My daughter Em and I decided, after tonight's viewing in a local IMAX, that Avatar is--in high concept terms--The Matrix meets Ferngully.

Liked the 3D, but the plot was too stock and the villains were too cartoonishly drawn, so once you got past the initiation front-half, your mind wanders during the all-too-predictable back half. As much as I loved all the gee-whiz stuff, and it truly is amazing, I found myself thinking up more interesting alternative plots while the second half unfolded.

And frankly, that's not like me whatsoever. I love to get lost in plots. I love to be clueless and suspend disbelief. I don't like to pull back from the screen whatsoever. But time and again I found myself wondering why Cameron didn't go down this alley or that one, all of which seemed more interesting (his realized world is truly fascinating) than the tired plot I knew was coming.

In that failure, Cameron is the anti-Roddenberry: shift humanity hundreds of years and we still encounter only the worst traits on display--and completely in control of the story (unfortunately). The same can be said of his vision of technology: we can create the avatars but have no more anthropological good sense than first-contact explorers from the 15th century; we can travel the universe but still can only--apparently--mine resources in a manner of some Middle Earth kingdom.

Cameron is a great director--unbelievably talented. But he's like Spike Lee. He simply should not write his own plots, because they're so stiff, ideologically speaking, that they diminish the product. What's so amazing is that his skill as a filmmaker often overcomes the material--transcending it.

As a side note, I see a very bright future for Zoe Saldana. She did wonders with the role. And the 3D technology is very engaging. I could see a lot of action movies benefiting tremendously from this new approach.