Since when did visual effects determine the worth of a film? Then again, there is no real point asking the question or reviewing the film. The whole world has already watched it convincing film producers that an original storyline and fleshed out characters are unnecessary.

The problem with Avatar is a complete lack of substance and originality. People praise the film for it's visuals, and while they are pretty they are not particularly imaginative. Floating islands, seen them before. Every animal on Pandora (lame and transparent name for a planet) is simply an Earth species with added limbs and fluorescent colors. The military hardware has been seen before, the drop ships resemble those from Aliens, the armored suits from any computer game set in the future. All of the characters are stereotypes, the gruff military general who has a blinding hatred for Pandora for no particular reason, the hero who must learn the true value of life. There is the greedy capitalist and the hippy scientist, and the natives of the planet that are Native American Indian stereotypes painted blue. It's a wonder James Cameron didn't include a casino on Pandora.

The message that the forests are precious is a little bit of Fern Gully. And the racist message that seems to have gone over everyone's heads that the natives need a White man to save them in order for their culture to be preserved. Well that's a little bit of Dances with Wolves and Pocahontas right there. And don't get me started on the plot holes!

But, there is no point standing on a soapbox preaching to the deaf. The film grossed absurd amounts of money, the damage has been done. All that is left to do is reflect on this cinematic anomaly and prey to the gods of the theater (if they are still listening) that film makers will continue to respect our intelligence and our desire to be challenged with believable characters, original concepts, and layered story lines. Amen.