‘Avatar’ and Hollywood’s Traitor Obsession
by James HudnallAvatar’s “hero” is a Marine who decides alien poontang trumps your entire species. He condemns his planet to slow destruction rather than allow them to continue to over-zealously mine some ore.
If you watch as many movies and TV shows as I do you’ll notice something rather annoying besides all the lame cliches that keep getting trotted out. And that’s the latest cliche to show up over and over again as the big “reveal” of the climax.
The bad guy turns out to be a traitor of some kind.
Either he’s the hero’s close relative, friend, buddy, co-worker…or, if the film deals with the military or national security in some way, the villain turns out to be a “patriot” who is trying to save America from itself by destroying it.
You have to ask yourself, what kind of Freudian slip is this? Writers usually know what they are trying to say. I know that may be hard to believe if you saw Terminator: Salvation or Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, but yes, writers usually are trying to make some kind of thematic statement.
The idea of a traitor can be powerful in dramatic terms. Someone you trust and rely on turns out to be your real enemy. That can be a very painful thing to discover, but it’s become such a common device in film it is almost a given. Which means what? Hollywood is lazy, or they feel we can’t trust anyone anymore?
Well hey, they invested a lot of faith and trust in our current president and look how that worked out. Except this has been going on for at least a decade now.
Let’s take two recent examples of the traitor. The first one is a big spoiler so don’t read the rest of the next paragraph after SPOILER: if you don’t want the movie “ruined” for you.
Smoking Aces 2: Assassins Ball features Tom Berenger as a handicapped lifer CIA desk jockey who is targeted by a whole slew of crazed assassins to want to kill him for some reason, at a certain time and place. The FBI wants to protect him when this hit is going down so they can discover why these killers are after Berenger. He seems to be a loyal worker for the US, a patriot (look out!) who has served his country for 30 years. SPOILER: And of course, he set up his own execution to lure a bunch of rogue assassins into a trap where they’d be killed, because he wanted to cover up the fact he used them to do terrorist acts around the world for the US government. Yes, the US government. Including the Spanish train bombing a few years back. And he doesn’t care if all these FBI agents protecting him get killed in the process. See, anyone called in a patriot in movies these days is a psycho. And, as we saw in last season’s 24 or Die Hard: Live Free or Die, patriots have no problem killing off Americans in the name of saving “America from itself”.
In Avatar we have the progressive’s favorite kind of traitor. The kind who sells out his own people. Avatar’s “hero” is a Marine who decides alien poontang trumps your entire species. He condemns his planet to slow destruction rather than allow them to continue to over-zealously mine some ore. His own troops, who he was supposed to represent, get slaughtered and the rest of his people get shipped off and humiliated so he can get rid of his puny white body and become a big blue stud. Sounds like the worst case of white guilt/penis envy ever imagined.
Talk about Freudian, Mr. Cameron.
Of course, the argument the story makes is sophomoric at best, it’s a Edgar Rice Burrough’s pastiche with some Hayao Miyazaki and Roger Dean thrown in. At no point do the “bad guys” have any sense to try negotiation with the dominate species. It’s a puerile parable of western civilization raping the new world. But what a lot of people seem to miss is the fact that the hero sells out his entire planet which needs this rock to live. And there is no attempt to work out a solution. As bad as the earth people are in the film, condemning your whole species because you like going native is a sad commentary on where some people’s heads at. And it reveals a dark undercurrent in the psychology of left leaning film makers.
Hollywood needs to take a break from his hack plot device. It has already lost its mojo. Let it rest for a few decades so it can regain its punch. And Hollywood, don’t think the success of Avatar had anything to do with its lame political message. All that money you wasted on Iraq bombs should have taught you that lesson by now.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
185 Comments
Well put, and since Avatar is such a commercial hit, it's a timely message as well.
Seriously, you're invoking a Direct to DVD movie (Smokin' Aces) while you make your case? Movies go Direct to DVD for a reason.
Hollywood is lazy, and they have an agenda. The writers can't seem to come up with any new ideas, they just rehash the same storyline over and over. Perhaps they need to reach outside the community for some quality writers.
