The Wrap: Cameron Claims Anti-American ‘Avatar’ Isn’t
by John NolteTo fully appreciate the absurdity of the statements uttered by “Avatar’s” writer/director James Cameron in defense of his film the other night, you have to get a feel for the setting. The Q&A took place during an industry screening of “Avatar.” That means an exclusive audience packed with fellow frat boys, sorority girls and a gaggle of suck up pledges. Trust me, there have been Ku Klux Klan meetings with more ideological diversity. Better still, this was an industry screening at the ArcLight Theatre, and for those of you fortunate enough not to be familiar with Los Angeles — that means this was a frat party at THE frat house.
Welcome to Inside-Inside-Inside Hollywood, where James Cameron is Doug Niedermeyer, the Big Man on Campus:
“Avatar” director James Cameron responded to right-wing critics of his blockbuster hit movie on Tuesday night, saying that “as an artist, I felt a need to say something about what I saw around me.” …
But he rejected comments by critics that the film is un-American even if it is an allegory for American military forays.
“I’ve heard people say this film is un-American, while part of being an American is having the freedom to have dissenting ideas,” Cameron said, prompting loud applause from a capacity crowd at the ArcLight Hollywood.
“This movie reflects that we are living through war,” Cameron added. “There are boots on the ground, troops who I personally believe were sent there under false pretenses, so I hope this will be part of opening our eyes.”
Okay, let’s grant Cameron this: Everyone’s entitled to his own definition of what is and is not anti-American. You can set the bar wherever you want. Why? Because thanks to the military Cameron smeared in his blockbuster where around the world, and maybe for the first time, audiences are wildly cheering the death of American Marines (NOTE to leftist hair-splitters: former Marines), this is a free country. As far as my personal definition of anti-Amer– wait. What? What did Cameron say…?
What is this supposed to mean?
“I’ve heard people say this film is un-American, while part of being an American is having the freedom to have dissenting ideas,” Cameron said, prompting loud applause from a capacity crowd at the ArcLight Hollywood.
Of course the audience applauded. Someone went after conservatives during an industry screening at the ArcLight. That’s the kind of environment where you could get a standing ovation while holding a puppy under water as long as you’re sticking it to the right. But what does this nonsense mean?
“…part of being an American is having the freedom to have dissenting ideas.”
Who asked for Cameron’s birth certificate? No one’s claiming he’s not an American. The argument is that his film is stridently anti-American and savagely anti-military. But does he answer those charges? Does he explain away his artistic decision to have genocide-happy U.S. Marines (NOTE for leftist hair-splitters: former Marines) on behalf of an American corporation (come on Cameron apologists, it’s not like “Avatar” had a rainbow coalition of evildoers. I didn’t even hear an Australian accent) commit a terrorist atrocity against innocents?
But it’s worse than that…
These Marines are in uniform and you leftist hair-splitters who excuse Cameron’s trashing of our best and brightest because one line of exposition tells us they’re former Marines, had best remember that Quaritch, the top genocide-happy psycho, is referred to throughout the film as “Colonel” — and not because he’s selling chicken.
And what does this Colonel in military uniform do? To explain his imperialistic mission statement he quotes an American President (“pre-emptive war,” etc…) and then orders all-too eager U.S. Marines to commit a terrorist attack on innocents.
And what does Cameron do? What are his deliberate “artistic” choices? He has Our Guys commit a 9/11. The falling of the Na’Vi Home Tree is deliberately filmed, staged and choreographed to look like September 11th on that fateful day. And in one thudding piece of spell-breaking exposition we’re told it’s “shock and awe.”
Cameron’s not having Psycho-Colonel quote Hitler or Stalin because his not-so thinly disguised allegory has nothing to do with some foreign leader. He’s not even quoting Robert E. Lee or Lyndon Johnson because “Avatar” has nothing to do with some long ago American war. Cameron had the entire universe of his imagination from which to find his terrorist evildoers, but his “artistic” choice came down to present-day America — an American company (I saw no one wearing kilts or turbans and heard only American dialects), the American military, American foreign policy, and the quoting of an American president.
Bush Quotes = War on Terror
Home Tree = The World Trade Center
And now we know those “militia” working class mineworkers = redblooded redneck NRA supporters
And we sure as hell know that 2+2 = anti-American.
Criticizing America is not anti-American. But making up lies…
Using the most powerful propaganda device ever created, Cameron spent $500 million to tell a world — that is right now cheering the death of American soldiers (in groovy 3D!) — that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — which we are presently fighting, by the way — represent America committing a 9/11 in those countries to steal their natural resources.
Nevermind that the same military Cameron smears sacrificed, bled, and died to liberate 50 million people they’ve never met; nevermind that We The People spent hundreds of billions to accomplish this liberation and have asked for nothing in return other than friendship. Facts mean nothing to Hollywoodists. It’s all about their unholy endgame.
And how many moons orbit the planet where making a film that trashes America qualifies you as some kind of dissenter with “dissenting ideas”?
Trashing America on film … in Hollywood is the very definition of conformity. Trashing America is also a form of penance for cliched, pedantic, predictable storytelling — a way to get absolution from sympathetic Leftist critics — a way to get your cliched, pedantic, predictable screenplay nominated as one of the five best of the year.
