The world and visuals made the movie quite enjoyable for me, but the storytelling was really weak. The cardboard cut-out antagonists (generic evil american army guy, generic evil american corporate guy), references to the war on terror (??), the attempts to glorify spiritualism, environmentalism, etc... all of it really bothered me. I've heard people say it was essentially a propaganda film and I pretty much agree. It's not always bad when you have generic bad guys, but why the allusions to the war on terror and whatnot? Why the shallow, completely one-sided and biased comments?
The way I view it is that while he is not necessarily wrong, when you're arguing against something it's absolutely essential that you take into consideration the opposing argument. You don't ignore it like Cameron did. Example: when the scientists try to explain to *generic evil corporate american guy* that the trees have some neurological connection with each other and he practically ignores what they're saying, gets a stupid look on his face like he doesn't understand, scoffs, and orders to have the tree destroyed anyways. Why are the corporate people evil, dumb, even completely oblivious to the importance of these scientific findings? Meanwhile, *generic evil army general guy* goes ahead and kills the Na'vi women and children. Unrealistic, one-sided, shallow: just a few words to describe my thoughts of the movie's plot. This kind of commentary does nothing to help people solve real issues, it just has people become more and more resentful of the things around them.
Still enjoyable overall, but it left a pretty bad taste in my mouth.