"His own troops, who he was supposed to represent, get slaughtered"
They aren't "his" troops, though. Sam is working for the Avatar Program, which is a seperate entity within the corporation from the security force – that's why Quaritch has to sneak around and try to "bribe" him to sell the program out by gathering military-intel on the Na'vi instead of just ordering him to do it.
"At no point do the “bad guys” have any sense to try negotiation with the dominate species."
Come again? They're trying to negotiate with them for the entire first and second act of the film ("negotiating" with them is the only reason they have the Avatars in the first place) and have been for something like a decade prior to that (hence the details about Weaver's character having operated a school there at one point.)
(continued)
(continued)
"But what a lot of people seem to miss is the fact that the hero sells out his entire planet which needs this rock to live."
Granted, I've only seen the thing twice, but where do people keep getting this one? We're never told what Unobtanium is "for," just that it's expensive. Cameron says it's a room-temperature superconductor, from which I suppose one could imagine that itwould be useful in the building of generators or power-plants…. but even that's a far cry from "needs this rock to live."
" As bad as the earth people are in the film, condemning your whole species because you like going native is a sad commentary on where some people’s heads at."
Not necessarily a "criticism," but… it occurs to me that this is pretty close to the ending of Atlas Shrugged…
i had seen it twice … still love everything…incredible movie….thanks for the hard work of Avatar director and his team….excellence …..job
"He condemns his planet to slow destruction rather than allow them to continue to over-zealously mine some ore"
False. False false false false false. You're making this up. It's never stated in the film what unobtanium is for (other than netting the corporation tons and tons of money, let alone that it will save Earth.
I'm not a big fan of Avatar, but making things up about it doesn't help your argument any.
And it starred Tom Berenger.
James – you rock!
Thank you for putting down the bong/40oz/ etc. long enough to check in from Democratic Underground.
"SPOILER: if you don’t want the movie “ruined” for you."
How can you ruin a movie for people who have already bought into the propaganda from articles like yours and are not going to see it anyway? Oh, that's why you had "ruined" in quotations. Nevermind.
"He condemns his planet to slow destruction rather than allow them to continue to over-zealously mine some ore."
Now I'm starting to wonder if you even saw the movie. Anyone can tell you he was protecting the Na'Vi. He fell in love with the people and saw what the Humans were doing as wrong. He choose right. Instead of wrong. You say "mine some ore" as if you just stuck your fingers in your ears when their home was destroyed, and people's displaced. You are sick.
"His own troops, who he was supposed to represent, get slaughtered and the rest of his people get shipped off and humiliated so he can get rid of his puny white body and become a big blue stud."
Now you just sound like a child. For one thing, he didn't represent the mercs who were there. He actually was representing a marine. One who didn't sell his soul to corporate greed. Remeber he got pulled in from the outside when his twin brother died? You do remember that, right? Because you saw the movie, right?
"a big blue stud. Sounds like the worst case of white guilt/pee pee envy ever imagined. Talk about Freudian, Mr. Cameron."
Ummm… Actually, you are the only one who is referencing "pee pees" here pal. Says a lot about your Freud theory, don't it?
"At no point do the “bad guys” have any sense to try negotiation with the dominate species."
Now I know you in fact did not watch the movie. Umm buddy, what do you think the whole Avatar program was about? Negotiation. Learning. Giovanni's character at the beginning of the movie even talks about it.
"But what a lot of people seem to miss is the fact that the hero sells out his entire planet which needs this rock to live."
You are trying to present the elimination of a native species as acceptable in support for gaining a "rock". You have completely lost any credibility. No wonder you guys have such a problem with the movie.
"Hollywood needs to take a break from his hack plot device. It has already lost its mojo."
I wonder, how does loss of "mojo" equates to the movie currently sitting at number 1in the world.
"And Hollywood, don’t think the success of Avatar had anything to do with its lame political message. "
It didn't. The success of Avatar can be attributed with capturing peoples hearts. The political message actually helped out with this a great deal. Of course, that's something the right fears, and therefore vilifies.
Hudnall. Not you, Cameron.
Agreed, this pattern is repeated more often than not.