Drive onto the 20th Century-Fox lot in a minivan with a Sarah Palin bumper sticker and then talk to me about dissent, Niedermeyer.
One last point…
“There are boots on the ground, troops who I personally believe were sent there under false pretenses[.]“
Translation…
“There are boots on the ground, troops sent there under false pretenses so I thought I’d smear them as bloodthirsty terrorists.”
We already know how much the military appreciates Mr. Cameron’s support … because they have told us so.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
598 Comments
Oh man, you stepped in it this time Mr. Nolte. Be prepared for the coming stampede.
Cameron’s not having Psycho-Colonel quote Hitler, Robert E. Lee, or Stalin.
imo, Robert E. Lee should not be placed in a list with Hitler and Stalin.
As for the rest of your post, I find it amusing that America continues to give billions of dollars to an industry that is dead set on destroying our culture and country. What was that saying? "Civilizations don't get conquered from without, they rot from within."
Being married to a 'former' marine, I can assure you there is no such thing as a 'former' marine.
Oh well, Nolte, Mao and Pol Pot think it's a valid point. In other words, Nolte, I have no respect for you at all after this.
The best thing is to just not spend money or anymore time on it. I'm not going to this movie to be preached at, I'll save my $10 and go to Church for free instead.
A coming stampede is probably deserved on that one. Of course he wouldn't quote Robert E. Lee. He surrendered. It's what he's known for.
Now Sherman. He's known for a bloodbath.
“There are boots on the ground, troops sent there under false pretenses so I thought I’d smear them as bloodthirsty terrorists.”
Sometimes a phrase becomes memorable because of its simple ability to brilliantly expose the truth.
Wasn't equating Lee with Hitler… Fixed sentence to make my original point clearer.
some one needs to tell Cameron that the Dissent -is-the-highest-form-of-patriotism concept is no longer acceptable in the party.
Really someone needs to get this guy a NewSpeak dictionary.
The only person enabling evil corporate greed here is Cameron not our brave and honorable US military.
Poor sentence structure. I've fixed the error to make my intent clearer.
My God, Mr Nolte- Jim Cameron is, and always HAS been a jerk and a half…
His statements are both facile and dated. Haven't we moved on past the 'false pretenses' argument- now that the Iraqi's are more or less on their own without a dictator? That's SO 2005…
He feels the heat despite the riches. Yes, the film slams US foreign policy and the contractor thing is a canard to
both slam the military while blowing stuff up with cool gear- a perennial Cameron favorite. Perhaps because this is so darn predictable it just doesn't fire us up.
It's Jimmy 'The Thief' and his hack writing and third grade polemics. Ho hum…
Cameron's wrong about a lot of things. A big one is that troops were sent into the current war under false pretenses. That's a lie that the left keeps telling in the face of contrary evidence and they've made it their 'conventional wisdom'.
He's either uninformed or he's lying. So why is he being given $500,000,000 to make a message film about a subject he obviously doesn't understand? Because he's good at filming big event shoot-em-ups. But someone should really rein in his scripts.
Cameron has lost this argument in the public square.
He is now known as a vicious leftist ant-military propagandist.
Having to deny that in front of his true believers is proof he SCREWED THE POOCH.
As you alluded in your commentary here and [http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/0... here], the anti-Americanism, anti-military, and anti-capitalism POV is all too obvious iin Avatar.
Given the fame and fortune that the Canadian-born James Cameron has enjoyed to coming to the United States, supplied by the abundance that American capitalism has generated that allows hiim to spend Other People's Money (OPM) in his chosen field of film-making, it strikes me as being extraordinarily dsingenuous.
Given the upcoming flow of American private charities. governmental aid, andf military support that will spearhead the relief efforts for the poor Haitians following the earthquest, one can see the truth of the true character of the United States and its military.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703...
"I’ve heard people say this film is un-American, while part of being an American is having the freedom to have dissenting ideas,” Cameron said, prompting loud applause from a capacity crowd at the ArcLight Hollywood.
He didn't hear Nancy Pelosi, I guess.
"Using the most powerful propaganda device ever created, Cameron spent $500 million to tell a world — that is right now cheering the death of American soldiers (in groovy 3D!) — that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — which we are presently fighting, by the way — represent America committing a 9/11 in those countries to steal their natural resources.
Never mind that the same military Cameron smears sacrificed, bled, and died to liberate 50 million people they’ve never met; never mind that We The People spent hundreds of billions to accomplish this liberation and have asked for nothing in return other than friendship. Facts mean nothing to Hollywoodists. It’s all about their unholy endgame."
When you can't say it any better, than you just repeat it. Well done, John.
“…part of being an American is having the freedom to have dissenting ideas.”
Wasn't he born and raised in Canada?
Wonderful. Care to give a coherent reason WHY, rather than mentioning some bizarre Oriental Communsit desposts that do not explain your post one whit?
Hi Marc. Cameron moved to the US with his family in 1971 at the ripe old age of 16. The fact that he was originally born in Canada didn't make him into the left wing narcissist he is today. Mentioning the fact he was born in Canada then stating how that the abundance of American capitalism allowing him to spend OPM is disingenuous.
