so brilliantly. But it's not fair to make such a broad assertion based on roughly one quarter of the film - so don't take anything I'm saying here as any kind of final judgment. Just voicing a suspicion...a guess. And I'd love to be wrong. Its performances will likely save the day. Or, perhaps the film will become bulletproof if audiences adapt a "The real world is over here...and our totally stylized Land of Oz is over here" mentality while viewing it. Come what may, and despite such trepidations, I really, really do want to see more. Like...tomorrow.

OTHER NOTES OF INTEREST:

** Landau indicated that efforts are underway to convert TITANIC to 3-D; towards this end tests have already been run. T2 and ALIENS were also mentioned as probably/desirable 3-D conversion candidates. Hopefully an official announcement about TITANIC can be made within the coming year. ** Depending on the extent to which AVATAR earns its keep, further adventures in the film's universe/on its planetary setting of Pandora are likely - whether in book form, movie form, or whatever. ** Landau says Jim Cameron already has several scripts for other projects in development and it's not likely he'll take ten years to make his next feature film.