# The Politics of "Avatar" **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 19, 2010, 8:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541 "2010-01-19T08:26:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2010, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/81 "2010-01-20T22:02:21Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > You are really claiming that they didn’t exterminate the Na’vi when they had a perfect chance due to absolutely spectacular incompetence? The Colonel had meticulously planned the operation based on information on the structure of the Home Tree provided by Jake. It was designed to take down the tree, not to kill Na’vi. > > You are basically admitting at this point that you can’t support your argument. Bullshit. Sure, had the operation gone perfectly as planned, the Na’vi would be scattered and the mining operation could continue. It _didn’t_ go as planned, and rather then withdraw, saying “We want to minimize casualties, fall back!” the humans just kept shooting. And then it got all _personal_ and shit, with the Colonel going after Sully specifically. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/82 "2010-01-20T22:24:25Z")
Sadly, this is why the movie winds up being something of a political hatchet job: it lionizes the natives but, as with a lot of the “noble savage” genre, never really treats them as _people_. They are ciphers for a purity uncomtaminated by all the “sins” the author sees in his own society, and therefore cannot be allowed an actual personality. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2010, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/83 "2010-01-20T22:36:22Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Bullshit. Sure, had the operation gone perfectly as planned, the Na’vi would be scattered and the mining operation could continue. It _didn’t_ go as planned, and rather then withdraw, saying “We want to minimize casualties, fall back!” the humans just kept shooting. So now you admit that the objective was to scatter the Na’vi and not to “exterminate” them, which is what you originally alleged. The objective was to destroy the Home Tree (to make the unobatanium accessible) and secondarily to scatter the Na’vi so they could not resist. It went perfectly as planned, succeeding completely in these objectives. Again, I think you must have seen a different movie than the one I saw. The humans did not “keep shooting” at the Na’vi after they had destroyed the Home Tree; in fact, I don’t recall any Na’vi being specifically targeted at all. The Na’vi who died were killed by falling debris or by being in the tree, not by being shot. At this point you are just making stuff up. ---
**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2010, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/84 "2010-01-20T23:45:10Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, evil was winning at the end of _Empire Strikes Back_ and it’s my understanding that this is widely considered the best in the series. Save the ultimate Ewokkian victory for the third film. Empire is also widely considered to be the _second_ film in the series. Correctly, in my opinion 🙂 The first film ends on a very high note. Shoot, everyone even gets medals! I think Avatar may even be less upbeat at the end than A New Hope. I do hope that Cameron goes this route with the inevitable Avatar sequels, his scriptment contained a lot of more murky stuff that could still be brought into the Avatar universe. With a built in audience and a smaller budget, he ought to be able to do a little more shaded storytelling. I think Cameron gets a bad rap for being “film-lite” without the important caveat that his biggest two hits were largely considered to be the Heaven’s Gate of their time, and were victims of all sorts of corporate meddling. For Pete’s sake, he even surrendered his paycheck for Titanic when it looked like it would be a huge washout. He has compromised his vision to simplify stories for his two biggest hits, despite his multi-billion dollar haul over his last two films, he has not had much in the way of creative freedom due to the sheer expensiveness of his thinking. I am hopeful that with his foot firmly planted with Avatar 1, he will get his rocks off like he did with Terminator 2 and Aliens- two preexisting franchises that he extended into new and interesting territory. Of course it is possible, even probable, that as he spends time with his material he feels the need to sharpen it or polish it in a way that removes all of the nuance. I guess we will get an answer in the next two years or so. ---
**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/85 "2010-01-21T00:07:54Z")
Whoops, I think I thought I was in the other thread. Not particularly on topic, that. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/86 "2010-01-21T01:16:52Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > So now you admit that the objective was to scatter the Na’vi and not to “exterminate” them, which is what you originally alleged. Trivial difference not worth arguing. > [@](#): > > At this point you are just making stuff up. Well, when relevent clips start appearing on YouTube or some other free source, I’ll be happy to revisit the issue. Meantime, I see not a fraction of a shadow of a reason to budge from my earliest assessment, formed about halfway through watching the movie - the story is simplistic and attempts to manipulate, and I feel no compulsion to cut it any slack. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/87 "2010-01-21T01:52:53Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Trivial difference not worth arguing. Which explains why you’ve been arguing it.