Three Days of The Condor
The steaming pile of Bourne films
It was just something I saw recently. Lots of theatrical movies are just as lame
James,
These are movies. There very concept is fantasy. Get over it.
This is the perfect film for the Obama years because:
1) It is all style and no substance. Great wealth was poured into technological innovation to make this a very realistic 3D movie with immersive visuals, but the storyline and the dialogue showed laziness.
2) There was great potential for this to be an important sci-fi film, but the movie fell short because of a story that fell back on easy cliches. Likewise, Obama had great potential to be all the things he promised during his campaign, but then, once elected, he turned out to be Progressive McSame.
2) Parrots the Obama line: Corporate guys bad; earth-worshippers good!
And it advocates traitors.
That's not even close to the ending of Atlas Shrugged. Have you even read it? In what way were they condemning the species?
They weren't trying to eliminate a species. Until the end were the military goes insane (of course), they were merely trying to get them to move. A mild inconvenience, at best. Or at least not attack them on sight while they slant drill.
This is what I was thinking while watching "Leatherheads" last night. Hollywood has officially abandoned the notion of the honorable soldier, even in a movie that supposed to be "about football," they decide to take down a Sergeant York-straw man.
See my previous comment about negotiating,. As for the rest you are obviously missing the larger point because you're so obsessed with the alleged story of the film. None of it makes a lot of real sense, from floating islands where endless streams of water flow (physics anyone?) to giants being incredibly fast and be able to ride other giant creatures (again, physics) to the realities of what life would really be like on such a harsh jungle world. In our own jungle world, the life expectancy of native people is pretty short when they don't have access to…uh, you know…science. Of course the Na'vi have a mystical healing tree because that allows Cameron fans to geekily proclaim that argument is solved the same way Star Trek geeks can explain away some other thing that;'s absurd by reciting some mumbo jumbo that some character said in and episode.
As for being #1, so was the Phantom Menace at one point. You were saying?
While I expect a lot of dissing from Avatar fans, I don't hate the movie. I just find the logic absurd and the "message" to be BS.
"Have you even read it?"
Cover-to-cover, multiple times. You could call me a fan.
SPOILER WARNING
The ending of Atlas Shrugged is as follows: A small consortium of industrial, scientific, artistic and intellectual best-and-brightest hole-up in a self-contained mini-utopia of their own design, hoarding both their own (potentially) socially-beneficial genius AND a perpetual-energy source away from a dying world that doesn't "deserve" the help.
The undeserving, dying world which had made war on said consortium of thinkers and builders is allowed to collapse under it's own ignorance and stagnation, while Dangy (who, like Sam with the Na'vi, had started out trying to beat-back John Galt's influence in the world only to see his side and join him) and the rest live happily in Galt's Gulch, awaiting the point when the old-world has burned itself out and they might return to reclaim it.
Quaritch isn't Sam's commander, they haven't met before the movie opens. Quaritch is the head of the private security force, and Sam is a member of the Avatar program – which is not under Quaritch's command. The only connection they have is that they both used to be Marines (Sam may technically still be – it's not specified if he's discharged or early-retired on account of disability.)
[...] posted here: ‘Avatar’ and Hollywood’s Traitor Obsession This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
as people who have fone 'contractor' work abroad, this is a cartoon…
The only thing about the film that IS accurate is the nature of many of the mercs- as in today, many are former line infantry looking for ten grand a month to do what they did for less than three- and trigger time to boot. Not exactly what one wants in a sensitive environment. So, yeah- some of the portrayals are spot on.
That said, the things that are wrong are plenty- the two (and one) dimensional characterizations (Ribis's character was a laugh, and Weaver's wasn't much better) and the lack of ANY empathy for what seesm a pretty marvelous planet- many of the mercs would have found the splendors much to their liking, one suspects- and the action sequences at the end- while thrilling- defied all logic.
Terrible tactics, poor planning, and unbridled arrogance would bring about a disaster such as portrayed.
It's just hard to believe it would EVER come down that way. Quaritch sipping coffee calmly as the death is meted out- it just doesn't work like that.
So, it's a movie. And a brilliant visual spectacle. But it represents NO reality we are aware of…
Should we just "get over" the fantasy that was Obama's "Hope and Change" too?
