- This topic has 61 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
@Arly: I’m not going apeshit, god. I seriously can’t sound annoyed or aggressive in the slightest on the interwebz without someone getting their feelings hurt. Stop taking everything so personally. You said Sherlock Holmes was better, and criticized Avatar for its “cliche” plot. I pointed out that the Sherlock Holmes featured a far more cliche plot, one that’s been told for hundreds of years since detective stories first became prominent (read: when newspapers became available to the masses).
I’m not going to lie. I really am annoyed with some people in this thread. So much of the criticism comes from people who looked at the movie far too shallowly. For instance:
“Man comes to appreciate the indigenous tribe and then witness how utterly evil and materialistic humans are.” A4Noob says this despite my explanation on the SAME F’ING PAGE explaining how it’s not that simple. It’s about imperialism. IMPERIALISM. This is not about humans or even capitalism in general. This is about imperialism.
“It’s imperialism, not ‘humans being super evil.’ As a member of what was the largest empire during the years of traditional imperialism, I’d expect you to know more about it. Imperialism was led by corporations like the one in the movie. They did what the corporation in the movie did to the Na’vi and Pandora to the native people of wherever and that land. See: Seminole Wars, West/East India Companies, Colonial Africa, etc. It’s something that still goes on in less direct ways (i.e. Iraq, Vietnam, etc.), and it’s something that most of us seem to accept pretty easily. What a lot of the stuff in this genre (Avatar included) tries to do is get people to see how wrong what’s happening is.”
I posted that 5 posts above his. Does he bother to even consider that he might have misjudged the movie? Never.
It’s not just your traditional imperialism-focused story either. It raises interesting questions about modern times. Throughout the movie there are constant references to traditional imperialism, but at the same time, there’s references to modern day stuff like Iraq (“We will fight terror with terror”) and Vietnam. In effect, it’s questioning whether such wars are, in effect, indirect forms of imperialism. Anyone with even an inkling of knowledge about world history and current events should be aware of such issues, but apparently making such connections is beyond most people.
So, no, Arly, what I was trying to do with that post was not to make you feel that Avatar was better. I was instead trying to show the flaw in your argument (and thus criticism of Avatar), in hopes of you considering you might have misjudged the movie. There’s nothing that can change the way you received the movie the first time. Hopefully, if you see it a second time, you’ll approach it differently and pick up on more of its fine points.
Edit: Before anyone tries to say condemning imperialism is some leftist message, go read a history book. It was some of the worst treatment of man by his fellow man in our history. All of it for money, too.
@Arly: Notice I never said Sherlock Holmes was bad, either. I thought it was pretty good regardless of its “cliche plot.”
You may watch a movie for its message and meaning, but I go to a movie for entertainment. It’s not good if I feel like my ass hurts and I want to get out of there. I could sit through the whole Star Wars trilogy (original). By the end of Avatar, however, I was glad it was over.
But the director himself said it was based on capitalism as well D: Cameron said somewhere how capitalism was the source of imperialism… which was why we had imperialism…
.. lulz.
Anyway, I didn’t think too deeply in the plot because it’s a movie for crying out loud. The message is clear, yes, humans be greedy, and we should coexist with nature, and not let greed get the best of us, but as ze critics say, Cameron himself could not ave made zis movie without ze bloody capitalism and imperialism zat allowed zis technology to exist. If we lived like the natives, we would not even be close to what the technology is today. Which is why the Na’Vi are fighting with bows. And Arrows. Against hovering gunships.
:O
I mean, in the end, it’s an Utopian message, it doesn’t matter if it’s cliche or not, it’s a message, interpret it your own way. Cameron made a medley of a movie by combining the good aspects of certain genres, and you imagine the characters. He doesn’t force you to follow his characters. AMIRITE?
So, go see it if you haven’t, ’cause it is a good movie, the plot is weak no matter how you look at it, but that’s the point, you’re supposed to bridge those gaps and fill in the holes. Not all movies are supposed to dictate everything for you, you have to be a part of it. And zat is why zis movie deserves a globe or whatever award they give for movies dang it!
Arladerus said: You may watch a movie for its message and meaning, but I go to a movie for entertainment. It’s not good if I feel like my ass hurts and I want to get out of there. I could sit through the whole Star Wars trilogy (original). By the end of Avatar, however, I was glad it was over.First, that was a complete straw man argument. No where did I say to you that “movies should only be watched for its message and meaning.” (I included “only” because by saying you watch a movie for entertainment, you imply that the message and meaning aren’t entertaining.) I was countering people like you who called the movie’s plot* cliche or generic Hollywood liberal BS by explaining that message and trying to show its unique aspects (in terms of presentation of the message and the questions that message raises). Good job not addressing any of the real points I made, quickly changing topics to something much more favorable to you, and attempting to act like that’s what we’d been talking about all along.
