http://ericharrison.orgQuick Blogcasthttp://ericharrison.org/2009/12/19/houston-film-critics-society-name-hurt-locker-best-movie-of-2009-and-honor-clooney-and-mulligan-for-acting.aspx#comment-2668718<br>Thanks for writing, James (and I'm Eric, by the way). I really enjoyed <i>Avatar</i> and think it marks the start of wide mainstream acceptance for 3D technology (that's how it will be remembered anyway). I've usually admired the way James Cameron roots his big-budget, high-tech action films with basic but profound human emotion and relationships. That's one reason they appeal to such a wide audience and that surely is why women are responding very well to <i>Avatar</i>. <br><br>What keeps it from being a great film in my opinion is his inability (or unwillingness) to imagine other worlds except through old movie formulas. So he's given us an American Western set on a distant moon -- <i>Dances With Wolves</i> in outer space -- with mostly nonwhite actors playing the nature-loving primitives taking a last stand against the advancing white civilization. We all know this story, it resonates with us, and Cameron knew all the ways it would push our buttons. It's a smart move commercially, but the lack of daring causes me to rank the movie a notch or two below greatness. But given the high cost of making the film, it's probably as close to great as it could get -- the high cost puts a cap on how daring and creative a filmmaker can be with the story.<br><br><i>Up in the Air</i>, I had problems with. There is much that I admire about it, but I felt the movie had two themes that don't really relate well to each other. The resolution of the story satisfies one theme (the personal one) but not the other one, and it's the unresolved theme (the social theme, having to do with today's economy and the morality of what Clooney did for a living) that makes the movie seem to ride the zeitgeist and gives the movie the patina of greatness. So basically, I think the script has problems. Also, while I think Clooney is very good in the role, I keep wondering how the movie would've been different had his character been played by an actor like Dustin Hoffman or Jack Nicholson. <br><br><i>Up In the Air</i> has a lot of similarities to Hoffman's <i>Last Chance Harvey</i>, and it reminds me in some ways of Nicholson's <i>About Schmidt</i>. I can't help but think that both Hoffman and Nicholson would've played the presentation scenes (where Clooney speaks to groups about the backpack) without Clooney's smugness and self possession. Played differently, I think those scenes (and a couple of others I can think of) might've revealed more layers to the character. <br><br>So, in short, while I liked the movie, I think the script was one draft short of complete and that Clooney didn't quite take the character deep enough to win all the accolades his performance is getting. <br><br>Whew. Sorry for the long-winded response, but since I only wrote one-paragraph capsule "reviews" of these movies this is the first time I've fully set down my thoughts on them, so I went on longer than I otherwise might have.<br><br>Thanks again for writing.&nbsp; <br>The Editor2009-12-21T20:30:31Zhttp://ericharrison.org/2009/12/19/houston-film-critics-society-name-hurt-locker-best-movie-of-2009-and-honor-clooney-and-mulligan-for-acting.aspx#comment-2667432Dear Mr. Harrison--<br />Just saw "Up in the Air" as it was highly regarded by the Houston Film Critics. A very powerful and moving film; I was touched by Clooney's performance. Also, I saw "Avatar" yesterday; I think that movie was just phenomenal. Your thoughts about "Avatar"?jamesintexas2009-12-21T12:49:42Z