Amassing more than two billion dollars through worldwide box office collections, Avatar easily qualifies as the most ambitious and successful sci-fi movies to emerge out of Hollywood in the last ten years. The movie, undoubtedly, offers groundbreaking visual effects tailor made for a 3-D spectacle. But does the movie, preoccupied with technology, unwittingly sacrifice cinematic quality? In my opinion it partly does, thus compelling one to question whether the success it enjoyed globally, unwarranted? It is, often observed that movie producers adversely manipulate the storyline and screenplay to accommodate visual effects. Avatar is a case in point. The fusion of special effects and the basic screenplay in the movie doesn't reflect a work par excellence. The movie's storyline in turn, is not very original either . There are aliens and humans involved in battle, albeit occupying different roles without actually doing anything different. It is merely a case of ad verbatim role swapping in an all too familiar thematic setting. In this sense the rave reviews which the movie attracted, allegedly on account of a groundbreaking shift in storyline, seem to be misplaced. The dialogue is not catchy, the characterization a tad stereotypical and the message all too familiar. In my opinion, Avatar is a high quality exhibition of special effects and needs to appreciated as such , but as a movie, it does not score very high and though moderately entertaining , is a run of the mill proponent of 21st century's sci-fi cinema.