• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Could end up a pretty decent weekend. Avatar will do great as usual, Book of Whitta will most likely do very good as well, and Lovely Bones might do ok.
 
Damn, who gets 4 days for MLK? Well, the line unit here is, due to a training holiday, but still..

Anyway, interesting discussion on the Na'vi and the messages of Avatar. I've read the "Avatar Sourcebook" or whatever it was and while it doesn't go into exhaustive detail on the Na'vi culture, I've developed my own theroy, which seems in line with the original script quoted above.

I think the Na'vi are SLAVES to Eywa. They seem to lack some critical elements of ambition, modivation, and a need for self-improvement. Their society seems very static and their environment provides a meager subsistence-level amount of resources. Granted, due to the mild climate they seem to be able to live quite well without clothing, real shelter, and food storage, and the bio-network can replace the need for permanent information storage systems, but I find it almost impossible to believe that no Na'vi experience greed, jealousy, or hate to the point where strife isn't more common or that they couldn't be exploited by the RDA. Surely ornamental trinkets, food, or steel/ceramic weaponry would be of use to them.

But of course Eywa stops this type of thinking, making the Na'vi little more than semi-sentient care-takers of the environment. Eywa doesn't want technology to develop, it doesn't want the Na'vi to progress to a point where they can see through Eywa and exploit resources at their own pace. Of course Eywa's method seems stable and much more maintainable than the human way, but it seems like the Na'vi have no choice in the decision process.

Avatar isn't so much "white-guilt" or anti-capitalist, in my opinion, as it is almost a celebratrion of the concepts of the pastoral fantasy and the noble savage. It is anti-urban, and clearly it touches many folks who feel that they have "lost" something for not doing more stuff outside. The Na'vi are savage, but reflect a compassion and strength of character not seen in many of the humans (supplanted by greed, cowardice, etc). We see this same sentiment cast upon Native American tribes; rather than blood-thirsty raiders they become full of quiet dignity, reserved control, and only respond to insults initiated by the crass, arrogant outsider.

I can watch the film and be drawn in, fully caring for Jake and the Na'vi, while at the same time realizing and accepting that where I on Pandora, I'd be riding in a mech gunning the blue bastards down :P The drive for unobtanium and the uses it has for a failing humanity would overshadow my respect for Pandora.
 
jason10mm said:
Damn, who gets 4 days for MLK? Well, the line unit here is, due to a training holiday, but still..

Anyway, interesting discussion on the Na'vi and the messages of Avatar. I've read the "Avatar Sourcebook" or whatever it was and while it doesn't go into exhaustive detail on the Na'vi culture, I've developed my own theroy, which seems in line with the original script quoted above.

I think the Na'vi are SLAVES to Eywa. They seem to lack some critical elements of ambition, modivation, and a need for self-improvement. Their society seems very static and their environment provides a meager subsistence-level amount of resources. Granted, due to the mild climate they seem to be able to live quite well without clothing, real shelter, and food storage, and the bio-network can replace the need for permanent information storage systems, but I find it almost impossible to believe that no Na'vi experience greed, jealousy, or hate to the point where strife isn't more common or that they couldn't be exploited by the RDA. Surely ornamental trinkets, food, or steel/ceramic weaponry would be of use to them.

But of course Eywa stops this type of thinking, making the Na'vi little more than semi-sentient care-takers of the environment. Eywa doesn't want technology to develop, it doesn't want the Na'vi to progress to a point where they can see through Eywa and exploit resources at their own pace. Of course Eywa's method seems stable and much more maintainable than the human way, but it seems like the Na'vi have no choice in the decision process.

Avatar isn't so much "white-guilt" or anti-capitalist, in my opinion, as it is almost a celebratrion of the concepts of the pastoral fantasy and the noble savage. It is anti-urban, and clearly it touches many folks who feel that they have "lost" something for not doing more stuff outside. The Na'vi are savage, but reflect a compassion and strength of character not seen in many of the humans (supplanted by greed, cowardice, etc). We see this same sentiment cast upon Native American tribes; rather than blood-thirsty raiders they become full of quiet dignity, reserved control, and only respond to insults initiated by the crass, arrogant outsider.

I can watch the film and be drawn in, fully caring for Jake and the Na'vi, while at the same time realizing and accepting that where I on Pandora, I'd be riding in a mech gunning the blue bastards down :P The drive for unobtanium and the uses it has for a failing humanity would overshadow my respect for Pandora.

We didn't delve deep enough to know what the Na'vi are capable of. Personally I thought I saw greed, jealousy, & hate gainst Jake. Rumor from the encyclopedia is they had conflicts with other Na'vi. Further, there is not that much interaction outside of a particular tribe, just like with humans.

