‘Avatar’ Open Thread: What did YOU think?
by Big HollywoodDon’t be surprised by “Avatar’s” box office success. As butt-numbingly dull as it is, compared to ”Transformers 2″ it’s a masterpiece, and Bay’s film made $834 million worldwide.
Doesn’t beef cause Global Warming?
Big Hollywood reviews below the fold:
REVIEW: Cameron’s ‘Avatar’ Is a Big, Dull, America-Hating, PC Revenge Fantasy
‘Dances With Wolves’ In Space: Cameron’s ‘Avatar’ Gets Visuals Right, Everything Else Wrong
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
736 Comments
If you can stomach anti american, leftist propaganda, then I would say it actually is pretty good in its own right for the first 2/3rds or 3 quarters. The climactic stuff is boring and nonsensical however.
The effects are generally mind blowing overall, so it does deserve some of the hype.
The Tree hugging native metaphor gets pretty old by the end.
And the most engaging character by far, is the main bad guy, colonel quaritch.
solid 2 1/2 or 3 stars out of 4. Not the greatest thing ever made, but definitely better than I expected.
The Supermodel of movies
Ah, Hollywood. Using cutting edge technology to exalt primative lifestyles, bashing the profit motive in their stories and politics while scamming every possible penny from a gullable public.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Big Hollywood, Michael Chavez, DNC DUDES, Big Tweeting, Mr. Pink and others. Mr. Pink said: ‘Avatar’ Open Thread: What did YOU think? http://tinyurl.com/yal2rot [...]
Just love the fact tht "Avatar" has a commercial tie-in with McDonald's. Green politics certainly does make for strange bedfellows. When I last looked McDonald's was near the top of every green hit-list because of transfats, animal cruelty, climate-destroying methane production and all of the evils associated with the consumption of beef. And now heres Cameron's "Avatar", perhaps the most sanctimoniously anti-modernist flick ever made, climbing into the sack with McD's for purposes of making that extra couple of million bucks. They can't even have a sense of humor about it. I'd have a lot more respect for both entities (the fimmakers and the burger company) if they had commercials featuring the blue-skinned aliens stopping by their local Golden Arches for coffee and a Big Mac after kicking Marine butt.
Maybe I'll catch it on TV in three years, and flip the channel which the politics intrude.
But for those who did watch, a question:
If there's an energy crisis unobtanium is supposed to solve, how does humanity have the available power and resources to ship minerals over interstellar distances? Don't they have fusion, which could be viable with Helium-3 easily obtainable here in our Solar System?
Everything I'm hearing makes it sound like Cameron is stacking the deck way too much. A pity.
Isn't it ironic after all of this time complaining about Hollywood making unoriginal stories and justifying them only with massive budgets…Avatar sneaks through?
I guess Hollywood wasn't using ENOUGH millions.
Or the magic ingredient was liberal hate speak.
I'm more amused by the fact that Cameron has spent $300 million dollars and used the best film technology available . . . to tell us that capitalism and technology are bad.
The very basic problem of this movie is that it totally disregards its own premise once they get to Pandora. Given the state of Earth, unobtanium (and yes, that is the mineral's name) is the savior of the human race. Among other things, it lets us get off the wrecked planet. And maybe make it less of a wreck. Fixing your power transmission and waste issues probably helps life on Earth. But the big one is that it plausibly let’s the human race leave by enabling FTL coms and effective .7c space travel. And energy-free superconductors are of course highly desirable on the spacecraft because it cuts your heat sink requirements dramatically and cuts your power requirements for running the ship. And you don’t get into the loop of having to cool the superconductor to save energy… yes, I'm a nerd.
In the scriptment, it’s also clear that Pandora is not the only resource exploitation area for a resource-starved Earth. RDA operates elsewhere and they would need .7c starships for those resources as well.
So "unobtanium" helps the energy situation on Earth, enables easier far-solar and extra-solar resource exploitation, and enables a chance for humans on a large scale to escape Earth if they find something that is either habitable or can be made that way.
