Avatar Fire and Ash: How Did Critics Review James Cameron's Film?

The storyline of Avatar: Fire and Ash centers on the continuing struggles of Jake and Neytiri's family, who are grieving after the loss of Neteyam.

They must now face a new threat from an aggressive Na'vi tribe known as the Ash People or Mangkwan clan, depicted as a ruthless and godless group of Na'vi, led by Varang, played by Oona Chaplin.

Varang and his clan are not afraid to break Eywa's laws and are determined to acquire human weapons, triggering a greater escalation of conflict on Pandora.

In addition to the Ash People, the film also introduces another Na'vi clan, the Wind Traders, also known as the Tlalim, a nomadic group that travels by jellyfish-like sailing ships.

Director James Cameron has revealed that the third film will take a new direction for the world of Pandora, with the character Lo'ak having a larger role in the story.

The initial trailer, released on July 28, 2025, gave a glimpse of the intensity and stunning visuals that 'Avatar: Fire and Ash' will present, sparking enthusiasm among fans worldwide.

Critical reception to the film Avatar: Fire and Ash was divided, with some reviews calling it the weakest installment in the 'Avatar' franchise to date.

The film holds a 69% score on Rotten Tomatoes and a 61% score on Metacritic, indicating significant disparity among critics.

Some even called it the lowest-reviewed "Avatar" film.

Nevertheless, many critics praised the film's stunning visuals and spectacle, some even considering it more beautiful than its predecessor.

Several reviews also highlighted improvements over "The Way of Water," calling it bolder, denser, and more focused.

The greater focus on character development and emotional depth was also a major point of praise, with Zoe Saldaña's performance being cited as her best performance.

The film is considered to have successfully established the audience's connection with the inhabitants of Pandora and provided a satisfying conclusion to the first trilogy.

However, the film's lengthy runtime and simplistic plot have been criticized.

Some critics felt the film lacked the significant technological innovations of the first film, even calling it "outdated" and "unrealistic," resembling an old arcade game.

What Avatar: Fire and Ash lacks in novelty, it more than makes up for with familiar characters and a satisfying finale that’s worth the wait.Our review: https://t.co/FX8qxrovXo pic.twitter.com/IsYhIFx3qX

— IGN (@IGN) December 16, 2025

Peter Bradshaw of The Guardian called the film "a piece of utterly boring nonsense" and "uninteresting" aside from a few dramatic moments.

Meanwhile, Nicholas Barber of the BBC gave it one out of five stars, claiming that the novelty of the planet Pandora had worn off and the filmmaking style felt "worn."

On the other hand, Erik Davis of Fandango offered high praise, describing "Avatar: Fire and Ash" as a phenomenal viewing experience and the biggest in the franchise.

IGN acknowledged that the film may not be as technically groundbreaking as its predecessors, but it makes up for it with refinements at every level, making Pandora feel more intimate.

Bilge Ebiri of Vulture even called "Fire and Ash" the "richest" "Avatar" film yet, allowing the audience to truly immerse themselves and explore the characters and their backgrounds.