They obviously went to a lot of trouble to make most of the aspects of this movie good, but they couldn't do that with the script? I don't have a problem with fantasy, I love SF and fantasy. But I expect someone like Cameron to not be so lazy and trite.
Yeah, when he agreed to cooperate with Quarritch and do some intel on the Na'Vi tree, Sully was a terrorist. But then he switched sides and became a "freedom fighter". Or vice-versa.
Would've been easier if he had just kept his mind on who was paying him in the first place.
I read this on a blog last year and found it hilarious.
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. "
Just the author's claim that Avatar was too unbelievable reminded me of this quote.
What Barry O is trying to do is far different from a movie.
Now that is a comment I can get behind. I agree that they could have done far better. But it is only a movie. Movies have taken liberty with the truth for a very long time, as long as they have been around in fact. I still get mad watching The Ten Commandments.
The director of 'Assassin's Ball" is, not surprisingly, on record as saying that white conservative Americans are more dangerous than Jihadists.
Iran could fire their first nuke and Hollywood would still be churning out stories that lament the loss of native cultures. Trying to reason with the ultra-liberal "artists" is an exercise in futility.
If you are tired of Hollywood spitting on our troops and this country, if you are tired of seeing Marines protrayed as traitors or cowards. Then go to http://www.forgottenheroesthemovie.com Hollywood refuse to pick this film because I show our troops as heros. They will not pick up a film no matter how big or small that is a positive reflection on America and the people who defend her.
There is a film out there, its my film and it's called FORGOTTEN HEROES and all it needs is a PR push so conservatives out there will know of and hear about this film. We are donating 25% of the DVD gross sales to the AMERICAN VETERANS DISABLED FOR LIFE MEMORIAL FUND you will never find Oliver Stone or Cameron donating 25% of anything to anyone and they are rolling in it.
That's what you get for watching anything with George Clooney.
The head alien chick is pretty hot and if she's ten feet tall, think how awesome her boobs are.
Definitely worth throwing aside your race for!
LOL.
"As for the negotiating, a brute force attack like that is utterly unrealistic on so many levels I could go on for days tearing it apart."
Which brute force attack are you talking about? The one where they need to destroy the tree to get to the minerals you have claimed are a "necessity" of human survival? Or the brute force attack when the corporation realized the natives were massing for an attack? I honestly do not think you can tear anything apart but you can sure try.
"None of it makes a lot of real sense, from floating islands where endless streams of water flow (physics anyone?)…"
You do realize this is a fictional movie correct? Why are you writing about a movie in a blog about movies if you cannot manage to suspend your disbelief? Do you not go and watch any sci-fi movies? With your attitude I guess I have to assume you in fact do not.
"In our own jungle world, the life expectancy of native people is pretty short when they don't have access to…uh, you know…science."
Did you ever watch the travel channels "Meet the Natives" about the Tanna tribe? They seem to be getting along splendidly living in their jungle world without science. There were old people, young people. Just like in America. Actually, there are many jungle tribes in our world that are making it just fine without "science."
This is weird buy you sound almost sound like Selfridge's character here. One of the tenants of the film was when Giovannis character (Selfridge) was stumbling in exasperation, ranting about the Na'Vi and their not wanting or accepting any "roads, or medicine, or "science."" He was totally angry they were content with that they had. You just sounded eerily like him…
"Of course the Na'vi have a mystical healing tree"
Ummm…. No. They have a tree they can "plug" into and drop off knowledge and attain knowledge. This is why I dont think you actually saw the movie, or else you would know this and not be getting it so blatantly WRONG. In Jakes instance, he was able to leave his human form and find his Avatar because it was like a data transfer from one body to the other. Not "healing." If you were correct about the healing aspects of the tree then Sigourney Weavers character would have healed the gunshot wound instead of having died. Don't you think?
"because that allows Cameron fans to geekily proclaim that argument is solved the same way Star Trek geeks can explain away some other thing that;'s absurd by reciting some mumbo jumbo that some character said in and episode."
Ah, conformation that you indeed do have a problem with Science Fiction and it's fandom.