The story should have been over a lot more than greed and I suspect that Cameron did realize that at one point or another in the 10 years of working on this. It’s probably not in there because it exceeded his storytelling grasp to still make Jake “right” in those circumstances.
The reason I say ignoring this angle is poor is because it lets you make some fantastic “bad” guys. Instead of a greedy corporation, you now have wide-eyed true believer crusaders. Doesn’t have to be all of them on planet, but it would be considerably more jarring to have a couple characters leaning this way. Some implicit reluctance given the stark situation – maybe they like the Na’vi – but absolute Knight Templar brutality and ruthlessness to get the job done because humanity is at stake.
It also would screw up the strawmanning by giving the audience competing rooting interests. Good book sci-fi would tend to do just this. Authors like Sophie’s choice situations like “two worlds enter, one world leaves.” To wit:
Humans: “We need to rip your planet apart to save our species.”
Na’vi: “The deposit is under our sacred tree, the flying mountains are sacred, and we’re not too thrilled about this whole ‘remove 20% of Pandora’s mass and ship it to your solar system’ long term plan either.”
Humans: “You’r right, that would probably be the end of your biosphere. We’re sorry for your loss.”
Na’vi: “….this is bad.”
Of course, this would make Jake’s choice to associate with the natives more asinine than it is and we can’t have the other side actually having a point. It would still be a much more interesting plot and require characters to make much more difficult choices.
Add to this the whole stupid Vietnam and 9/11 analogies plus the “noble savage” clichee (why Hollywood still clings to that one I just cannot fathom) and even from the POV of someone who is not an American (me) you get a movie that is preachy, anti-civilizational propaganda about living in harmony with nature made by people who have the luxury not having to do just that.
It’s also really bad and inconsequential story-telling if you think about it for more than a second. Just imagine what the Na’vi did just did:
How does eradicating a mining colony make it less likely that you’ll be burned down to the bedrock in the long run? Your stuff is still valuable, you’ve proven you’re unwilling to negotiate, and you’ve demonstrated you’re a threat on the ground… Hey, wow, the atmosphere’s on fire, and what’s that big rock…?!
use a spellcheck.
Was this Colonel character the same as the Michael Biehn character from "The Abyss"?
I love the irony with the McDonald's tie-in.
Avatar was visually breathtaking, but the story was heavy-handed, especially towards the end. If you're easily offended by political leftist thinking, then this movie is not for you.
If you see it, I HIGHLY recommend seeing it in 3-D on IMAX like I did.
Vince, lighten up! It's Saturday morning.
I saw Avatar yesterday and I can't help to notice the rascists aspects to the movie, especially in the language and music. It reminded me of the Heart of Darkness were the "White man" brings civilization to the "Black Africans" and you can hear this in Africaner style in the music and lanquage. It's a rascist movie no doubt about it, but I liked it anyways. The "White man" reigned superior to the "Black man" in the end. Check it out and tell me if I'm wrong…
By the end of the movie – I was rooting for Col. Quaritch. I would have rather watched a three hour movie with him as the main character.
Dumb movie, with dumb, naive politics. Was the screenplay written be George Lucas?
Just think of the good Cameron could have done helping the poor & destitute with 300 million dollars! Nah, I'll just waste it on a high-tech piece of eye-candy with a convoluted script, that will be forgotten about the second you exit the theater.
For it's 3D pageantry it gets an A+. For it's tree hugging loving, new age worship nonsense, and anti military rant it gets a beat down and a kick in the throat. This film joins the ranks of An inconvenient truth and The 11th Hour for it's over zealot sanctimonious message of saving the environment from evil, vile corporations.
It's eye candy and nothing more. It's the film equivalent of Megan Fox. Real nice to look at but as soon as it/she starts getting preachy you feel the need to run away real fast.
It's about an hour of an unoriginal movie and an hour and a half of a special effects expo.
I have to co-sign Vince's comment. Proper grammar doesn't take breaks or holidays. How many times have we read perfectly cogent arguments or counterpoints ruined by the phonetic approach to spelling?
To James Cameron, it's called selling your soul for another Oscar trophy on your mantle.
