# Avatar on DVD: What Did You Think? \[Spoilers\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 25, 2010, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294 "2010-04-25T10:57:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/41 "2010-04-26T17:37:10Z")
The knife looked and seems pretty ridiculous. If the military of the future needs to equip mechs for wandering in dense jungles, I find it hard to believe that they wouldn’t find a more elegant solution than making it hack through the underbrush with a machete. Even a retractable straight blade or saw blade or something would make more sense than a giant robot Rambo knife in a sheath. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/42 "2010-04-26T17:43:16Z")
Responding directly to the OP: I think that there’s absolutely no reason to watch it outside of a 3D IMAX theater. It’d be like buying a DVD of Star Tours. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/43 "2010-04-26T17:57:26Z")
I thought Dave’s analysis was very intriguing. In terms of SF tropes, Avatar was very intelligent. It borrowed VERY intelligently from SF tropes of the past … the floating mountains being the most arresting example, in my opinion. He did not just baldly present floating mountains, he also presented them as a gravitational anomaly that also threw off instrumentation. Very slick. Like Dave, I am often disappointed by SF films that take on a few of the visual trappings of SF but ignore the sense of wonder that makes SF so appealing at its very best. _Avatar_ hit the mark on these points, much more effectively than most other SF films do. ---
**Author:** ![Kolga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e56c9b/32.png) [@Kolga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolga)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/44 "2010-04-26T17:58:15Z")
> [@Hampshire](#): > > -My favorite characters were actually Giovanni Ribisi and the General guy. I liked these guys. And you’re supposed to hate the bad guys. > [@MilTan](#): > > You sound like my brother, whose commentary about the movie could be summed up as “Great visuals, but I hate that the good guys lost.” A raving hardcore close-minded libertarian friend of mine actually saw the movie as a metaphor/message against…wait for it…imminent domain. So, the N’avi are property owners, see? And the government is trying to take their land without giving them fair market value, so they are merely fighting for their right to control their own property. So, he basically liked the N’avi because they were, for him, the emblem of the hard-working American landowner fighting against the faceless corrupt government. No environmentalism at all for him. THAT was a surreal conversation to be having, for sure. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/45 "2010-04-26T19:05:44Z")
> [@Kolga](#): > > A raving hardcore close-minded libertarian friend of mine actually saw the movie as a metaphor/message against…wait for it…imminent domain. > > So, the N’avi are property owners, see? And the government is trying to take their land without giving them fair market value, so they are merely fighting for their right to control their own property. > > So, he basically liked the N’avi because they were, for him, the emblem of the hard-working American landowner fighting against the faceless corrupt government. No environmentalism at all for him. > > THAT was a surreal conversation to be having, for sure. That’s brilliant. So the Navi are really just New Londoners, the company is Pfizer, and the Colonel is Supreme Court Justice David Souter? ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/46 "2010-04-26T19:23:38Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > I’ve never seen the movie but if the mecha is very large I absolutely agree with **Justin**. Having a mecha wield a giant knife for the purpose of clearing brush would be exactly as retarded as putting one on a tank for the same reason. > **[Rhino tank](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhino_tank)** > > "Rhino tank" (initially called "Rhinoceros") was the American nickname for Allied tanks fitted with "tusks", or bocage cutting devices, during World War II. The British designation for the modifications was Prongs. > In the summer of 1944, during the Battle of Normandy, Allied forces—particularly the Americans—had become bogged down fighting the Germans in the Normandy bocage. This landscape of thick, banked dirt and rock walls covered with trees and hedges proved difficult for tanks to breach. In... Yes. Exactly as retarded. By which, of course, you mean not at all because it worked pretty well. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/47 "2010-04-26T19:40:27Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > [Rhino tank - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhino_tank) > Yes. Exactly as retarded. By which, of course, you mean not at all because it worked pretty well. That doesn’t look anything remotely like a tank with a giant hunting knife attached. It looks more like a tank with a “cattle-catcher” sort of gizmo. ---
**Author:** ![Dancer\_Flight](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dancer_flight/32/7601_2.png) [@Dancer\_Flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dancer_Flight)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/48 "2010-04-26T20:15:38Z")
> [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > And then they use an injoke calling unobtainium “Unobtainium”! Man, that was genius. They won me over and I was totally willing to swallow whatever baloney they were serving for the rest of the film. I just saw it last night on DVD and while it is a visually stunning film (and I expect more so in 3D), that “inside joke” was _by far_ the most irritating thing for me. For Og’s sake use a little technobabble, that’s what it’s there for. Calling it “unobtainium” is like blandly calling a mysterious object “the Hitchcockian McGuffin” on screen. The fourth wall is there for a reason, and you break it at your peril. I saw the similarity to _Fern Gully_ and _The Last Samurai_, and _Dances with Wolves_. Honestly that didn’t bother me too much as I’m well aware of the old saw about there being only X original stories and how everything is derivative of what came earlier. -DF ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/49 "2010-04-26T20:33:17Z")
