_Avatar_, directed by James Cameron

i thought x-men was all about being a gay misfit

"while america was collectively losing its mind in fear of terrorism"

come on, it was '09 not '03

it is, but it doesn't swing anywhere near as hard at that target as avatar. maybe if you threw in some scenes of obviously gay populations being annihilated before rising up to completely smash the state.

well we can say that brian singer is a touch more subtle than james cameron

contenderizer that is bog-standard hollywood liberalism

Bullshit, especially now, when George Clooney is disappointed in progressives/Dems who are disappointed in mass-murdering warlord Obama.

To the electric chair with them all.

come on, it was '09 not '03

fair point, but that doesn't make its obvious allegorical implication and explicit anti-war/anti-military stance* any less remarkable, especially in a film of its type.

* conflicted, of course, by cameron's obvious hard-on for combat, tough-guy tropes and military tech

corporations bad, fighting good. noble savages better than a mean soldier or a kid with an MBA.

really arresting stuff here, never seen its like

re: lack of cultural currency, i waited until a few weeks after it came out, and then tapped a friend on the shoulder, looked deeply into their eyes, and whispered "I see you". and nothing happened. at that very moment i said to myself "this film really isn't going to have much cultural currency". i even whispered "I see you" to someone else later that month, and nothing. what a ripoff.

i admit, as always, that it's possible that no one knew wtf i was talking about

i hear you

corporations bad, fighting good. noble savages better than a mean soldier or a kid with an MBA.

really arresting stuff here, never seen its like

sure, but context is everything. try to think of another big, family-friendly action blockbuster of the post-9/11 era that makes a similar statement.

Wait until Step Up Revolution sees the light of day and this will all be moot.

the bourne movies?

or like the daring stance against big oil in the muppets

Most noble savages films don't actually end up with a tick in the win column for said savages.

the lorax!

er, xp

I wouldn't overestimate the size of the super fandom right now (though we'll see what happens if we get movies every 5 years for the next decade or two), but it was definitely a real, weird, thing at the time.

http://worldbuildingrules.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/avatar-bono.jpg

ravey

just wait til Django Unchained takes on racist-imperial foot fetishism

the bourne movies?

― goole

or like the daring stance against big oil in the muppets

― a la bouquet marmoset (Austerity Ponies)

i don't think those compare to avatar's heroicization of armed resistance by native "terrorists" to what appears to be an invasion by the US military - made during wartime, when the US military was actually invading foreign countries and demonizing resistance as terrorism.

goole & AP's day to troll

ha. maybe that's fair in my case, but Morbius do you really believe that James Cameron's Avatar is too radical for Clooney?

avatar is a very pointed and obvious metaphor for the genocidal consequences (agenda) of specifically western imperialism. and it presents "terroristic" responses to an invasion by what looks suspiciously like the US military as unambiguous heroism. for a funtimes, family-friendly summer action blockbuster, that's pretty remarkable.

well, I do admit it's remarkable how incredibly hamfisted the message is, even for Hollywood. but I don't really consider this too important because that's not really the reason why it became a Blockbuster.

to expand on this: for a funtimes, family-friendly summer action blockbuster made during wartime, while america was collectively losing its mind in fear of terrorism, that's pretty remarkable.

this came out during the Obama administration, right?

hamfisted = clear. and i wasn't aware the movie had to pass some kind of message = selling point test for the message to count.

this came out during the Obama administration, right?

but before CHANGE

this came out during the Obama administration, right?

it was conceived and made during he bush admin (shot in 2007/8), but yes, it was released during the first year of the obama admin

tbf I think Cameron started working on it during the Korean war

well, yeah, if you count the childhood daydreaming/crayon illustrated part

Development of Avatar began in 1994, when Cameron wrote an 80-page treatment for the film.[12][13] Filming was supposed to take place after the completion of Cameron's 1997 film Titanic, for a planned release in 1999,[14] but according to Cameron, the necessary technology was not yet available to achieve his vision of the film.

I think 1994 was when we intervened in Haiti under Clinton

star trek had a tiny fanbase in its day. it failed on TV, and its memory was kept alive for decades not by popular acclaim but by its importance to a small but dedicated minority.

and syndication

well, I do admit it's remarkable how incredibly hamfisted the message is, even for Hollywood. but I don't really consider this too important because that's not really the reason why it became a Blockbuster.

