File under "I" for "Idiots writing for the New York Times"

[trinityvixen]

It shouldn't and doesn't really surprise me that a conservative white dude wouldn't have a problem with the "white man saves the ignorant savages" aspect of Avatar. After all, aren't white people the bearers of all that is good? Men especially? (PLEASE NOTE: DEFCON 200 BILLION-LEVEL SARCASM.)

It shouldn't but did surprise me that there would be anything to scream and holler about regarding religion. Seeing how the "all Mother" goddess/nature spirit of the Na'Vi was, sort of, supposed to be somewhat biological, I figured the more likely source of attack on Avatar would be the enviro-nazi angle.

There's also the fact that the movie vilifies mindlessly militaristic macho types, of which most couch-potato conservatives believe they are, secretly, a member. I suppose there's enough of a soldier in the hero--given the major military battle that he basically causes. There's also the excellent point raised over at Lawyers, Guns, and Money that the soldiers are not, in fact, soldiers but mercenaries. Cool as it is to be a mercenary in concept, as screen characters, they are decidedly Not Heroes. I suppose, despite the conservative government that forwarded the aspirations and lined the coffers of outfits like Black Water, most conservatives would still agree with that assessment.

My own problem with Avatar--the racist aspect--is spelled out in that link under the cut to LGM, in addition to this follow up post. You know what that blogger did? Some goddamned relevant research about the kinds of things that are problematic--as in literally fostering ugly ideas about race and civilization--in a major motion picture release that is currently being hailed as the second coming of CGI. What did the NYT columnist do? Picked apart a minor nitpick to whine about how one of, if not the, most powerful religion on this planet wasn't also the major religion of a bunch of 10-foot-tall kitty aliens. No seriously. He watched this movie and all he could think to complain about is how unfair a science-fiction fantasy action film failed to prioritize Christianity on a planet where fully 99% of the sentient beings haven't ever seen a human, much less heard the Good News. Jesus H. Christ himself is going, "What the fuck are you talking about? It's a movie about kitty people. Cats aren't even supposed to go to Heaven anyway. (But PS? They totally run the joint.)"

Comments

[neo-leviathan.livejournal.com]

Note, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here.

Some might argue that him throwing open the entrance and charging out is just as much a "I wont make my men do anything that I won't" thing.
There's also him not really taking any visible pride/delight in destroying HomeTree, it's all "Right, that's done, good work all", with no hint of the manic glee we normally associate with those who enjoy destruction.

Yes, there is plenty stating that he's a monster, and Cameron has stated in interviews that he's "A good guy who has been corrupted by too many bad tours of duty", but still...

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

At some level, you are free to interpret, but authors of stories also give you a lot of help in coming to your conclusions. Like I said, it is possible that this guy could be perceived as being a good soldier gone bad. But there's almost no textual evidence of it. I would even argue you on the last point--I was pretty sure that he was more than just a little pleased with the idea of destroying HomeTree (beyond a "job well done" angle--there are grim but determined looks and then there are psychotic ones).

As for Cameron, if the story points out nothing else, it's that his opinion of his characters is biased by being their creator. Moreover, what he knows about the characters may not be what we know. I mean, although he controlled just about the entire movie, he did probably edit himself, meaning that there are bits he knows that didn't make into the movie. In Cameron's complete story, that guy might not have been a total fuckbag. But in Avatar, he pretty much was.

[neo-leviathan.livejournal.com]

Another reason we wish his earlier drafts had made it in.
Some background info on first contact, previous military engagements, some more character backstory etc, could have gone a long way.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Absolutely. The blogger at Lawers, Guns and Money points out that Pandora is like one giant organism, and, as such, it and its "cells" (all the creatures inhabiting it) would treat new organisms like diseases. Attacking new people would be an instinct. This explanation, extrapolated from the neural networked trees, would have sufficed. But it didn't get in. Imagine how much we're missing. Or, rather, you don't have to, since someone compared an earlier rumored draft of the movie and the movie. (http://www.chud.com/articles/articles/21969/1/PROJECT-880-THE-AVATAR-THAT-ALMOST-WAS/Page1.html)

[neo-leviathan.livejournal.com]

Exactly! Inserting that in there would have been perfect justification for the behavior of the Na'Vi. Insert in a bit more about the Avatar program also being about trying to get the Planet to see them as symbiotes rather than parasites, and presto, that makes the ending make more sense.

Extrapolate that out further as the Company not being willing to wait until the planet *maybe* allows them to be there without attacking them, and feeling that damaging the planet enough that it can't fight back, and viola, we have a reason for the Company's genocidal (terracidal?) actions.
We can even further reason this by adding in a bit about "Unobtainium halves the travel time for space flight. Do you have any idea how many people we could save by getting more resources, faster medical treatment to them?".

It wouldn't have taken much to really improve the feel of it as well as the look.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Yes, yes, and yes. There was nothing to lose by making the antagonists somewhat sympathetic. What a waste.

[neo-leviathan.livejournal.com]

Bleh "Extrapolate that out further as the Company not being willing to wait until the planet *maybe* allows them to be there without attacking them, and feeling that damaging the planet enough that it can't fight back is the best way of getting to the minerals that they need without being eaten by Australia on Steroids, and viola, we have a reason for the Company's genocidal (terracidal?) actions."