"As for being #1, so was the Phantom Menace at one point. You were saying? "
Let me remind you. I said, "The success of Avatar can be attributed with capturing peoples hearts." The Phantom Menace did no such thing, and pulled the greatest trick ever on Star Wars fans. It being number 1 was just a giant "haha! Fooled you!" From George Lucas.
"were merely trying to get them to move. A mild inconvenience, at best."
MERELY? By DESTROYING a huge tree the size of the Empire state building which also happened to house an entire village? Yeah. Sound like that fits into the "mild inconvenience" category to me.
Wow. True ignorance on display.
The traitor antagonist is a classic like "child in jeopardy" isn't it? The person close to the hero who is secretly on the take, the family member, the boss… That ups the tension a lot, that betrayal. That's why it's used.
Trust me… when everyone behaves themselves it's really hard to get an interesting story going. It's great in real life, but not so good in fiction.
What I thought about the notion of "traitor" in Avatar was that the movie was unfocused. The "treatments" I've seen were actually better that way. In my mind at least, the Quaritch character had betrayed, not just the Avatar program, but the warrior principles and his Marine legacy, and I really, really wanted Sully to call him on it. But he never did.
Hey movie bob. How do you italicize your quotes?
We were much better off as a society when the writer's strike was in full swing, if this is the kind of crap we can expect – what a bunch of talentless hacks, all around!
The hero as traitor really doesn't work at all. It can't.
The hero could well turn his back on his compatriots, but the reason he or she does so has to be sold and has to be, in the end, an actual refusal to betray the hero's principles and what is right.
Which I suppose is what Cameron was trying for. He just failed to sell it. Perhaps the reason that he failed to sell it well enough was that it would have required Sully to double-down on his principles and loyalties, strengthen them to stand against what he knew was wrong. But that part of his internal journey was skipped over, really, and obscured by having him give up what he was, instead of double-down on what he was.
So that internal part, the growth and change of the protagonist over the course of the movie was disjointed and unfocused.
"But it represents NO reality we are aware of… "
You are right about that. It presents us with allegories to the realities we are aware of.
Writer's strikes don't really effect film. Studios have a such a backlog of already purchased and completed movie scripts they they can release almost indefinitely.
This is not true, obviously, with television shows.
I've seen it three times! Did you see it at the imax yet? It's awesome! Going to see it again with my mom and dad when he's got the time.
Shhh!!! Doesn't matte if what he said has no basis in reality. HE was on a roll! Don't Tread On Him!
"They will not pick up a film no matter how big or small that is a positive reflection on America and the people who defend her. "
YEAH! Like Saving Private Ryan! ….. DOH!
"you will never find Oliver Stone or Cameron donating 25% of anything to anyone and they are rolling in it. "
It's so interesting when people decide it's ok to have wealth envy.
"It's only a movie" starts to sound like "They were only campaign promises".
As long as we don't expect much from others, that's exactly what we'll get.
Yeah, and the repercussions mean a lot more than just feeling like $10 was misspent.
I said before they went insane and, implicitly, resorted to violence. Read before using caps. It will save you time and embarrassment.
Right? we're supposed to believe that in 150 years, we'll be able to travel to other solar systems but not repair spinal cords at a reasonable cost to the average citizen; we can create human/alien hybrids for consciousness transfer but we have not developed more effective negotiating strategies. An Earth -based government has not placed rules of contact and commerce on it's corporations doing extra-planetary industrial work? (What if bad business practices made an alien civilization really, really mad and they attacked our planet with irresistable weaponry? That sort of risk DEMANDS some kind of regulatory body!)
Exactly. So then the species, humanity, will live on in Galt's Gulch.
The left likes lazy plots which don't require a lot of critical thought. Critical thought is discouraged by the Left. Good thinkers = bad followers. "Avatar" toes the PC line, so sheep love it. Everyone else thinks it could've been a lot better if skilled writers not afraid of a little work and the ability to answer hard questions had been involved.
All the females are pretty flat-chested; the better for drawing a bowstring and keeping males' attentions above the shoulders.
This site has such oddball commentary that I suspect most of the commentators live somewhere far away from the American market place in some sort of parallel universe.