I think it is human nature to not hurt your family/friends s the Na'vi weren't acting unusual in that regard. What is unusual is the interaction they have with their world. I wouldn't call that slavery. I think they understand the balance they have to keep to make sure the planet stays around.

I also don't think the Na'vi are anymore savage than the mercs who are out to kill them/manifest destiny just for a mineral deposit which is what Cameron is getting at. He obviously is not against technology or even against war/violence, but he appears to be against it's use to hurt others and the environment for commercial gain. I don't have a problem with that message even if I was whacky enough to disagree with it.
 
Jibril said:
Paraphrasing :P

I don't see any line which can remotely be paraphrased to suggest that there is any intention to say the movie is stupid or even dumb. The article clearly expresses that the story is somewhat "bland" which is to say it is unoriginal, but where does it express that it is dumb or stupid?
 
duckroll said:
I don't see any line which can remotely be paraphrased to suggest that there is any intention to say the movie is stupid or even dumb. The article clearly expresses that the story is somewhat "bland" which is to say it is unoriginal, but where does it express that it is dumb or stupid?

Well, paraphrasing...with...

....

I'll just be honest. I confused bland with unintelligent :(
 
duckroll said:
50 million again even with competition from the great Gary Whitta? I dunno...
The marketplace expands for the holiday weekends. There will be room for Eli's
far too small
box office alongside Avatar doing its thing. I'm predicting a ~$38m for the three day and $50m 4-day take for Avatar.

On that note, in addition to Avatar's domestic box office being revised up $2m, the international take was revised up over $8m yesterday as well. It was a $200m weekend, world-wide, $150m overseas, $50m domestic.

It's already put $220m between it and the previous #2 movie WW.

adjectives
 
So basically, at the rate Avatar is going, by the end of Jan it'll be #1 worldwide, and all of Feb will be the countdown to it getting over 600 million domestically?
 
duckroll said:
So basically, at the rate Avatar is going, by the end of Jan it'll be #1 worldwide, and all of Feb will be the countdown to it getting over 600 million domestically?
Seems like it. It should be at over $1.6b by the end of the week. One or two (at most) weeks after that and it's #1.
 
Enosh said:
no it's preaty much white guilt, not only about it, but it is certanly a big part of it


It's not white guilt. What about it is white guilt? Humans from another planet landed on a planet that had a more primative race on it. They wanted a great resource for energy and $$$ reasons.

The white guy that eventually fought with them didn't do it because he was white. He didn't do it because the Na'vi were dumb and too stupid to fight back (due to their nativeness).

So what's the race issue that you see?
 
Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:
I was troubled that the movie builds up to a lengthy sequence in which the audience cheers as former U.S. military personnel are graphically slaughtered, including a scene in which the blue avatar of Jake Sully, the protagonist, machine-guns some soldiers in the back. Edward Boyce of Sydney, Australia, writes, "You asked, 'When did watching depictions of U.S. soldiers dying become a form of fun?' Part of the answer is that the U.S. military is unpopular outside its home country, and Hollywood blockbusters cater to an international market. Avatar's earnings in its first three weeks were $352 million in North America and $673 million in the rest of the world. I can't explain why American audiences pay to see their soldiers blown up. But in the international market, dead American soldiers are appealing, and Hollywood is only too happy to oblige."

Finally this from Trey Lindsey of Dallas: "I am a member of the U.S. military and I felt like I was taking crazy pills while watching that movie with my wife and son. I sat wide-eyed and appalled as the rest of the audience actually applauded as U.S. Marines -- whether they were mercenaries seems irrelevant, they were referred to as Marines, called themselves Marines and wore Marine-style uniforms -- were slaughtered on camera. I watched Avatar in Nashville, a historically conservative city located near a major Army base that is home to one of the legendary units that liberated Europe in World War II, the 101st Airborne. There is a graveyard in France full of men who once lived near Nashville and who died opposing fascist tyranny. But to Hollywood, U.S. soldiers are evil and deserved to be slaughtered as audiences cheer."
Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
 
Sounds like that dude should be taking crazy pills if he doesn't see a difference between US military and mercenary forces.

What a douche.

Interesting how the rest of the audience could applaud, despite being near a base in a conservative city...
 
Count Dookkake said:
Interesting how the rest of the audience could applaud, despite being near a base in a conservative city...
He was obviously sitting in a theater full of libruls, or maybe even illegal immigrants.
 
XiaNaphryz said:
Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:

Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?

Fortunately it's too late and has little to do with the international market even if the US dried up to nothing.

I still don't get the controversy since it's not the military being fought.

I also don't get why Americans would stand behind troops that do whatever is necessary just because they are American troops. The easiest way for the mercs not to die would be to not attack the Na'vi in the first place. Once they crossed that line, was Jake supposed to pull a no kill rule for people trying to kill him?
 
