Comments on: A Few More Thoughts on Avatar

By: registry cleaner program

registry cleaner program — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 21:36:37 +0000

Avatar brings us as close as cinema ever has to actually visiting an alien world. The beautiful environs, the exotic creatures and incredibly lifelike natives of Pandora arrest the senses, visually, aurally and emotionally. The world in Avatar is the true star of the show. The amount of detail and work that has gone into bringing this new world alive is seriously impressive, and it will be a while before we see anything that overtakes it in scope and quality. WETA Workshop and ILM have truly outdone themselves.

By: Phil Bowermaster

Phil Bowermaster — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:46:25 +0000

The Chad –

They knew she was (originally) human, but it’s not clear to me that they ever knew that the person they were seeing was just a sophisticated puppet. They might have assumed she was a human being who had herself turned into a Na’vi.

But you’re right — small point.

By: Phil Bowermaster

Phil Bowermaster — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:37:43 +0000

Josh –

The problem with polemics is that they rarely make good stories. If Cameron wants to do a documentary about the history of exploitation of less technological peoples by more technological peoples, great. But if he wants to tell a story then he runs into all these entanglements of needing to be believable, engaging, etc.

There’s a great danger in assuming that the lessons of history don’t apply to us, and that we needn’t worry about making the same mistakes our less sophisticated ancestors made. However, there is an equally great danger in assuming that history will always play out exactly the same.

Cameron gives us bad guys using tactics that would be considered monstrous by any free / democratic society in the early 21st century — so the assumption here is that the 22nd century will be less free and / or a generally more barbaric era than we currently live in. This is of course possible, but it’s a cynical assessment of where we’re headed which ignores — actually reverses — more than a century of human civilization becoming increasingly concerned about universal human rights, protection of the environment, etc.

Here’s the problem: if we discovered Pandora tomorrow, I don’t believe for a second that events would play out as portrayed in the movie. I’m even less convinced that that’s how it would go down 150 years from now.

Unless one shares the movie’s cynical (Stephen’s phrase “self-loathing” is not far from the mark) view of humanity from the outset, it is thoroughly unconvincing and unbelievable. Mainly because we’re all just supposed to assume these things. Everyone knows that human beings (especially white ones!) are incurable serial rapists of the natural world and ruthless exploiters and tormentors of the weak. That’s the whole story. History has never varied from that. It can never change and will never change.

Sorry. No sale.

By: The Chad

The Chad — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:05:59 +0000

Minor quibble, though I agree with your review: the Na’vi knew he was a fake body. They knew Sigourney Weaver was a human scientist in their midst.
Spot on the rest of the way though. I went into the movie knowing the plot was going to be lousy, and it lived up to that. I think you’re right that he made the movie for Pandora, not for the message. Seems they spent all their money on the effects, and forgot about the storyline. Maybe the sequel will get more thought in that regard.

By: Phil Bowermaster

Phil Bowermaster — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 07:23:46 +0000

I don’t think the storyline was forced on him, and I don’t think it was necessarily out of sync with what he really believes…but it still feels like something tacked on. If he was as interested in that “message” as he was the planet, I think he would have put some of the same care behind it. Look at Titanic — is the love story between Jack and Rose central to the story? Technically, that’s the screenplay he wrote / approved. But his real interest was in sinking the ship. Titanic could be an interesting movie without Jack and Rose — there are hundreds of more compelling stories one could tell. The reverse is not true. Absent the sinking ship, the Jack and Rose story would never have been made — or would have bombed the first weekend. In the same way, Cameron’s shoddy “evil corporate guys exploit noble savages” story — no matter how sincerely believed — would not have been a hit absent the setting. He expends enormous effort on what is really interesting to him and phones in the rest.

By: Stephen Gordon

Stephen Gordon — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:41:47 +0000

Phil:

Hang on to those 3d specs you and your daughter were using. That was about half of your $26 right there. The next Real3D movie you go see will be much cheaper if you do.

I’m fine with a long movie as long as I don’t realize its a long movie. If I start looking at my watch, its time to go. With Avatar I glanced at my watch about 45 minutes from the end. Without the spectacle I would have glanced much earlier.

I actually watched the movie through 2 pairs of specs – my glasses… plus the 3D – and it worked okay. Contacts would have been better. I’ll definitely have to invest in a pair if more movies are made this way.

I think the Hollywood crapola was not a tacked-on-by-the-suits kinda deal. It was central to the story the director chose to tell. That doesn’t make it any less crapola. I wish these luddite memes would let my Cameron go.

Josh: I agree that whenever two different groups of people meet, the group with the lessor technology is at a vast disadvantage. This is always been true. Of every group. Including nonwhite groups.

But as far as I know, our society is the first to feel the need to hate themselves and culturally flagellate themselves endlessly over their success. If these feelings simply inoculated us against future sins, that would be fine. But, these ideas are being used destructively to persuade us to relinquish our society and culture.

Will: Go see Sherlock Holmes (a fun movie) AND Avatar. Seeing Avatar at home just won’t be the same.

By: Will Brown

Will Brown — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:24:48 +0000

Now that’s a movie review.

One thing I can suggest that might partially obviate Cameron’s directorial choices is that he wasn’t financing the production himself. Once he had his admittedly great planet movie down, it seems quite plausable he found himself compelled to include the cliched additions you mentioned to satisfy the less-visionary investors. Don’t know this to be true, but the clash of the storylines doesn’t seem consistent with only one source of story vision input.

I’ll put my “at the theater” money on Sherlock Holmes myself and wait for Avatar on the cable or DVD.

By: Josh

Josh — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:20:12 +0000

I think you make a lot of good/interesting points, and I certainly agree with how one-dimensional the portrayal of the military is, however I take exception to your objection to the “pocahontas” plotline, the stereotypes and exploitation. The story of what happens when a technologically advanced, which not to beat around the bush has almost always meant white, society has come into contact with a less advanced one is the the same painful tale every time. Sure, there may be some technological benefits, but the disease, exploitation, slavery, population movement and alcoholism that inevitably result pretty much balance those out. And then some. This is exactly what is taking place in Avatar. You may not like the negative connoctation that this gives to technology, but History tells us this is the truth.