Be sure to buy a supersize bag of popcorn and eat it early — you're need the empty bag when you Puke!
I enjoyed the 3D effects, which were great but not super-spectacular, but the story ruined the movie for me. Having the military industrial complex be the very bad thing is a hackneyed cliche today, done beyond death, and the new age nature worship was deeply irritating. No way I'll buy the DVD.
The best thing about Avatar was seeing the trailer for Knight and Day, which looks to be a hilarious action comedy, despite the fact that Tom Cruise is the star.
Too many!!!
I just choked on my Big Mac. ;D
Wait…was that your plan??
Now there's an idea. How about Avatar costumed people slobbering over Big Macs on Youtube!
If this film is financially successful say farewell to human actors-they'll all whine up as background for digitalized celebrity stars who never age or wrinkle nor make public fools of their private lives.
SAG members-you've just been relegated to the dinosaur age; perhaps you can use your talents community organizing for free.
Also – I couldn't help but notice that the blizzard in the Northeast will keep millions of moviegoers at home. And, Avatar a global warming PSA? God has a sense of humor.
really? 'ruined'? that mite be the stupidest fucking comment i've ever read on this site. and that includes crap from 'average joe'. get over yourself.
I agree with the ironies listed above, and thought the basic story line was trite. But I found the movie engaging enough that I was involved to the end – even though it was pretty obvious how everything was going to conclude. The 3-D was incredible, and the scenery was gorgeous. The 'connecting' thing was pretty cool too – I like the Gaia idea even for our Earth, in the sense that the impact of whatever mankind has done to it gets absorbed to some extent from a Darwinian or scientific standpoint. I don't think the 'message' is going to convert anyone new, and as entertainment I'd say I got my money's worth. This must be seen in a good theater with 3-D to really appreciate it.
Why are people bothered to see a movie that doesn't jive with their politics? If you don't want your money to support it, that's fine. But I'm sure it will tear it up financially. I will probably want to puke at the "message," but the effects look far too mind-blowing to miss on the big screen.
And, when these movies are labeled "far-left," it usually isn't as bad as these websites suggest. If you are looking to be offended, you will find it.
But my other point is not to worry about the message of the movie. Worry that your kids are being brain-washed with this type of bullshit in the schools you send them too. Frankly, I won't have kids until I am financially able to send them to a private school.
Saw it last night and I loved the special effects. They were beautiful. I'm blind in one eye, so the 3D stuff does nothing for me so saw it in 2D but was still mesmerized.
I'm a conservative, so I obviously saw the preachy aspects of it. It was interesting how he had the natives (or the indigenous as they called them) make the sounds used in all the old stereotypical westerns for the "savages!" However, I enjoyed the movie for the wizardry and ignored the evangelizing. I'm sure viewers will not change their views on anything based on this movie. He will either be preaching to the choir, or people like me will just ignore the preaching. I liked the previous comment where someone noted that Cameron spent $300m and the cutting edge of technology to preach a message that capitalism and technology is bad!
If I had family in the Military, I'd go throttle Cameron over the cheer-the-Marines-getting-offed final battle scene. And I thought the color scheme was ugly.
All the commercials make it look like the military look like the hero. They did the same thing with Lions for Lambs.
If hollywood knows what people want . . . why not give it to them?
This is why under Socialism . . . we would have no art, no sports, no entertainment, etc.
Because every penny you spend is needed desperately by someone, somewhere on earth. The Left just needs to accept that fact and move on.
It is only with Capitalism (the private ownership of Capital) that allows people to follow their individual pursuits. And we all get to enjoy the fruit of their labor.
I'd honestly like to know which commercials you've been seeing… it's been pretty clear what the story was from the teaser on, so far as I've seen: The blue guys are smiley and chilling in the woods, then the army guys start shooting at them. The "head" bad guy even has a big gnarly "I AM A BAD PERSON" scar across half his face, for those sitting in the back row…
Um, you do know real actors were used for all the motion capture, right? SAG got plenty of dues from Avatar.