> [@](#): > > A raving hardcore close-minded libertarian friend of mine actually saw the movie as a metaphor/message against…wait for it…imminent domain. JFTR, it’s _eminent_ domain. Unless your land is suddenly going to appear. > **[Eminent domain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain)** > > Eminent domain,\[a\] also known as land acquisition,\[b\] compulsory purchase,\[c\] resumption,\[d\] resumption/compulsory acquisition,\[e\] or expropriation,\[f\] is the compulsory acquisition of private property for public use. It does not include the power to take and transfer ownership of private property from one property owner to another private property owner without a valid public purpose. This power can be legislatively delegated by the state to municipalities, government subdivisions, or even to > [@](#): > > Calling it “unobtainium” is like blandly calling a mysterious object “the Hitchcockian McGuffin” on screen. The fourth wall is there for a reason, and you break it at your peril. Like this? > **[The Double McGuffin (1979) ⭐ 6.6 | Mystery, Family](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079070/)** > > 1h 41m | PG ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/50 "2010-04-26T21:32:37Z")
> [@Dancer\_Flight](#): > > For Og’s sake use a little technobabble, that’s what it’s there for. Calling it “unobtainium” is like blandly calling a mysterious object “the Hitchcockian McGuffin” on screen. I don’t get this. Unobtainium _is_ [techno-babble](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainium). > [@](#): > > Since the late 1950s, aerospace engineers have used the term unobtainium when referring to unusual or costly materials, or when theoretically considering a material perfect for their needs in all respects, except that it does not exist. > > \ > > Unobtainium is also used, in an ironic sense, for materials that are practical and really exist, but are difficult to get. ---
**Author:** ![MilTan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@MilTan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MilTan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/51 "2010-04-27T00:12:49Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > That doesn’t look anything remotely like a tank with a giant hunting knife attached. It looks more like a tank with a “cattle-catcher” sort of gizmo. Sure, but a knife wielded with some dexterity would be more effective than a cattle-catcher type gizmo. So why use a cattle catcher when you can just hold the knife in your hand? ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/52 "2010-04-27T01:31:39Z")
> [@MilTan](#): > > Sure, but a knife wielded with some dexterity would be more effective than a cattle-catcher type gizmo. So why use a cattle catcher when you can just hold the knife in your hand? Why hold the knife in your hand when you could use some sort of blade built into the mech that you couldn’t drop or have knocked out of your robot hand? Why not have some sort of saw blade? Why carry around some silly robot hunting knife and not a robot machete or something if you’re going to be hacking through the brush? Who picks a Rambo knife as their preferred way to carve through a jungle? It’s not logical, it was just something Cameron (or whoever) thought looked cool. Thinking that it looked silly instead of cool is perfectly legitimate. [Here’s a still of the mech holding its knife](http://www.beforethetrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/filmstill213.jpg). I’m sorry, but arguing that that knife is a tool for hacking through the jungle is just… well, again, silly. In fact, I forgot just how ridiculous it looked until I saw it again now. ---
**Author:** ![Dancer\_Flight](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dancer_flight/32/7601_2.png) [@Dancer\_Flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dancer_Flight)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/53 "2010-04-27T02:06:19Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > I don’t get this. Unobtainium _is_ [techno-babble [wiki link to unobtainium -DF]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainium). Unobtainium is a _general term_, incredibly well known to anyone writing speculative fiction or performing thought experiments in materials science. It’s like saying we need to get these aliens off their tree because there’s a big deposit of “weird, hard to get matter”. “Unobtainium” lacks specificity. There’s an “unobtainium” [trope](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Unobtainium)! To hear it in actual usage in a script is as jarring to me as hearing a political candidate uttering “insert pithy comment here” while delivering a speech. It is something that some hack writer left in there because s/he didn’t do a final polish and fill in the blanks, or s/he forgot to replace the place holders. I get that such a remark can be intended ironically but it has to fit the overall speech and candidate. If you want to argue that scientists have a sense of humor, I will agree with you. IUPAC has a somewhat more formal naming process for new materials than, say archaeologists (Hey, I’m down with [thagomizer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thagomizer)). Personally “eludium” might have been a better choice, if only because it is less commonly used in discussing and analyzing speculative/fantastic fiction. By the way, wikipedia states in its article on [techobabble](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technobabble) that “Technobabble’s principal use in most science fiction, in particular more hard science fiction is to conceal the true (impossible) nature of materials, technologies or devices mentioned in the story, frequently because of a violation of the laws of physics.” Calling something “unobtainium” doesn’t, in my opinion, conceal much. Your mileage may obviously vary. -DF ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/54 "2010-04-27T02:32:07Z")