One of the main characteristics of Americans is that they root for the underdog, which often is someone who has suffered an injustice or is oppressed by less than benign forces. Movies as diverse as Rockie and Napoleon Dynamite are tales of the underdog, and I think this comes from our popular myth that anyone can rise from the bottom to the top n this country, so long as they are made of the right stuff and work like heck.
It is interesting that the conservative / tea party psyche is now rejecting this most American of myths in favor of loyalty to the organization, no matter how corrupt or detestable the organization might be. It could be that having a President who fulfills the American myth that anyone born in this country could grow up to be president creates deep conflicts in the conservative mythical world. So, now the tea party goers want ideological purity and anyone who isn't pure is against them.
I did read. Re read what you had to say. Because no matter what way you try and spin it you still sound like heartless punk.
Heh.
Which totally explains the vitriol aimed at Sarah Palin and her snowbilly bonafides.
Blah blah blah. Wow, those are tired old talking points there pal. You can't even keep up with the latest ones from Rush? Tisk tisk. You need to try harder.
Not with you, I don't. You've perfectly illustrated mental laziness. "Try harder" is not in your repertoire.
Each of us has already thought longer and harder about the ins and outs of this puerile piece of junk than the writer has. I´m done with it.
There is a "tea party psyche"? And what mysterious organization would that be? I think you should think less about myths and get acquainted with the mountain of debt you are going to pay for for the rest of your life. Assuming you have a job.
You mean these movies have shitty scripts without any reason or excuse at all?
"illustrated mental laziness."
Yeah, you are getting warmer with the most recent talking points which are there to describe the "evil hated left" but you still need to try harder… Common man! Rush supplied some great ones today! Can't you even remember just one of them? Try harder…
Think, man! If your Avatar in also ten feet tall and has hands like trash can lids it negates that advantage.
You must of not liked Blade Runner then.
And the rest of your rant does not take into account that this is not your movie. It's James Camerons movie. If you want all of that stuff in a movie go out and make it yourself.
I can see you're not interested in having a real conversation so we can stop wasting each other's time.
Blade Runner was very good.
I don't have to make a multi-million dollar film before i can critique them, skxawng.
Oh, so my review has to do with tea parties now? Your meds are wearing off, if you ever took them.
Sam's real-life counterpart is Adam "The American (Adam Yahiye Gadahn), the American who is spokesman for al-Qaeda.
Does that put things in better perspective?
The cover in the movie is that the villain is a "corporation" as if that is some kind of alien life form. A corporation is just a group of people banded together for a common purpose. GE is a corporation; so is Moveon.org; Americans Coming Together, The Sierra Club and your local charity.
So in Avatar you are rooting for Adam "The American" who turns against a bunch of people who banded together to try to save their world, at the expense of a tree on another world?
You're so right.
James, don't even put the great Edgar Rice Burroughs on the same page as Avatar. You can still pick up "The Mad King" today (just for an example) and enjoy it just as much as the readers did a hundred years ago. Brave men, strong beautiful women, evil villains, and of course the brawny uncompromising Americanness of them all.
American men always get the girl in an ERB book, after they hew their way through lots of enemies. And they never betray their fellows. Cameron and his ilk aren't fit to polish the shoes of Mr. Burroughs.
Don't treadOnMe, you can only by the DVD from my website at http//www.forgottenheroesthemovie.com I am selling it directly to the public. It won't be on netflix for a while yet.
Kudos! Brilliant insight! With arguments like that… I'm done.
Thomas… you're kidding me right???? Saving Private Ryan?? That is a Speilberg film, funded by the studio, that is picked up before the first page of the script is eve written. You are comparing this mega funded production and distribution studio level film to my little indie film funded by private investors???? DOH!
There are so many pro American troop films rolling out of the major studios like oranges that the market is flooded with these films. If you think SPR is a pro troop film and you didn't catch all the little anti-war, anti-troop things in there, then there is no hope for you. I could rip Ryan apart in a review and take each time they went after the Americans, but what would be the point. The fact you compared my film to this mega film shows me you have no idea how Hollywood works.