What made Cameron what he today is the Hollywood left/liberal mindset.
Your point is definitely clearer with the Johnson reference.
But I never mind having an opportunity to remind people that Sherman was a murderous bastard.
"Cameron had the entire universe of his imagination in which to find his terrorist evildoers, but his “artistic” choice came down to America — an American company"
Yeah, so what? Do you have a problem with this? Does it make you feel guilty inside? Perhaps if he had illustrated a bunch of Muslims in the role, it would have made you feel better? Cause, you know, America can do no wrong. Like ever.
Perhaps you missed the bigger picture, that IN THE FUTURE, this is HOW IT COULD BE. It's a movie, and if it bugs you at this level I have to question why. So what if it puts our soldiers in a bad light? The world isn't black and white, and Cameron is trying to illustrate that. People who actually watched the movie instead of reading about it from some right wing publication understand the soldiers in the movie are NOT the soldiers of today. It's an allegory for what they may become, if current trends continues.
It makes the viewer question the excuses used for todays battles. And that's the important part people seem to be missing.
So what if he said "shock and awe" or if he said "fight terror with terror" SO WHAT! If I remember correctly, fighting "terror with terror" was an excuse for a preemptive war that's gone no where and killed hundreds of thousands of people so far. I think it fits perfectly in the movie as it illustrates the kind of propaganda used to rally the troops to military will.
He was born in Canada but moved to the states with his family when he was 16. If anything is to blame for this guys viewpoint/attitude it's Hollywood and all his pals there.
Realist Hair Splitter moment: There is no such thing as a "former Marine." There are only "Marines." If you can claim to split hairs over the difference, you know far too little about the armed forces to have any credibility.
"Poor sentence structure. I've fixed the error to make my intent clearer. "
Sounds like you should take down the whole article, due to your poor world-view structure.
Are we all shocked that a Hollywood – limosine – Lear Jet Liberal would actually use the big screen to further a radical leftist point of view? Now that it has been established that this movie is all about bashing the military, we can assume that it will win every award available. Hey Jim? If you hate America so deeply, why not pack your bags and head back up to The Great White North? I'm sure your ex-wife Linda Hamilton will be relieved to see you go….I believe the basis of the divorce was that you use to beat the hell out of her on a regular basis….you remember that, right Jim?
"I saw the movie and can tell you the falling of the Na'vi tree was not an allusion to 9/11. It looked nothing like 9/11."
Well, they didn't run planes into the trees or anything. But come on. The allusion was obvious. You think the two trees and the ashes were a coincidence, especially in a movie that also talks about "shock and awe" and "fighting terror with terror"? What are the odds?
I think it's hilarious that he believes a crowd of people who paid $14+ to see his movie is an impartial one.
I also love that classic left-wing logic. It can't be un-American because expressing ideas is American. It's the most tiresome tautology. Obviously if you have the ability to say anything you want, you can say something that goes against the country which gives you that permission. It's not un-American to express yourself. Saying un-American things is un-American.
Couple of points:
1. James Cameron is not American. He is Canadian.
2. If you think distinguishing soldiers of fortune and soldiers serving under the banner of the United States armed forces is “leftist hair-splitting” your opinion of our military is disgusting and cynical.
LOL. There you go again.
Nolte happens to be pretty spot on here. And, doesn't he have the right to his opinion? Or is it only your approved dissenters who get the floor? Which really isn't dissent then, is it?
Totally uncalled-for observation–and not at all meant as an Ad Hominem–but remember the website "Celebrities Who Look Like Old Lesbians"? Recently saw Matt Groening of THE SIMPSONS and nominated him; now, based on the photo above, I nominate Cameron.
"Cameron has lost this argument in the public square.
He is now known as a vicious leftist ant-military propagandist.
Having to deny that in front of his true believers is proof he SCREWED THE POOCH. Sap."
The only think funnier than Cameron thinking he has to defend himself over being a filthy vicious leftist ant-military propagandist to other filthy, vicious, leftist ant-military propagandists, is when other filthy leftists think they can come here and defend filthy, vicious, leftist ant-military propagandists.
"Perhaps you missed the bigger picture, that IN THE FUTURE, this is HOW IT COULD BE."
I will humor you, but the issue is not that Cameron painted a picture of a potential future (trust me, more sincere and engaging portraits of the ":parasitic mega corp" in Sci Fi exist), but that he painted a picture of what he views the present as with Blue aliens and SciFi gear thrown in. It isn't hard to see if you have ever deconstructed or analyzed something.
" It's a movie, and if it bugs you at this level I have to question why."
I cannot speak for Mr. Nolte, but I personally would say for the same reason that Triumph des Willens, Mission to Moscow, and (on a more comparable note) Oh What a Lovely War bug me.
"So what if it puts our soldiers in a bad light?"
If you need to ask that, you are already so far off the mark I have no reasonable hope of you ever getting it.
"The world isn't black and white, and Cameron is trying to illustrate that."