The headline for this movie should be "Cameron Gets His Black Vibe On” – to make up for the absence of black people in Titanic. This movie has the most uninspiring plot of any movie Mr. Cameron has ever made, and in it Cameron sells his movie-making soul to that Lucifer called computer-generated reality. Because the fast-paced action of the story gives the audience no time to get involved with either the characters or the plot, the hero seems uninspiring because the movie never successfully illustrates why he becomes so involved with the natives so quickly and so thoroughly that he forgets his mission – and himself: the movie seems all action verb (not linking) and no noun. At no point does a convincing bond occur between the audience and either the female lead or her people – and these disconnects keep coming throughout the movie. “Special effects” can NEVER take the place of a good story or a sympathetic character, which this movie makes patently clear. The film – though blazing with movement – seems strangely dead, which leads me to sadly proclaim, “And thus passes James Cameron – King of the Moviemakers.”
Shoot, at least George Lucas ATTEMPTS to be original, even if he epically fails. Avatar is such an obvious rip-off.
I haven't seen it, but the funniest comment I've heard so far is that it should have been called "Dances with Smurfs."
Just like always, Original K. Haven't seen the movie, but the "story" sure is getting old.
The movie had great effects. However, as others have noted, it is anti-American, anti-capitalism, and at least to some extent, anti-military.
You're wrong. <spoiler ahead> The White Men don't bring civilization to Pandora whatsoever. They're sent packing, with asses royally kicked, back to their 'dying planet'.
The original script had unobtanium as an energy source crucial to Earth's survival. Cameron decided that would be too complicated for his anti-capitalism, anti-technology message, so he reduced it to the mantra that the mineral is worth a lot of money instead. The finished product in nonsensical because no one would spend decades and billions in research to mine a mineral that is profitable (but would take at least 6 years for every shipment to arrive back at earth). That's a huge problem with the movie, besides the silliness of the characters and dialog.
It's more like $500 million. He'll probably make it back, but this movie isn't going to be viewed as a major success in the long run (other than to the Tree-Huggers who use it as their new video Bible {sigh} ).
I am enjoying the rite comments. they are really funny. they love war & do not beleive in science….
It was pretty preachy (though nor peta preachy), it actually makes me want to slash and burn an acre or two of rain forest. Despite that, I enjoyed it. Lots of shit gets blown up. But it was nowhere near the best movie of the year. Movies like Up!, The Hangover, Zombieland, and Star Trek, were much much better.
I dont think they were Marines, I believe they were Mercs.
I know, I think science is a sham and love war with guns…I just don't go needin' hows to understands bullet speeds..just point and there shootin. Dat's how's we gets it dun on da rite.
Now, for something completely different. The movie was BORING…amazing 3D but to judge it as a good film, get out of the 3D realm and watch the 2D version. Then come back to me and tell me if it's any good. It's literally Dances with Wolves in space…nothing new, lame characters, nada, nothing.
Best part of my screening, when the word "Shock & Awe" was mentioned in the dialog…most of the audience groaned. One guy behind me, a retired Marine said at the end "Nuke the site from orbit, only way to be sure". Now THAT'S classic Cameron…not this dumbed down version. I want the guy who gave us Hudson, Hicks, Vasquez, and Bishop back!
Go watch the Great Global Warming Swindle and tell me all those scientists "don't believe in science." No one believes your man-made climate change junk science anymore – you are the minority.
So, let me get this straight–this movie is "anti-American, anti-capitalism, and at least to some extent, anti-military." You rail about leftism controlling the movies in Hollywood–and the lack of substance in movies–and you read all the reviews confirming your liberal fears about Cameron's latest…
…and you all WENT TO SEE IT ANYWAY? Because it had big shiny effects?
Bwa hahahahahaha!
Thanks for the $$$ support. That's why they keep making these "liberal" movies, nimwads.
Any movie that can be enjoyed only if I cheer a blue Smurf wasting American soldiers is NOT a movie I'm going to watch.