I have never been envy of anyone's wealth liberal of conservative. It is Stone and the rest liberalism, who scream how they hate capitalism and you don't see them giving up a dime of their wealth. If Stone or any of these 'big spenders' were to donate part of their profits to the veterans it would be on the news like JFK's murder was. However, we can only hear a pin drop. This disdain of wealth by the likes of the liberals like Stone, Cameron, Moore and the rest of the super race is a trick to keep the rest of us from getting a piece.
Actually, I was wondering about that. If the boob size thing was on purpose. because, if you think about it, except for the human avatars there really wasn't a lot of physical difference between the Navi, other than age. Maybe Cameron was trying to tell us that boob size is the essence of greed. We desire more and more wealth so that we can find the women with the best rack. Therefore, if we limit breast size, we end greed as we know it.
This movie just got so much more interesting to me.
You realize you're on a site that's dedicated to the premise that it's NOT just a movie, right?
Blade Runner was written before we had computers, even. Not having read the novelette I can't say how much the title, "Do Android's Dream of Electronic Sheep," is reflected in it, but going by that title and by the substance of the movie, I feel pretty confident in saying that Blade Runner was about the ramifications of the technology…
What if we can create human-like constructs? What would we use them for? What if they had ideas of their own? and What if we couldn't tell us apart?
So, Blade Runner is the exactly opposite of DontTreadOnMe's complaints about Avatar. Blade Runner was all about what the technology might mean and how it would interact with society and the world. It was about what it all meant.
Avatar never even asked the question.
What if we can make alien bodies and put our consciousness in them? It didn't even ask that question.
Frankly, two other recent movies, "Gamer" and "Surrogates", did a better job of asking Blade Runner type questions than did Avatar.
Having the sex organ of a ten foot alien is no advantage.
Trust me on this…lol.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's all for the lust of big hooters that drives everything.
You really lose a lot of the moral high ground and the credibility when you debate in that infantile style of yours. We all are aware that you love the movie and you hate America. You don't need to constantly validate that with us. Really. Perhaps you can try and be a little less childish and really try and state your points in a more mature manner. I would certainly take you more seriously.
ThomasTnkEng:
" It's awesome! Going to see it again with my mom and dad when he's got the time."
Pretty much says it all. Liberalism: the philosophy of bratty children. Thus he can rattle off piffle like "corporate greed"
"The political message actually helped out with this a great deal" yep- "Indigenous peoples, unite to kill US Marines!" A blockbuster for America-haters the world over, like the Euroweenies whining over our "military occupation" of Haiti.
When you grow up to be a big boy, Tommy, you may understand that Avatar traffics in the crudest of infantile stereotypes.
"Did you ever watch the travel channels "Meet the Natives" about the Tanna tribe? They seem to be getting along splendidly living in their jungle world without science. There were old people, young people. Just like in America. Actually, there are many jungle tribes in our world that are making it just fine without "science.""
Well, you have just demonstrated that you are the sort of soft-skulled twit whose cranial puree is just filled with the "noble savage" mythology pimped by today's schools and entertainment.
Do some reading on *real* primitive life. Nasty, brutish, and short.
BTW, the "Travel Channel" doesn't count.
" It could be that having a President who fulfills the American myth that anyone born in this country could grow up to be president "
LOLOLOLOLO)L!!!!!
Barry Soetoro? The child of privilege who has absolutely everything handed to hiom on a platter without earning any of it??
MUAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
A Horatio Alger hero he ain't.
You didn't critique it, you only said what you wanted to see because what you saw did not fit your agenda. That's not critique.
But of course, you already saw the movie, didn't you?
I'm sure you are done! Nothing really much else to say! Thank you for the kudos!
"It is interesting that the conservative / tea party psyche is now rejecting this most American of myths in favor of loyalty to the organization, no matter how corrupt or detestable the organization might be"
Liberals haven't the least clue, do they?
Dedication to *no* organization is rather the Tea Party point. Whereas the point of Avatar's critics is the fact that Cameron has adopted the Leftoid propaganda line that corporations and the US military are "corrupt and detestable," and therfore deserve destruction.
LOL sure man. See ya. Good luck in doing what Rush does best. Switching off people who actually refute him.