> [@Dancer\_Flight](#): > > I just saw it last night on DVD and while it is a visually stunning film (and I expect more so in 3D), that “inside joke” was _by far_ the most irritating thing for me. For Og’s sake use a little technobabble, that’s what it’s there for. Calling it “unobtainium” is like blandly calling a mysterious object “the Hitchcockian McGuffin” on screen. The fourth wall is there for a reason, and you break it at your peril. As I said in the previous thread, “unobtainium” is perfectly fine in-universe, as long as you can accept that characters in that universe are capable of possessing a sense of humour. Sometimes names given as a joke stick, as shown by the [Thagomizer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thagomizer). _In-universe_, “unobtainium” works perfectly, since it’s a mineral with amazing, unique properties that is incredibly difficult to obtain. “McGuffin” doesn’t work in-universe, because the term relies on the item having useful properties outside the plot, which is impossible if your “plot” is real life. > [@Jophiel](#): > > Why hold the knife in your hand when you could use some sort of blade built into the mech that you couldn’t drop or have knocked out of your robot hand? Because installing a built-in weapon that would get in the way of using the hand misses the point of creating a humanoid mech. It should be obvious that these mechs are designed to be able to do anything a human can, even by a pilot with no real mech pilot training. They’ve got hands like a human does, they’ve got about the same proportions a human does, and they’re controlled by the pilot moving their body in a natural way. ---
**Author:** ![Kolga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e56c9b/32.png) [@Kolga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolga)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/55 "2010-04-27T02:37:31Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > JFTR, it’s _eminent_ domain. Unless your land is suddenly going to appear. > [Eminent domain - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain) :smack: :o ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/56 "2010-04-27T02:37:46Z")
> [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > While I haven’t seen Ferngully No need, you’ve seen Avatar, so you’ve more or less seen Ferngully. The biggest difference? No mentally unstable bat. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/57 "2010-04-27T03:33:03Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > That doesn’t look anything remotely like a tank with a giant hunting knife attached. It looks more like a tank with a “cattle-catcher” sort of gizmo. It’s a tank with a serrated blade on the front, specifically for cutting things. Mechanically, it’s analogous, given that tanks have no hands. Knives do not require power to operate, can be created with trivial use of technology. Maybe it was an aftermarket addition on the planet’s surface, an improvised idea that went to production. You know, like the up-armoring of HMMVs in Iraq. There are variations. [http://www.track48.com/shop/product.php?productid=381&cat=54&page=1](http://www.track48.com/shop/product.php?productid=381&cat=54&page=1) [http://www.missionmodels.com/files/images/t\_16975.jpg](http://www.missionmodels.com/files/images/t_16975.jpg) A knife can be used to pry things, pick at things, work at angles a hand can not. It’s a lever with a sharp end and sharp edge. Handy sort of thing, really. Attaching it permanently to a hand reduces the amount of use you can get out of it, either by removing the flexibility of using it _in_ the hand (eg, attaching it to the forearm) or reducing the size of the knife (attaching it to the hand) or interfering with the use of the hand (attaching it to the hand) Think of the difference between Wolverine and a guy with a sword. There’s a reason people use swords instead of sharp objects strapped to their forearms. ---
**Author:** ![MilTan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/71e660/32.png) [@MilTan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MilTan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/58 "2010-04-27T04:07:33Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > Why hold the knife in your hand when you could use some sort of blade built into the mech that you couldn’t drop or have knocked out of your robot hand? **Grumman** already addressed part of this. But in general, do you think you’d be more adept with a knife if you’re holding it in your hand and can reorient it as necessary? Or if it were taped to your palm? ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/59 "2010-04-27T04:30:18Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > Maybe it was an aftermarket addition on the planet’s surface, an improvised idea that went to production. You know, like the up-armoring of HMMVs in Iraq. Yeah, maybe. Or maybe it’s a ridiculous looking Rambo knife being held by a robot because someone thought it would look cool when the robot knife-fought some blue alien chick. Given the pronounced lack of robots using their knives to cut through vines or carefully pry open giant robot beer cans or pick things out of rocks and the prevalence of robots using their giant robot knives to fight blue alien chicks, I think I have evidence on my side 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2010, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294/60 "2010-04-27T05:00:16Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > Yeah, maybe. Or maybe it’s a ridiculous looking Rambo knife being held by a robot because someone thought it would look cool when the robot knife-fought some blue alien chick. This is pretty much the entire reason for legged mecha existing in sci-fi at all: because they’re fucking awesome. Realistically, as I understand it, they’re highly impractical compared to wheeled or treaded vehicles. So when the mecha itself only exists because it’s fucking awesome, you might as well keep following the Rule of Cool and have it wield a bigass knife. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/avatar-on-dvd-what-did-you-think-spoilers/537294.md?page=4)