If I were to play along, I’d say:
Just because something doesn’t fit your exact parameters doesn’t make it bad. I hate horror games and will never play them because I don’t like the stressing out and freaking out that comes with them. That doesn’t change the fact that Resident Evil 4 is an incredible game.Personally, I found the movie plenty entertaining as well. I don’t see how soaring through the air on awesome Banshees and fucking up helicopters wasn’t entertaining (one small example). Even if you’re not into violence, there was a nice romance side story, cool animals and environments everywhere you looked, etc. I really doubt this movie would be grossing over a billion dollars (on track to give Titanic a run for its money) if it didn’t feature broad entertainment.
*Plot and story is something appreciated much more on an intellectual level than what I think you’re implying by “entertainment,” similar to things like message, themes, and such. Still, I don’t think you’d argue a story can’t be entertaining, so why can’t other things on a similar level also be entertaining?
@David: Have you taken any history course that taught you anything about imperialism? I only ask because Cameron’s comment makes sense only if you have. Capitalism led to imperialism the same way our modern transportation system lead to car crashes. Our modern transportation system does not cause car crashes, but certain parts of it, when misused and combined with inattention, can lead to car crashes. Likewise, capitalism lead to imperialism lead by certain corporations. While these certain corporations (and thus imperalism) would not have been possible without capitalism, it wasn’t all of capitalism striking out at the natives, it was certain people in certain corporations misusing that system for greed.
You can argue that Cameron’s suggesting that greed ruins Capitalism, but that’s a criticism that’s really inherent in any condemnation of imperialism, as it’s one of the prime examples of just that.
Also, why the hell shouldn’t you think deeply about a movie? What makes them shallow? That’s news to me. Just because you didn’t doesn’t mean everyone shouldn’t. A movie is just as legitimate an art form as literature.
tarheel91 said: I’m not going to lie. I really am annoyed with some people in this thread. So much of the criticism comes from people who looked at the movie far too shallowly. For instance:“Man comes to appreciate the indigenous tribe and then witness how utterly evil and materialistic humans are.” A4Noob says this despite my explanation on the SAME F’ING PAGE explaining how it’s not that simple. It’s about imperialism. IMPERIALISM. This is not about humans or even capitalism in general. This is about imperialism.
Right. Because imperialism is such a current ordeal now a days that we need a huge budget film to revolve around it. This isn’t about capitalism? That’s pretty funny considering how the entire basis of the movie is on corporations exploiting the poor and impoverished, which seems to be the nucleus of all hollywood propaganda. Oh, and I laughed when they called it “unobtanium”, it’s real ironic. I already mentioned similar parallels like the Spanish invasion of the Native Americans. This is just beating the same dead horse like every other high budget film because script writers think it’s deep to be misanthropists.
tarheel said: “It’s imperialism, not ‘humans being super evil.’ As a member of what was the largest empire during the years of traditional imperialism, I’d expect you to know more about it. Imperialism was led by corporations like the one in the movie. They did what the corporation in the movie did to the Na’vi and Pandora to the native people of wherever and that land. See: Seminole Wars, West/East India Companies, Colonial Africa, etc. It’s something that still goes on in less direct ways (i.e. Iraq, Vietnam, etc.), and it’s something that most of us seem to accept pretty easily. What a lot of the stuff in this genre (Avatar included) tries to do is get people to see how wrong what’s happening is.”For the life of me I don’t understand why you put Iraq and Vietnam in there. The only “imperialists” I would imagine were the Soviet proxies in North Vietnam trying to conquer South Vietnam. But putting that aside, why is the European expansion a couple centuries (and even earlier) a prevalent modern issue? It isn’t and to bring that kind of parallel to an advanced human society is just ridiculous. No one can take it seriously because of how facetious every moment is. Example: The Na’vi tree being burned to the ground with the general saying, “Good job boys”.
What would be realistic? The Na’vi tribes being at war with each other. Similar to how South American tribes committed atrocious sacrifices to their god, which honestly make your examples look like cannon fodder. Yes, we know about Colonial Africa, and British/American conquest of modern-day USA. But are people aware of the brutality that commenced between the Iroquois and the Algonquians? Are people aware of the Arab slave trade in Africa. Hell I bet even script writers of Avatar are completely ignorant of White Gold, yet they’re more than anxious to jot down the condemnations of North Americans / Europeans.
I’m not trying to marginalize what transpired to the indigenous in Florida or across N.A. But the story line was unrealistic and overused. Though, I’m sure that won’t stop the writers from earning an Academy award.
A4NoOb said:tarheel91 said: I’m not going to lie. I really am annoyed with some people in this thread. So much of the criticism comes from people who looked at the movie far too shallowly. For instance:“Man comes to appreciate the indigenous tribe and then witness how utterly evil and materialistic humans are.” A4Noob says this despite my explanation on the SAME F’ING PAGE explaining how it’s not that simple. It’s about imperialism. IMPERIALISM. This is not about humans or even capitalism in general. This is about imperialism.
Right. Because imperialism is such a current ordeal now a days that we need a huge budget film to revolve around it. This isn’t about capitalism? That’s pretty funny considering how the entire basis of the movie is on corporations exploiting the poor and impoverished, which seems to be the nucleus of all hollywood propaganda. Oh, and I laughed when they called it “unobtanium”, it’s real ironic. I already mentioned similar parallels like the Spanish invasion of the Native Americans. This is just beating the same dead horse like every other high budget film because script writers think it’s deep to be misanthropists.
tarheel said: “It’s imperialism, not ‘humans being super evil.’ As a member of what was the largest empire during the years of traditional imperialism, I’d expect you to know more about it. Imperialism was led by corporations like the one in the movie. They did what the corporation in the movie did to the Na’vi and Pandora to the native people of wherever and that land. See: Seminole Wars, West/East India Companies, Colonial Africa, etc. It’s something that still goes on in less direct ways (i.e. Iraq, Vietnam, etc.), and it’s something that most of us seem to accept pretty easily. What a lot of the stuff in this genre (Avatar included) tries to do is get people to see how wrong what’s happening is.”For the life of me I don’t understand why you put Iraq and Vietnam in there. The only “imperialists” I would imagine were the Soviet proxies in North Vietnam trying to conquer South Vietnam. But putting that aside, why is the European expansion a couple centuries (and even earlier) a prevalent modern issue? It isn’t and to bring that kind of parallel to an advanced human society is just ridiculous. No one can take it seriously because of how facetious every moment is. Example: The Na’vi tree being burned to the ground with the general saying, “Good job boys”.
What would be realistic? The Na’vi tribes being at war with each other. Similar to how South American tribes committed atrocious sacrifices to their god, which honestly make your examples look like cannon fodder. Yes, we know about Colonial Africa, and British/American conquest of modern-day USA. But are people aware of the brutality that commenced between the Iroquois and the Algonquians? Are people aware of the Arab slave trade in Africa. Hell I bet even script writers of Avatar are completely ignorant of White Gold, yet they’re more than anxious to jot down the condemnations of North Americans / Europeans.
I’m not trying to marginalize what transpired to the indigenous in Florida or across N.A. But the story line was unrealistic and overused. Though, I’m sure that won’t stop the writers from earning an Academy award.
I love how you conveniently ignore that corporations lead and motivated all of the examples of colonialism being discussed. It’s a corporation colonizing a planet to exploit the natives and the land. How the hell ISN’T that imperialism. Corporations have always led imperialism, and that’s why you see a corporation leading it in the movie. Again, let me quote myself to explain unobtanium (since you seem incapable of reading previous posts):
“If you look at a lot of the stuff involving the corporation, it’s incredibly general. The thing they want is “unobtanium.” Both the leader and the security dude are complete caricatures. Why? It allows this story to make it’s focus imperialism in general, and not one specific case of it. Because of how generic that portion of the setting is, it allows references to various points in history and justifications used for things that were occurring then as well as allusions to countless pieces of film and literature with similar themes. If you look at other works such as Dances with Wolves and Heart of Darkness, it’s very easy to associate each piece with a specific conflict (with those two being associated with Native Americans and the Congo, respectively). This can limit the scope of the reader/viewer’s thinking, and undeniably limits the message the piece is making.”
Continuing with that line of thought, it also allows him to make comments about today. Whether you agree with it or not, he’s making connections between what America’s done in the past half century (Vietnam, South America, Iraq) with traditional imperialism, by referencing both in the movie. Sure, it’s not as direct, but there are some clear parallels between what’s America’s done/doing, and what’s happened with imperialism in the past. I’m not going to debate the legitimacy of that message, but I think most will agree it’s not the ludicrous Hollywood BS you want to pretend that it is. At the very least, it’s debatable.
Who the hell got Tarheel started? This is gonna be a long thread by the time he runs out of steam. ;O
MasterCheeze said: Who the hell got Tarheel started? This is gonna be a long thread by the time he runs out of steam. ;OMost of it’s me quoting myself. Look. People just don’t like reading the thread before posting on the interwebz. I’m basically saying the same thing over and over again. However, you know I’m never one to back down from an argument, so it will continue as long as necessary.
Here’s hoping me and you never get in an argument tarheel, I don’t let go of an argument until one of us is proven wrong, or someone starts crying 8D
Nass said: Now this thread is tl;dr-ableEpic lulz.
Anyway, I never said movies were shallow, I said that it is to you to interpret the message. Everything is for you to interpret the message. Please stop being pushy about things, I don’t want to argue, it doesn’t get anywhere.
Btw, I’m not an idiot, so please don’t imply that I am one. I realize that certain individuals create these problems, and that the system itself isn’t flawed, but that’s the same with everything – someone always ruins it for everyone. Always.
As for capitalism -> imperialism, I’m just repeating what Cameron said, k?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.