I agree with your article and comments – however I think people also forgot the point that the first Brute force invasion came – when the humans decided to land on the planet, do what they wanted to do with no consideration for the natives.
Avatar 2: The Wealth of Pandora: The Na'vi people learn to mine their rich natural unobtanium resource and trade with the Sky People, ushering in generations of economic growth and a plentiful way of life. Their flying dinosaurs receive the best veterinary care and their beautiful landscape is made available to tourists from far and wide. Their bows and arrows are replaced with effective defensive tools. Jake and Neytiri found a peace-loving and just democratic form of government for Pandora and put the planet's wealth to use protecting peace and freedom throughout the galaxy. Unfortunately, a distant and populous planet becomes bent on galactic dominance of their backward way of life and wreak barbaric, unprovoked violence on the peaceful Na'vi. Jake reunites with the Sky People and, together, the galactic super powers turn the hearts of the marauders toward peace and coexistence.
Bohemond,
You are right about that. The average life expectancy of people living in the stone age is what 30, 35.
"How can you ruin a movie for people who have already bought into the propaganda from articles like yours and are not going to see it anyway?"
What are you talkng about. Of course we conservatives are going to see this movie I mean after all it is one of the greatest comediesof our age. Cameron is sure comic genius.
I mean the guy telling us that Unobtanium *snicker* is worht 20 billion an oz has a 3 oz rock that is used as a conversational paperweight that no one in this group of amoral killers who will wipe out a species to take their rocks would steal off their desk. Or the Space Shuttle retrofitted as a bomber that could launch a nuke from high orbit that instead moves along the ground to keep pace with ground troops. LOL! Classic Douglas Adams stuff there. I laughed so hard I dropped my towel twice.
These are reviews. There very concept is to explain the theme and propaganda one might find in a movie.
Get over it.
Excuse me? James Cameron is nothing like Hayao Miyazaki. A distinguishing feature of Miyazaki films is that there never are any "bad guys", or if there are they relent by the end. In "Princess Mononoke" for instance, the factory workers are just as sympathetically portrayed as the forest creatures fighting to save the environment. Please don't insult Miyazaki, who is a true film genius, by comparing him to Cameron.
"having a President who fulfills the American myth that anyone born in this country could grow up to be president"
Umm, have to agree with Marvin here. If Barry can do it, ANYONE can.
You gotta watch this. This is a good analysis of Avatar and funny too, by the same guy that did that 7 part tear down of The Phantom Menace. (I really hope this comes up as a link in the comment.)
http://redlettermedia.com/
Doggone it…the very next article down! You guys at BigHollywood are up on everything!
Sam's commander was the same guy who tried to kill him at the end of the movie. The "bribe" you mention was a promise made at the start of the film by the same character as part of his deal.
As for the negotiating, a brute force attack like that is utterly unrealistic on so many levels I could go on for days tearing it apart. With the technology they had, they could have drilled underground to get to it, and certainly, the idea of the stuff being solely under one tree when there's an entire planet to consider is beyond lame. It's a cheap plot device.
You don't "try to negotiate: without understanding anything about the people. The hero's infiltration was the first time they seemed to learn a lot of basic information relevant to negotiation. They were acting like negotiators from the 1700s. It's absurd.
It's the most 1 dimensional 3d movie ever made.
So, "Avatar" is "Dances with Wolves" and/or "The Last Samurai" in space with a little bit of Al Gore thrown in.
My husband and I agree. We love sci-fi (the "harder", the better), and while we kinda went in knowing what to expect from "Avatar", we came out of the theatre feeling like there was so much more the movie could have done with just a little hard work on the script. The script didn't tackle the hard questions raised by the story, and it regurgitated leftist pets and cliches like mad: the veteran on paltry benefits who can't get treatment, the out-of-control "security force", the wise indigenous people, greedy corporations, etc etc.
It coulda been a contender…
The director of 'Assassin's Ball" is, not surprisingly, on record as saying that white conservative Americans are more dangerous than Jihadists.
Iran could fire their first nuke and Hollywood would still be churning out stories that lament the loss of native cultures. Trying to reason with the ultra-liberal "artists" is an exercise in futility.
You must be logged in to post a comment.