Right, but the original context for this discussion is not that it was The Anti-War March of Asses on Seats, but that it must have looked a little risky (even as the next film from that man who made all that money).

then i'm not sure what's risky about it, the movie was going to be a blockbuster regardless of how liberal or hamfisted it was, it just kind of boils down (for me) as "James Cameron is kind of a shitty dude"

political "message" of this film did not resonate/register with the general public at all afaict. they just liked shiny things that explode. also blue boobs.

exactly, unless people talk about "reasons why I fucking hated this film"

then i'm not sure what's risky about it, the movie was going to be a blockbuster regardless of how liberal or hamfisted it was

i'm not claiming that making avatar was particularly "risky", though i think it was (taking any strong political stance is always risky, even when you think the zeitgeist is with you). my point is that the film has a clear and strong message - more than one, really. it's not just "empty spectacle" as is so often lazily claimed. the fact that its messages are so "hamfisted" only strengthens this point.

nor am i claiming that avatar is a great film. while entertaining and admirable in its aims, it's got a lot of problems. it's derivative, maudlin, and simplistic. and overlong. and burdened with a tiresome "white saviour" theme. in my opinion, it's merely good - something of a triumph, given its many flaws. but i do credit it for the force and clarity with which it makes its moral and political points.

political "message" of this film did not resonate/register with the general public at all afaict. they just liked shiny things that explode. also blue boobs.

based on what? there was a lot of talk of the film's politics at the time of its release.

yes we know the Great Unwashed are too fucking stupid to get anything, look around

based on what? there was a lot of talk of the film's politics at the time of its release.

maybe I was just reading the wrong reviews? this is the first time I've ever heard anyone take the film's political content even vaguely seriously

Really, come on - the message of "Avatar," like that of most action movies (bless 'em) is that things look cool when they explode. I can barely name any non World War X action flick that does not depict military authority in a negative light, as duplicitous and manipulative. You see it in "Aliens," you see it in "Rambo," you see it "Avengers." Any message "Avatar" had was negated the second those 3D glasses went on. It was spectacle, and the fact that it pushed gently in an environmental direction meant nothing. Was it even protested by the Christian right? Because that's the gold standard response to having a message.

there was also a fair amount of criticism of Avatar for being racist
xp

PS I have never seen Avatar. Should I watch y/n?

I think I will just wait until discount theatres get 3d.

Was it even protested by the Christian right? Because that's the gold standard response to having a message.

It was protested by at least one right media-watchdog group.

maybe I was just reading the wrong reviews? this is the first time I've ever heard anyone take the film's political content even vaguely seriously

jeez, go to rotten tomatoes and check the linked "full reviews" from "top critics". most concentrate on the movie's visual splendor, but there's also quite a bit of praise of the film's moral and political agenda.

Was it even protested by the Christian right? Because that's the gold standard response to having a message.

usually to a "club em over the head" DO U SEE message

jeez, go to rotten tomatoes and check the linked "full reviews" from "top critics". most concentrate on the movie's visual splendor, but there's also quite a bit of praise of the film's moral and political agenda.

typically those aren't the critics that I read, and I guess I see where you're coming from, y'know I'm sure lots of people praised Bruce Almighty's strong Christian message too

Really, come on - the message of "Avatar," like that of most action movies (bless 'em) is that things look cool when they explode. I can barely name any non World War X action flick that does not depict military authority in a negative light, as duplicitous and manipulative. You see it in "Aliens," you see it in "Rambo," you see it "Avengers." Any message "Avatar" had was negated the second those 3D glasses went on. It was spectacle, and the fact that it pushed gently in an environmental direction meant nothing. Was it even protested by the Christian right? Because that's the gold standard response to having a message.

i don't think that aliens, rambo or the avengers are anywhere near as brave as avatar wr2 the message(s) presented. in aliens, brave soldiers are betrayed by a corrupt corporation. in rambo, vets are abandoned by the military. in the avengers, covert gov't/military organizations are duplicitous and craven. all SOP relative to avatar's wartime celebration of violent revolt against what basically equals the invading US military.

the film's environmental themes are hardly it's primary message. it's much more prominently an impassioned condemnation of imperialist genocide (easy target, sure), and a fantasy of deus-ex-machina justice overcoming the "inevitable" forward march of historical progress. it's also a pointedly specific anti-irag/afghanistan-invasion flick. sully subtly compares the invasion of pandora to war for oil. quaritch is much less subtle: "our only security lies in preemptive attack. we will fight terror with terror."