And he does this by… pitting souless PMC hired guns against pwoor innocent Noble Primitives for an exceedingly thin reason that the actual script lacks the weight to support? Sorry, I don't buy that. Any given snippet of plot on The Witcher or Dragon Age's Orzammar shows fifty times more moral complexity than tthe entirety of Cameron's work.
" People who actually watched the movie instead of reading about it from some right wing publication understand the soldiers in the movie are NOT the soldiers of today."
I cannot speak for Nolte, but I did see it. And I saw differently. Because if Cameron legitimately wanted to do that, he would have at least tried to explain away some of the connections (say perhaps state that the MegaCorp got the Marine uniforms on the cheap to save almighty $$$ and perhaps even have Jake wax poetic about how they are being stained with dishonor by their current wearers), and he CERTAINLY wouldn't have gone OUT OF HIS WAY to drop in these little snippits such as "Shock and Awe" or "Fight Terror with Terror" without the slightest bit on inverse justification.
If you take Cameron's word that he doesn't mean it as an allegory to the present, either you are far more foolish than I thought, or Cameron has an exceedingly poor grasp on what he wrote.
"So what if he said "shock and awe" or if he said "fight terror with terror" SO WHAT!"
Ignoring all the insulting ideological and political issues, IT IS DONE SO HAM HANDEDLY AND UNNATURALYL THAT IT DERAILS THE DIALOGUE, and does it very PAINFULLY. The simple fact of the matter is that Cameron- if he absolutely had to include them- could have included them in a far smarter and more natural context (for instance, perhaps having the love interest ask what "shock and awe" means, and Jake will give a brief one sentence summary before concluding "They are going after the Great Tree)."
Thomas,
To hear you say it, the only way Cameron could make the scene evoke the image of 9/11 is if he turned trees in to buildings, made Pandora look like New York City, and *exactly* recreate the images of that day.
I gotta say… that's not how they do it on film.
You're obsessed, Nolte. OBSESSED!
And an idiot. Keep on fanning the flames of this culture war you obviously want to take place. I have to give you this: you don't disguise your hatred for the coasts. Maybe you, Glenn Beck, Bill O, Sean H, Sarah Palin, and the rest of Faux News can gather a little tea-baggin' army together and make your way to LA to fight all those people you can't stand. I doubt it, though. You're just a big ol' coward like the rest of the chicken hawks you identify with.
I don't know if this has been said, but if Cameron believes our troops were sent in under false pretenses, why punish the marines for that? Why not put more emotion int he marines as though they are doing something they would rather not and leave the psycho-crazy crap to the leader? There is only one reason, he hates the marines just as much as their leader, regardless of what good the soldiers have done.
Such sentiment is always the way the anti-Right works.
For all those that keep saying that the movie is not about America, not about our Marines, etc., I think Cameron's own words say differently: “I’ve heard people say this film is un-American, while part of being an American is having the freedom to have dissenting ideas,”.
If the movie was NOT about America, NOT about our Marines, etc., then shouldn't he have SAID SO. Instead he confirmed it by saying that it was "American" to have "dissenting views" – in other words, views that show that America is bad and that our Marines are baby-killing murderers.
Cont'd
I've written about my husband's feelings on the movie (he liked it and saw no offense and he's in the military), and one more thing he said was this: that because it took place in the future, to him it wasn't Americans and the Marines – it was some far off group of people so it didn't matter. If it was present day, then he'd be ticked off.
Well, I will counter with this: The fact that Cameron didn't actually refute that the movie is about Americans and our military, the not so subtle dialogue, etc., I think shows something far more devious. Cameron's intent to make a movie like this, that doesn't refer directly to "America", "American" or "U.S. Marines", but then alludes to it all the while, setting it in the future on another planet so that you can later say one has nothing to do with the other, when really it does. Then they can sit back and claim to laugh at us "right wingers" because we're seeing something that is not there.
But it's been exposed and despite the fact that many still claim to like the film (or are feeling suicidal about the film), it still is what it is – a sneaky way of smearing America and our military because all the other more direct films failed.
Now they have success. Unfortunately.
I had to look this up after reading your comment because I couldn't believe it. What I found was an article of 25 men who look like old lesbians. Hilarious.
You just repeat the same comments you already made? I´m still waiting for an intelligent response to my earlier evisceration of those. At least you stopped pretending that you were a conservative once. Personally I think you were a moron and you just believe you changed.
"that IN THE FUTURE, this is HOW IT COULD BE"
Or not. In other words, it´s all made up.
"The world isn't black and white"
That is rich, coming from you. And what is Avatar if not black and white? It ain´t subtle.
For your information, it was never US policy to "fight terror with terror". Have you ever heard of counterinsurgency? On this planet – the real one – the US military is the last one deserving to be smeared like that.
"HAHA. I saw the movie and can tell you the falling of the Na'vi tree was not an allusion to 9/11. It looked nothing like 9/11."
Obviously, you have no idea of what 9/11 looked like, than.
"Stop deluding yourself and your readership who will refuse to see the movie because some right wing author on some right wing website told them to."
Lovely strawman, knave. And for one, I DID see it.
"For one thing Mr. Notle, if the whole scene was meant to look like 9/11 then Cameron would have had the military bash a few of their helis into the tree, don't you think? Instead, they used a ton of rockets."