What hypocrisy? That braided blue thing in the ad is obviously very disappointed with and disillusioned by that floating Big Mac. I mean, just look at him.
just to be brief about it, you're nuts. Stunning movie. And while I share, in the abstract, the feeling that it would be nice to have the military be the good guys, I'm also a Choctaw Indian; I've got to say it was nice to see the Injuns win one.
Cameron has too much affection for all things military (the ethos, the gear, the manliness) for us to really buy the pacifist angle of the story (Ebert actually called the movie anti-war in his review – did he sleep through the last half hour?). His simplistic environmental story and his equally shallow and offensive depiction of man (read white man) vs. noble savage reveals his trite, pop-Marxist understanding of history. I'm not really convinced that he even really buys it.
But it's all really a cynical exercise, as Cameron is simply trying to outdo Titanic. Here's what he calculated: Cool future military stuff (his favorite) + cutting edge CG characters and self developed 'revolutionary' 3D (he's still master of latest movie tech) + trendy global warming/green/lefty anti-American message (to gather largest possible global audience) = still King of the World. Et voila, Avatar!
The commercial starts out . . . "my job is to keep you alive. I will not succeed." Ra ra ra, go military. something like that. Lots of explosions and high fives.
They cut out a scene where the blue people trade carbon credits.
Afrikaners ( learn how to spell words you use, correctly ! ) never lived in the Belgian Congo ( learn geography !), where Conrad's HEART OF DARKNESS takes place, and as to "Afrikaner music" ( I bet you've never heard any, but I have heard lots of it ! ) isn't "racist" nor does it contain "imperialistic" themes.
You're completely ignorant about all of what you wrote about, except for the movie, which I can't claim to know anything about, because I haven't seen it and won't. It would behoove you take a hint from me and to NOT talk about things you don't know nor understand.
I'm Choctaw as well, actually! And I used to work for a casino, so I'm quite used to seeing redskins outwitting the paleface.
Lesson learned: meesa be 'tinkin dat the left be berry berry selective in its outrage over CGI cartoon stereotypes.
First off I have not seen the movie and as of this moment have no intention of paying to see it. Politcs are not the issue nor the CG animation but just the same old story lines repeated adnauseum.
What I really wanted to comment on was the term 3D. These are eye tricks and not really 3D. The technology has gotten good enough so that the effect is better focused and sharper but it is still eye tricks. When they finally are able to do Holograms, not the Star Trek kind, that allow you to move around and see the movie from differing angles seamlessly then it will be 3D. I know it is a little petty but I hate how english keeps getting twisted up and the names of things are important. I just wanted to use my Hand Held Portable Photon Generator (Flash Light) to shed a little light on the subject of nomenclature.
Personally I would like someone, anyone make a movie about "Ringworld" by Larry Niven. That was a great book and finally the technology has caught up to make such a project possible.
With that wish in place I will leave with a phrase which will mean something to those who have read it and will be totally meanigless to those who have not, "The Luck of Teela Brown."
It's a basic sign of sloppiness. It's the sort of thing that one would catch if one were to take the time to ensure that one's post actually makes sense. The major problem with the ease of posting replies is that it encourages one to post before thinking.
I am not an epic movie kind of guy, but the graphics and 3D in Avatar are the best I've ever seen. Specifically, I loved the nature/landscape imagery, and this is the first 3D movie I've ever seen where the 3D actually serves a purpose. We filmed an INSTANT movie review the moment we walked out of the theater: http://bit.ly/6prras
Wait- does this ad mean the Big Mac is made with Avatar meat?
Your a dumbass dude
Hypocritical of Big Hollywood to ask "what do you think" after Big Hollywood has spent the last few weeks ridiculing the very idea of this movie.
This is a loaded question. The answer the editors at Big Hollywood want to hear is "we hate it. You were totally right. Please, oh sage ones, continue to be our protectors from pernicious Hollywood products."
How totally expected that Big Hollywood dismisses this movie because of its parallels to the founding of America — hey, white people did treat native americans in a brutal, dehumanizing fashion you know — yet these same people praise Cameron's "True Lies" because it dehumanizes middle easterners. You want pretty lies: America is a pure, noble nation not founded in horrific slaughter and slavery. Please, sir, don't remind us of these things, the editors at Big Hollywood endlessly plead. In this mentality they are no different from the Taliban.