😉 > [@](#): > > Well, when relevent clips start appearing on YouTube or some other free source, I’ll be happy to revisit the issue. Meantime, I see not a fraction of a shadow of a reason to budge from my earliest assessment, formed about halfway through watching the movie - the story is simplistic and attempts to manipulate, and I feel no compulsion to cut it any slack. You haven’t been “not cutting it any slack,” you have been ignoring explanatory elements that are actually in the movie, while at the same time reading into it things that aren’t there. So your arguments shouldn’t be cut any slack either.😉 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/88 "2010-01-21T03:56:33Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > So your arguments shouldn’t be cut any slack either. Well, then I guess you and I are at an impasse. ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/89 "2010-01-21T06:59:44Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > The only reason I can see for hating it for being an Iraq parable (if that’s what it is, or resembles) would be _if you didn’t consider the whole business of Iraq to be one massive clusterfuck_. > [@Condescending\_Robot](#): > > Eh, one can oppose US involvement with the Vietnam War and still roll one’s eyes at the whole black-and-white EEEEEVIL KKORPORATIONS vs. virtuous, upright natives depiction of the whole thing. I suppose if you read Avatar as an Iraq analogy, the same process could occur. Right. You can think Iraq was a clusterfuck and still think the Iraq analogy in “Avatar” was moronic. Show a Sadaam Hussein equivalent, show a George Bush equivalent - do _something_. Make it an _interesting_ analogy. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/90 "2010-01-21T07:30:39Z")
[This is an interesting article](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/movies/20avatar.html?em) about how so many different groups are hanging their own issues onto the movie. This thread is a good example. > [@](#): > > … > > Since its release in December, James Cameron’s science-fiction epic has broken box office records and grabbed two Golden Globe awards for best director and best dramatic motion picture. But it has also found itself under fire from a growing list of interest groups, schools of thought and entire nations that have protested its message ( **as they see it** ), its morals ( **as they interpret them** ) and its philosophy ( **assuming it has one** ). > > Over the last month, it has been criticized by social and political conservatives who bristle at its depictions of religion and the use of military force; feminists who feel that the male avatar bodies are stronger and more muscular than their female counterparts; antismoking advocates who object to a character who lights up cigarettes; not to mention fans of Soviet-era Russian science fiction; the Chinese; and the Vatican. This week the authorities in China announced that the 2-D version of the film would be pulled from most theaters there to make way for a biography of Confucius. > > \*\*That so many groups have projected their issues onto “Avatar” suggests that it has burrowed into the cultural consciousness in a way that even its immodest director could not have anticipated. \*\*Its detractors agree that it is more than a humans-in-space odyssey — even if they do not agree on why that is so. > > “Some of the ways people are reading it are significant of Cameron’s intent, and some are just by-products of what people are thinking about,” said Rebecca Keegan, the author of “The Futurist: The Life and Films of James Cameron.” “It’s really become this Rorschach test for your personal interests and anxieties.” > > … I like this part: > [@](#): > > Over the breadth of Mr. Cameron’s career, he has been attracted to outsize themes. Ms. Keegan said that it was possible to read “The Terminator,” his breakthrough 1984 movie, as an anti-technology polemic, an anti-war film or a modern gloss on the birth of Jesus. > > “Or,” she said, “ you could just watch it as a movie where Arnold Schwarzenegger stomps around like a robot.” I especially like this part: > [@](#): > > Paradoxically, the pileup of arguments surrounding “Avatar” might have made a sympathetic figure out of the outspoken Mr. Cameron, who now finds himself in the underdog position of having to account for every possible message in his ostensible popcorn film. Cameron as an underdog. I love it! Attacks left and right, but people still love it and are flocking to see it. “Simplistic” movies do not generally generate this kind of controversy and adoration. There’s something about **Avatar** … ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2010, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541/91 "2010-01-21T13:48:26Z")
What about the politics of the Na’vi themselves? Superficially (as if this movie is anything but) they resemble what Jared Diamond calls a “Big man” society, a few hundred villagers with a chief. Do they maintain individual personalities in light of their fiber-optic networking? Do they vote on anything? They allegedly have hard lives where only the strong and smart survive, yet the only dead Na’vi we see (prior to the humans going all Krystalnacht on them) looks like a victim of old age. Do Na’vi children with birth defects or who show signs of illness get abandoned to the jungle? Do Na’vi adolescents who fail one of the rituals get written off, i.e. after climbing Wile E. Coyote mountain to bond with a glider-critter, little Ji’bolla got thrown off and plunged 80,000 feet to his death. It’s okay, though, the tribe is better off without his kind of weakness. I’m prepared to start speculating, for the sake of discussion, in light of the lack of information presented in the film. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-politics-of-avatar/525541.md?page=4)