Count Dookkake said:
Sounds like that dude should be taking crazy pills if he doesn't see a difference between US military and mercenary forces.

What a douche.

Interesting how the rest of the audience could applaud, despite being near a base in a conservative city...

Yeah, did I miss that part of the movie? I thought it was a private security force the company was paying. Were they really military members?
 
Jibril said:
But those are Mercenaries. I guess Mercenaries and US soldiers are synonymous to the dude. :P
ShOcKwAvE said:
Yeah, did I miss that part of the movie? I thought it was a private security force the company was paying. Were they really military members?
Some of it is actually mentioned earlier in the same article, right before the quote I posted:

I objected that it wasn't clear whether the fatigue-clad warriors who slaughter Pandorans were regular military or a private army, noting the noble helicopter pilot -- the sole sympathetic military character -- is addressed as "Marine." Many readers, including Sharon Gunzelmann of Tulsa, Okla., countered, "Once a Marine, always a Marine. It is an honorific that stays with you after you leave the service, the way a former judge is always addressed as 'Judge.'" Andrew Whitford of Darlington, Australia, felt it was clear the people in question were mercenaries, if ex-military
 
Isn't this directly addressed in the movie itself though? When Jake first lands on Pandora, he specifically says that back at home these people were soldiers fighting for countries and ideals, but out here they're just another hired gun. He also specifically mentions the mindset of "once a marine always a marine" regarding himself in particular.
 
Count Dookkake said:
JAKE FUCKING SAYS THEY ARE MERCENARIES IN THE FIRST 5 FUCKING MINUTES OF THE MOVIE.
Pffft, that time's for getting the last condiments for your food and snacks obviously!
 
the dude was just confused and has now made an ass of himself. jake talks about how he was a marine, and there are other former marines so he just got it mixed up like a tool
 
What does it matter from a plot standpoint. Let's say the mercs are really the Marines who decide to force people off their land and blow up they sacred lands. Is Jake supposed to not doing anything because they are operating as military?

I would have a hard time believing that since by the final battle he was far more Na'vi than human.
 
Count Dookkake said:
JAKE FUCKING SAYS THEY ARE MERCENARIES IN THE FIRST 5 FUCKING MINUTES OF THE MOVIE.

Not only that but Quaritch re-enforces that point when he is giving Jake the post-weightlifting speech. He makes it clear that he was former military but now, presumably a Colonel without a war to fight, he became the head of Private Security for RDA.
 
icarus-daedelus said:
The dumbest thing about that is that the "worship of nature" depicted in the film is not a modern doctrine; it is in fact animism, a type of religion which is handily older than monotheism and polytheism combined.

Kinda sorta, except it is 'real.'

I get your point though.
 
Now some of those gus know how it feels to be German/Japanese/Russian/Vietnamese/Middle Eastern in a war movie :lol

I thought that it was odd when the French girl behind us started laughing when gunships were crashed and door gunners eaten by Nikran, but I have no sympathy for the false outrage people have over this movie. ZOMG humans die! ZOMG mostly American ex-militaries AREN´T the bestestest guys ever! White guilt! Noble savage stereotype!

And smh, Vatican, smh. I expected more of you and the spider queen ruling you.
 
XiaNaphryz said:
Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:

Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?


WTF is wrong with seeing American soliders blown up first of all? But more importantly they weren't even American military soliders. :lol
 
XiaNaphryz said:
Saw this tidbit on (of all things) an ESPN NFL column:

Will there be a larger backlash movement starting soon?
In cultural news, is the mega-hyped forthcoming movie "Avatar" a cartoon? Television advertising has begun -- the material is so obviously phony, it makes "Clifford the Big Red Dog" seem like realism. There are video games whose content looks less bogus than "Avatar" -- the ads basically shout the words "faked using a computer." "Avatar" appears to be the work of animators -- manga disguised as a movie. All the hype, all the money -- what if this flick becomes the new "Heaven's Gate"?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091117&sportCat=nfl

haters gonna hate. Same author btw
 
icarus-daedelus said:
The main subjects of animism are definitely real, tangible things, so that would put it in a slightly different class from the invisible sky wizard religions of the modern day. But usually in animism a spiritual aspect is given to humans, animals, plants, rocks, rivers, etc. and the world is considered a sacred place (rather than simply a stepping stone to a better life - another difference from monotheism) so it is a type of religion, even if it is one focused on things that provably exist. I'm guessing it's that aspect that upsets the Vatican.
What I find amusing in all this is how the film goes out of its way to establish this. You've got the military side dismissing it as religious gobbledygook, and the scientists saying, well no actually it's biology. And the movie goes on to demonstrate that. It's decidedly not religious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom