'Avatar': Fun Fantasy or Political Statement?

[CoolBreeze]

This has been building up since Avatar was released, so we might as well get into it as well.

'Avatar' is a big blockbuster with gorgeous visuals and awesome 3D effects. But is 'Avatar' a popcorn fantasy flick or a carefully construed message movie? The answer is -- well, a bit of both. The film is a non-stop action flick that's exquisite to look at -- but there's no denying director James Cameron has loaded one of the most expensive films ever made with messages about terrorism, environmental chaos, and government corruption.

It's a "green" movie ... or is it?
The overt message is one of environmentalism and man's missteps in that area. The plot revolves around the fact that humans have destroyed the earth and are now mining nearby planets for minerals, including unobtainium, on the Eden-like Pandora. If you stop to consider the film's estimated budget of $230 million (other estimates put the cost at between $400 and $500 million), you find yourself wondering how many resources were used and how much waste was accumulated in the making of this film. Maybe it's not so green after all. Maybe it's downright hypocritical.

The humans are bad guys.
Pandora is inhabited by the peaceful Na'vi, a race of blue humanoids who live in harmony with their beautiful land and are connected to their ancestors in a way you might imagine Aborigines, Native Americans and other tribes around the globe. Thus, when the massive bulldozers mow down the Na'vi's sacred spaces, you picture those same bulldozers blazing a swath of devastation through the rainforests on our current planet, scattering the tribes and creatures willy-nilly.

It's like 'An Inconvenient Truth' ... re-imagined as a 3D sci-fi blockbuster.
Al Gore's 2006 documentary claims that global warming is real, that it's caused by human activity, and that humans and the government have to do something before it's too late and our planet moves beyond the point of no return. So, yeah, the argument could be made that it's sort of like what's happening in 'Avatar' (though depending on which news sources you read or watch, the question is being raised again on whether or not global warming is, in fact, a threat).

'Avatar' takes a jab at President Bush's War on Terror.
In fact, at one point, Stephen Lang's war-hungry Col. Quaritch proclaims, "We will fight terror with terror!" There's another reference to a "shock and awe" campaign. When it appears that the Na'vi are refusing to vacate their land so the government can mine the minerals there, the military will stop at nothing to achieve their goal -- even if it means killing every Na'vi and replacing all the delicate plant life with an apocalyptic landscape of charred rubble and chaos. They also enlist a group of scientists to create the avatar program, infiltrate the tribe and report back with pertinent info. Some of the scientists have hearts, whereas the military personnel are heartless you-know-whats.

http://insidemovies.moviefone.com/2009/ ... webmaildl2

[Bob Campbell]

I saw Avatar Tuesday and it is an exquisite technical production. The 3-d is astounding but so integrated into the movie that you don't notice it, you simply experience it. No monsters jumping into your popcorn just for effect.
As an avowed uber-way beyond-liberal, the story is simplistic. Good guys, bad guys. There are good soldiers ( Michelle Rodriquez from Lost is smokin'!) and the bad guy colonel and the corporate asshole. A lot of the bulldozers versus trees stuff is right out of "Ferngully, the Last Rain Forest" (uncertain about the title). But the neural network "Gaiea" idea is pretty neat, though much used in sci-fi literature.
I think Cameron got caught between making a kid friendly spectacle and a "message" movie. The message comes across way too ham handed, when it could have been underplayed a bit to better effect. Such as the "fight terror with terror" line. Very topical and on point, but it appeared to be used for shock value rather than given a better contextual phrasing. It's supremely difficult to take very complex issues and distill them into an action film. Cameron did it much more effectively with Aliens and Terminator. But I got the feeling he got caught up in the technology of the film. It's the old sci-fi flick bugaboo, the effects overpower the story. And Avatar, with it's groundbreaking use of digital and motion capture, falls prey to that. But , Oh my God, it looks freaking great. See it in 3-D for sure.

[Hoosier Daddy]

First Cameron removes a tree from the roof of the WGNT transmitter building.
Next thing you know he makes a box office busting, award winning 3D computer animated holiday movie.
Damn, Cameron.
Tell Mykke Kuerttner I said to give you a raise.

[Lester]

"I believe in ecoterrorism" --James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly (Jan 22, 2010 issue)

I think we have our answer.

[Bob Campbell]

"I believe in ecoterrorism" --James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly (Jan 22, 2010 issue)

I think we have our answer.

And yet the movie contains no ecoterrorism. The blue aliens never attack, only defend.

[The-Hammer]

[Lester]

And yet the movie contains no ecoterrorism. The blue aliens never attack, only defend.

That's the exact same argument ELF uses... they aren't "attacking" humans, they're "defending" the Earth.

[Bob Campbell]

And yet the movie contains no ecoterrorism. The blue aliens never attack, only defend.

That's the exact same argument ELF uses... they aren't "attacking" humans, they're "defending" the Earth.

No, I mean really. In the movie the blue aliens never attack. They defend when the corporate earthlings attack. Didn't you see it?

[Lester]

Not yet... I want to contribute to next weekends box office win.

Regardless, the question was: "'Avatar': Fun Fantasy or Political Statement?" and we have our answer.