Do yourself a favor and go late. It was hard to relate to the characters and the storyline. The visuals are outstanding but they should have had more of a script and story. The last 45 minutes of the movie was great.
That would have at least been an interesting plot. It's a shame that Hollywood often ignores interesting angles in their stories in favor of boring ideology.
Indeed, God does.
Also, how come Worthington's parapelgic character doesn't have prosthetic limbs? We have those *now*, for crying out loud. Some soldiers can even be on active duty with them.
It's only earned $27 mil so far. He's got a ways to go.
So, they're just carrying out this hugely expensive endevour just to be mean?
That's even stupider.
Sarah did go off the deep end for a minute – anti-science and anti-male. But young John quickly got her back on task. And of course you did have Cyberdyne more or less as the culprit in the future downfall of humanity. However, I got the feeling that happened not because of the unbridled greed of a Big Corporation, but because the geeks working for the corporation really didn't understand the technology they had discovered (terminator's hand & processor). Oops.
I am a Marine and I will wait till I can 'watch instantly' on Netflix. Also, I will cheer for the humans and wish the Navi were made into Big Macs.
I'd probably be seeing Avatar right now if my car weren't buried in snow.
Maybe Hollywood will make better movies if somebody tells them a good script is a special effect.
Can someone explain to me why, if they really don't care about the aliens, are willing to engage in genocide against them, and Earth is dying and this is its only hope, they don't simply "take off and nuke them from orbit" (to quote another Cameron movie) and then mine to their heart's content? Is that option even discussed in the movie (because we know for certain that Cameron understands the basic idea)?
I'll see it for the 3D. That's about the only thing that puts my butt in theatres these days.And since this is supposed to be the best 3D ever I have to see it. I'm dreading the Captain Planet storyline.
oh everyone is being so silly. i'm conservative, politically speaking. i loved Avatar. Let's just keep politics out of my craving desire for good special effects and eye candy. Cool flick, really cool.
You spelt "mite" wrong. It's m-i-g-h-t, not m-i-t-e. A mite is a small insect.
I rarely go see movies (I haven't even made it to see The Blind Side yet) so there's no way I'm gonna pay to see Dances with Smurfs in the Fern Gully in Space.
Excellent take, blueknight. Excellent!
Frankly, I'm lukewarm about the film because of its unoriginal plot. Evil humans conquering an alien Eden full of innocent primitive aliens has been done to death in everything from comic books like "Ekos":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekos_(comics)
To films like "Battle for Terra":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Terra
The only reason "Avatar" is getting any attention is Cameron's name recognition. For truly original fare, spend your money on a Pixar flick like "Up." (I'm still trying to think of another movie starring an old guy and Cub Scout using a flying house to embark on a grand adventure.)
A blizzard hit the East Coast about the same time Obama returned from Copenhagen. *That* is all the proof I need that there is a God, and he has a great sense of humor.
It's sounds like a lot of "bait and switch" in the marketing for Avatar. It reminds me of how Obama was marketed as a moderate Democrat, but was clearly a Far Left Marxist to those who looked past the hype.
I don't care what anyone says.I'm never giving Jim Cameron another penny.
That's right, I forgot the anti-male part of it. (Honestly I thought she was the most annoying character in the terminator films.) I'd love to say that scene alone turned me off from T2 but I'm afraid I wasn't real fond of the whole film from the start. That scene was just the final straw.
It's "You're a dumbass dude." When you accuse someone of being a dumbass try using correct grammar.
There's no problem in this movie that a decent arborist couldn't have solved. Figure out how to mine the 'nosuchthingium' without disturbing the roots of the tree and without displacing the people. But what fun is that when you can just demonize corporations, exalt nature, make the military folk talk like hicks and blow stuff up?
After spending $13 to watch this eco-kookery – I will now join you in never giving Cameron one more cent of my money.