If THAT is the sparkling analytical genius you bring to the table, than I am amazed you can afford the electicity to power the computer you typed that with. By your logic, if in an American movie abotu war between (say) the US and China, if the movie opened to a massive sneak attack on an American fleet in harbor by IBCMs or other missiles, that would obviously not be a reference to Pearl Harbor? Fool.
"Another thing, if it were supposed to be 9/11 then the tree would have fallen in on itself, and not sideways."
And if the attack upon said American fleet in said fictional movie does not include weapons of any tye going into the water and running like torpedos, than that automatically disqualifies it as referencing Pearl Harbor? Yous ee the issue with your logic?
"So how was this like 9/11 again sir?"
A. Massive, unprovoked attack upon innocents?
B. Bodies splayed EXACTLY as several of the Twin Towers victims were, as recorded by those at the scene (yes, some of that can be explained by random chance, but not so when you have literally one shot of the movie mirroring a snapshot taken from Ground Zero, with each and EVERY single one of the corpses splayed out EXACTLY as they were in the movie)?
C. The general atmosphere and motifs being similar to those utilized in films dealing with 9/11?
Do I really need to go on?
I would respond, but it seems like there is nothing but talkling from your ass in your reply.
" Please enlighten us on how it was "deliberately filmed, staged and choreographed to look like September 11th on that fateful day.""
I have, but if you want more, google it and compare photos.
" Because for anyone who actually watched the movie, it did not appear that way at all."
I DEMAND to differ.
So, are YOU going to actually back your points up?
Did you watch the movie? Be honest.
And yet it makes infinitely more sense than your own attempts.
You know what, John? Screw you. I'm not a leftist, I just listened to the damn dialogue. You went in with your review already in your head.
The movie isn't about the American military, but mercenaries who have signed up as "security" to wipe out the indigenous races of another planet, so that a corporation seeking some rock can exploit the planet until it is destroyed. It's about thinking people vs. knee-jerk reactionaries. It's about people who care for others vs. those who are willing to commit murder for immediate personal gain, and who are willing to pretend that their dishonorable intentions are in fact patriotic.
Your attempts to turn it into the straw man of your choosing, so that you can knock it down with the same verbal tools as have been used to alienate anyone who disagrees with the hate-regime of the radical branch of the right-wing (not all right wingers are like you, nor do they all believe in the American aggression of the previous 8 years) is actually an example of the very mentality the movie criticizes. Once again, it has nothing to do with hating military, just those who would abuse the honor of our military for purposes of aggression and destruction of innocents, and who defile American ideals such as patriotism, defense, freedom of thought and speech, science, stewardship of the land, and protection of the weak and poor from the rich and powerful. Such defilement of the basic ideals that made America a beacon to the world now threatens to make us the enemy of the world, if not to all living things. And THAT is the message of the movie.
Open your eyes. Get a clue. Wake up from the trance into which you've been hypnotized by the constant twisting of our language into epithets that equate free-thinking and genuine heroic action with "anti-Americanism." This kind of bashing has got to stop.
Yes, I honestly did. And I honestly thought it was fairly goo, but the true tragedy is that it could have been far, FAR better. And that I blame squarely on Cameron's shoulders. Not merely for making an Anti-Conservative movie (that is standard faire, and I expect not much else), but for making one grossly incompetently. The CGI chaps and the acters, in my opinion, did wonders, but the dismal script let them down.
Of course he has a right to his opinion. Never said otherwise.
On the same token that Nolte was wise to adjust his specific mistake, I am merely suggesting that Nolte himself wise up to his general folly.
Its just a suggestion. No call here for anything besides self-censorship.
"If you take Cameron's word that he doesn't mean it as an allegory to the present, either you are far more foolish than I thought, or Cameron has an exceedingly poor grasp on what he wrote."
Umm. I actually think it's an allegory to the present. You said you saw it, so you know what I am talking about. The propoganda fed to the mercs in the movie sounded really similar to what's been fed our troops and America these past years.
I see no problem for him to include that in a movie.
The WMD weren't there. In fact, more than a few NGO's and other governments were loudly stating that the WMD weren't there before the invasion. Besides, insiders like Tony Blair have commented that the invasion was authorized in 2002 and that the WMD made a convenient way to "frame" it for an American public that wasn't exactly hopped up to start another war while Bin Laden was still at large.
Well, technically, we did ask for something in return. We asked the people we allegedly "liberated" in Iraq if we can build giant military bases on their soil and permanently station tens of thousands of troops there.
Why get so elaborate in your language? I think the term "The Left" is more plain and clear than "Anti-Right".
But yes, you are correct. In my leftist (anti-right) opinion, I do think the notion that Avatar is "anti-American" or "Socialist" is hogwash.
For one: Any movie is a capitalistic venture, by definition. And this one is raking in barrels of money. Nothing socialistic about that.
For two: You people clearly have your view of what America should be. And this movie threatens THAT vision of America. In this sense, this move IS "Anti-RIGHT-America". But no sir is this movie Anti-America when it comes to the America that I cherish and will fight for.
Hurray for James Cameron, hurray for Avatar, and hurray for America! No other country in this world could have made such a beautiful cash cow with such an important and idealistic message!!!!
Cameron is Canadian born, but did he ever become an American Citizen? Isn't Cameron's brother a U.S. Marine?
"You obviously don't, because that was never a justification. The justification was self defense against an enemy that had already struck in the very heart of the US in 9/11 after years of lesser terror campaigns."
Yeah, and by now you see how flat that justification fell on it's face. Or do you still think Iraq had WMD's? And not just the leftovers from when he dismantled them in the first place?
Self defense? BWAHAHA! Please. No one buys that bull anymore, and if they do, they are just die hard right wingers who won't listen to reality.
"Which shows you have no idea about propaganda or about how to write a script competently. "
And you know how to write a script competently? HAHA, please do indulge. I mean, you made the claim, back it up hommie. And propaganda is was used by Joseph Gobells in WW2 rather effectively to sway the hearts and minds of the populace. So much so that they were actually ok with getting rid of Jews. Propaganda today is heavily used by Rush and Hannity. They are not objective, and if they are it's to fit their needs. And like I said, propaganda in the movie was used to rally the troops into a military frenzy and will to fight to the death for a cause that was obviously a wrong one. That's how propaganda works.
Careful, Matt! This may prompt a response from scr_north2p that James Cameron moved to the US with his family in 1971 at the ripe old age of 16.
Please note that this was during the height of the Viewnam War, and Canada was all too willing to shelter draft resisers. Maybe Mr. Cameron has confused those "boots on the ground, troops who I personally believe were sent there under false pretenses" with the Vietnam war, not the more recent wars in southwest Asia
The movie isn't about the American military, but mercenaries who have signed up as "security" to wipe out the indigenous races of another planet, so that a corporation seeking some rock can exploit the planet until it is destroyed. It's about thinking people vs. knee-jerk reactionaries. It's about people who care for others vs. those who are willing to commit murder for immediate personal gain, and who are willing to pretend that their dishonorable intentions are in fact patriotic.
Your attempts to turn it into the straw man of your choosing, so that you can knock it down with the same verbal tools as have been used to alienate anyone who disagrees with the hate-regime of the radical branch of the right-wing (not all right wingers are like you, nor do they all believe in the American aggression of the previous 8 years) is actually an example of the very mentality the movie criticizes. Once again, it has nothing to do with hating military, just those who would abuse the honor of our military for purposes of aggression and destruction of innocents, and who defile American ideals such as patriotism, defense, freedom of thought and speech, science, stewardship of the land, and protection of the weak and poor from the rich and powerful. Such defilement of the basic ideals that made America a beacon to the world now threatens to make us the enemy of the world, if not to all living things. And THAT is the message of the movie.
Open your eyes. Get a clue. Wake up from the trance into which you've been hypnotized by the constant twisting of our language into epithets that equate free-thinking and genuine heroic action with "anti-Americanism." This kind of bashing has got to stop.
"IT IS DONE SO HAM HANDEDLY AND UNNATURALYL THAT IT DERAILS THE DIALOGUE, and does it very PAINFULLY. "
Yeah, it would be painful for you. It hits a little too close to home. And you just can't stand for that, now can you? Goes back to my reasoning why conservatives have such a problem with this movie. It makes them feel guilty, so instead of addressing that guilt, they lash out and say, "How outrageous! Hur hur hur! It's anti-this and anti-that!"
He is just a troll, as will become clear to you soon enough. Nor an adult, if you ask me.
"Umm. I actually think it's an allegory to the present. You said you saw it, so you know what I am talking about. The propoganda fed to the mercs in the movie sounded really similar to what's been fed our troops and America these past years.
Ah, so on that much, we DO agree, both on the existence of the allegory, its substance, and its direction. The one thing we would probably differ on would be how the allegory reflects reality, but that it if a reference to the current conflicts in the Middle East and the US's involvement in them (at least in part) is agreed upon.
The problem is that many people in the military and people on the Right didn't think that our troops were being exploited in Iraq or Afghanistan. AND our military does NOT engage in "destruction of innocents" and in general and as a whole has no "dishonorable intetions", no matter how much someone might disagree with why we went into those countries. You may be thinking of the Russians in Afghanistan or a host of other countries whose armies conduct themselves in that manner against the enemy and against their own people.
You are very confused there, Shooshie.
HAHA, what are YOU talking about? It's the author of this article who claimed it was 9/11 reborn.
"To hear you say it, the only way Cameron could make the scene evoke the image of 9/11 is if he turned trees in to buildings, made Pandora look like New York City, and *exactly* recreate the images of that day."
Yeah. Pretty much. You got it! Because if you had seen the movie, you would realize it was NOTHING like what the OP had to say.
"I gotta say… that's not how they do it on film. "
…
So you WANT the movie to be portraying 9/11 then? Huh? I mean, you did watch it, right? Answer me that you actually saw the move before you acted like you knew what you were talking about.
Very witty. Here let me try something on your level: You are a stupid deluded drone.
There, I can compete. Even downwards.
"Of course he has a right to his opinion. Never said otherwise."
You would say otherwise if you ever got a shot at enforcing it.