I am so done with the "let's make the military evil BS." Hey hollyweird, here's an idea for you. Give us a movie where the US is the great and noble country that we are, the military does a job that you are too scared to do, and the bad guy is something we all can recognize (here's an unPC hint he's wears a rag on his head and screams allah akbar). Americans will flock to it.
can't put nuthin by you, can i
I believe in correct spelling-
rite = right
beleive = believe
what else you got, genius?
Politics aside, the movie wasn't even that great. The storyline was amazingly formulaic, and indeed the Na'vi were hard to distinguish from one another. Pandora was quite a fantastical escapist world, one I liked, but after the first hour or so the special effects and the world weren't anything new. Thus, the poor story (along with the blatantly anti-human, anti-capitalist, anti-[traditional] American bent) failed to make this movie worth watching.
I think you are the dumbass, calling a woman a dude.
While I agree that conservatives can sometimes over react to messages in a movie, this is a case where the DIRECTOR says that the message is liberal. Don't have to wear tin foil hats to see this one coming methinks.
Just once I would love to see Gargomel get himself a smurfburger.. Oh wait, they did do that in robot chicken once.
She was off the deep end for a lot longer than a minute. John had a better head on his shoulders even when he was doing that petty stuff at the start.
I saw it last night and enjoyed it. I've learned that you simply have to skip whatever politics may or may not be intentioned any movie. Sadly, since movies first became entertainment politics have been embeded in them so it's either skip them all or take what you can out of them. All in all, if a movie let's me escape and be part of the environment this one did the trick. 3D was increadible and FX were astonishing, story predictable. That alone makes it worthwhile in my book.
Lenin said Capitalists would sell him the rope he would use to hang them, And so we have this anti-captalist propaganda piece with advanced technology (although I preferred Jurassic Park) filled with predictable anti-US propaganda financed by a major US corporation. I guess Lenin was on the money. And as for the "acting" …Stephen Lang's snarling, grimacing performance was like an old silent movie villain, All he needed was a moustach and cloak. Giovanni Ribesi was pathetic and Sam Worthington as interesting as blank paper. If he wanted to do a 3D movie he should have remade Bwana Devil.
I just saw the movie tonight and here is my review…
The special effects were absolutely wonderful. The 3d technology is excellent.
However, the plot was just an old rehash of enviro-weinie propaganda. In one scene where the "evil" Colonel is briefing a room full of troops he says that the native "Na-Vi" gathering in large numbers was a clear threat that warranted a preemptive strike because they were being terrorists. I assume this is Cameron's swipe at GW Bush. To bad it is a poor one. When the Bush admin stated a preemptive strike against Saddam's Iraq was necessary it was because everyone believe they had nukes. The threat of a nuclear attack does not compare to an enemy gathering in large numbers especially when their only weapons are knifes and arrows. As for the terrorist label…no one is stupid enough to believe that so why did he put it in?
Then there is the tired old statement "they wiped out their planet now they are here to do the same to this one". That seems to conclusively say that we are currently destroying our world. I assume this is with the disputed global warming farce that is making Al Gore rich. Tired, old and stupid.
If the listed plot references were cut from this movie it could have stood on its own and been a fairly neutral view of morality. As it is it was just another propaganda movie. James Cameron may claim he is "King of the World" but the rest of the world doesn't see him that way.
I tried for 2 and a half years to contact Cameron about his portrayal of a character with a disAbility – he never would return a call, letter, or fax. Of course I didn't expect to change his mind after casting – but wished he would recognize the fact that being a paraplegic is a significant factor in my identity – and for all of those with a disAbility – and this is not a choice – I am not paralyzed by choice – no more than my age, gender or race is not a choice but also a significant factor in my identity – so why does Hollywood treat the disAbility like it was a choice – and can choose any actor to represent? AS a filmmaker I hate to wish any movie not do well – but lets just say it wouldn't hurt my feelings if Alien Smurfville tanks! Oh, and I have not seen it – anyone who has – please tell me if the paraplegic character Jake – goes beyond the Hollywood ending and gets the fairy tale ending of walking into the sunset on his own able body? Thanks!
You must be logged in to post a comment.