Two trees? Oh noes! Two of them? You mean ashes fell on people after they burned up most of a tree? What? Why is ash falling from a burning tree! MUST BE 9/11. Two trees? MUST be 9/11.
But hey, I have to give it to you. Since there were two trees, (of which one was in the background and didnt play any major part in the film at ALL) and since there was ash, I can totally see your reasoning and connection to 9/11. Hell at least it made more logical sense than Noltes comparison..
If I weren't me, I'd want to be you
I guess the definition of mercenary holds no place in the dictionary then. Wow, better inform Miriam.
Just found this quip in a profile about Cameron in the New Yorker;
Cameron was born in Canada, and grew up in a small town not far from Niagara Falls. (He revoked his application for American citizenship after Bush won the election in 2004.)
I love how it's opening up the hearts and minds of it's viewers to. Something that is an antithesis to the conservative message!
Go #1 Cameron! What a masterpiece!
Lame. You are fading El Gordo.
Apparently, Mr. Cameron revoked his application for U.S.. citizenship because of the re-elkection of President George W. Bush:
http://ca.askmen.com/entertainment/special_featur...
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/26/091...
Also, according to a profile in New Yorker magazine dated October 25, 2009 (see above link), his younger brother younger brother John David did serve as a marine in Iraq during the first Gulf War.
To someone like you. Yes, it would. Hence the reason my "attempts" go straight over your little head.
"And I honestly thought it was fairly good, but the true tragedy is that it could have been far, FAR better."
Far better if he had left out the "anti-conservative" stuff? Well that's interesting. So why did the "anti-conservative" stuff bug you so much in the first place then? You know, I used to be pretty conservative myself, so I already know the reason.
Guilt. It made you feel guilty. The allusions he was making towards what's going on today in the name of expansion and empire hit too close to home.
Ugh, the more I hear about this film, the more disgusted I am.
I had no idea about this:
"He has Our Guys commit a 9/11. The falling of the Na’Vi Home Tree is deliberately filmed, staged and choreographed to look like September 11th on that fateful day."
How vile these people are.
And conservatives are still going out and financially supporting this? Once again, I ask WHY?
No, you are very lacking in your attention to the events that actually happened over the past 8 years. There has been plenty written on the subject; no need for me to repeat it. Perhaps you've only been listening to those who say what you want to hear. We won't solve this debate in a little movie forum, but I refer you back to my original post; the movie isn't about hating soldiers. Don't forget that the guy calling the shots was a corporate minion for the mining company seeking the ever-elusive "unobtainium." The Colonel worked for him.
By substituting an American "hot button" with deep emotional reactions in people on any side of our current conflicts [hating the military], you are attempting to distract us from the real messages of the movie, which is your point: those messages make you uncomfortable. If you can sway the debate to your straw-man hot-button topic, you might be able to prevent people from receiving the real message. But would that really make you feel better? The actual roots of the problem still persist, and you are only making things worse.
Focus on what the movie was really about. The straw man is only a distraction. The movie was about the defilement of American ideals by way of twisting them to mean something else — exactly the sort of thing Nolte and his followers are doing in this review. If you've forgotten exactly what that means, read my original post.
I stopped reading your comment at:
"… hate-regime of the radical branch of the right-wing (not all right wingers are like you, nor do they all believe in the American aggression of the previous 8 years…"
Hate-regime? Radical branch of the right-wing? LOL! I'd love to know who those people are.
And what American aggression of the previous 8 years? Oh, you mean the wars being fought in defense of our country?
Since you're so intolerant of right-wingers, why are you even here on this site? LOL!
And the mercs in Avatar were NOT sent in under false pretenses. Unlike the Marines in Aliens, the mercs were not told they were on a rescue mission. The entire mission was about getting unobtainium, one way or another. So where were the false pretenses?
And as far as the whole "where were the WMD's" complaint – haven't we all had, like, seven or eight years to digest the pros and cons and make up our own minds? If you feel the need to beat people over the head with your timely message, at least make sure it's actually…you know…timely. Cameron's like a guy marching in front of Obama's White House carrying a sign saying "Bush Lied, People Died." Dude, we did that already. If you can't keep up, maybe you should find a longer-lasting outrage to protest against.
When did the right become such cry babies? And we wonder why the left pounded us. God I hate hollywood types on both sides.
Your "attempts" never even made it out of your mom's basement.
Thank you, Saint Shooshie. Congratulations for being on the right side of history.
What are you thinking? 15 year old? Or is that too old?
Me thinks you are projecting too much into the flick. Sure, worship of the Earth, Gaia religion is blatantly obvious but it has about as much relevance as Hogworth has to Charter schools. As far as the flick bashing the military, I doubt if many viewers develop a distaste for our military from watching the flick. You give Cameron too much credit.
Please stop your "NOTE for leftist hair-splitters: former Marines". You're right, their defense is based on one line in the movie. But what of another line in the movie by the protagonist at the outset – "once a marine always a marine" when he's getting out of the aircraft at Pandora.
Yes. The fact that the target audience is "the youth" (as with 99% of Hollywood movies) is especially gratifying.
As they did with the rock-n-roll youth movement of the 60s, this movie confirms that Hollywood still knows how to package and sell idealism, making big bucks in the process.
"You just repeat the same comments you already made?"
What, is that getting to you?
"I´m still waiting for an intelligent response to my earlier evisceration of those."
Where? In the other thread where I already told you why your "evisceration" was nothing but a random hodgepodge of ill connected thoughts and convoluted ideas that no sane person could make sense of? I illustrated it pretty well in the other thread.
But just for S&G lets illustrate it here again for everyone to see.
You said, "At least you stopped lying that you were a conservative once. Personally I think you were a moron and you just believe you changed."
Oh really? You know me? That's pretty cool. I had no idea we've meet before. How are you claiming that I am lying about being a conservative? I made one vote in my young adult life, and that was for W when he was running for the second term. A vote I will forever regret to the end of my days.
"Personally I think you were a moron and you just believe you changed. "
Well, that is partially true. I was a moron, a conservative one, I used to have the same stupid, unfounded in truth or reality of arguments as you do. Luckily, I have since changed to a centrist. To be honest, I have never felt better. I'm not voting for either party, and believe they are both detrimental to this United States.
You see, after freeing myself from the Conservative doctrine, I have found accepting new ideas very refreshing. I have let go my bigotry for gay people, let go my racism for Mexicans, and Muslims. Knowledge and truth are my friends now, and I've never felt better to be an American.
If you still think I'm lying then that's honestly your prerogative. I could care less.
But moving on!
You said, "Or not. In other words, it´s all made up. "
Yeah, it is all made up. It's a fictional movie. What's your point? That's why I said "this is HOW IT COULD BE" I didn't say that's how it IS. You basically said the same thing I said. How is that the basis for any argument? Wait. Is this a sample of your "evisceration" you were referring to earlier?
I said, "The world isn't black and white"
You said, "That is rich, coming from you. And what is Avatar if not black and white? It ain´t subtle."
Did you see the movie? How could you even claim to know anything if all you've read about it is biased reporting? How can you make an objective claim like that unless you saw the movie? Lets say you did see the movie, you would then know that Jake had a very important decision to make. You would have realized that him fighting for the Na'vi against orders was him realizing the fact his world was not black and white any longer. It was more complex and nuanced than when he first arrived. He was enlightened to the Na'vi people, their culture. This was one of the whole premises of the movie, that the world is not black and white. Is this your evisceration?
"For your information, it was never US policy to "fight terror with terror".
No, it never "officially was" but that didn't stop it from becoming synonymous with the war cry of the right in the push for war.
"Have you ever heard of counterinsurgency? On this planet – the real one – the US military is the last one deserving to be smeared like that."
Have you ever thought that if we hadent invaded and removed the one person in power who was stabilizing the whole country, we wouldn't have the need to battle a counterinsurgency in the first place?
"the US military is the last one deserving to be smeared like that."
It's not really the military that's being smeared, but the idea of what our military has become or could become that's being smeared. It's an allegory.
Anyway, let me know when you are ready to "eviscerate" me again. LOL.
I think Shooshie must be a rapist and a pedophile. If he doesn't like me calling him a rapist and a pedophile, it MUST be because he really is a rapist and a pedophile. It would be better for him to just accept he's a rapist and a pedophile, then he could move on.
Come on. There are "pro-American Military" sci fi blockbusters. Can't you just skip Avatar and go rent Independence Day?
You are a slanderer.
Please enlighten us as to what the idealism in Avatar is? I'd love to hear? Truly.
come on, El Gordo. you can do better than that.
Wow, I am happy that 99% of the world does not agree with you in any way form or fashion.
Perhaps you weren't following the events carefully. There's been much good, much bad in our appropriate defense and our inappropriate aggression. There is plenty written on the subject; no need for me to repeat it. We won't solve this debate in a little movie forum, but I refer you back to my original post; the movie isn't about hating soldiers. Don't forget that the guy calling the shots was a corporate minion for the mining company seeking the ever-elusive "unobtainium." The Colonel worked for him.
By substituting the "why do you hate our soldiers?" hot-button with its deep emotional reactions in all people, you are distracting us from the real messages of the movie, which probably make you uncomfortable. As long as you can sway the debate to your straw-man hot-button topic, you might be able to prevent people from receiving the real message. But would that really make you feel better? The actual roots of the problem still persist, and you are only making things worse.
Focus on what the movie was really about. The reviewer's straw man is only a distraction. The movie was about the defilement of American ideals by way of twisting them to mean something else — exactly the sort of thing Nolte and his followers are doing in this review. If you've forgotten exactly what that means, read my original post. It's accurate as long as you don't go redefining my words or explaining what I "really meant."
Also, for the purpose of clarity:
• radical right wing = those who refused to listen to the truthful reports that were coming in before attacking a country that was not an immediate threat to the USA, and who still believe that we made no mistakes, accusing all dissenters of anti-Americanism.
• Moderate right wing = those who later expressed regret for our actions after originally getting swept up in the propaganda. Many top military and government officials retired or resigned so that they could take a stand in rejecting the administration's policies. Cameron represents them and the majority of American opinion as of the polls of 2008.
You must be logged in to post a comment.