December 17, 2009, - 1:51 pm

Don’t Believe the Hype: “Avatar” Stinks (Long, Boring, Unoriginal, Uber-Left)

By Debbie Schlussel

If you want a Cliff’s Notes (or, I guess, Debbie’s Notes) version of my review of “Avatar,” refer back to my review of the just as awful (but about half as long) “The Battle For Terra,” (which was released in May).  The story, plot, etc. of the two movies are exactly the same.

avatar

Despite the out-of-control hype over “Avatar,” the movie is silly, long, boring, and heavy-handed.  And did I mention, sleep-inducing?  I’ve heard other movie critics and reports say that the 3D animation in this movie is “the most visually stimulating movie I’ve ever seen,” “the best 3D ever,” “Oscar material,” “will change cinema forever,” “a Hollywood colossus,” and even that it “caused motion sickness.”

Don’t believe the hype.  This bloated, highly overrated movie is none of these . . . with the exception of the “Oscar material” claims, since we know that the contemporary Academy Awards famously award far-left tripe like this. Did James Cameron really spend years of his life on this rotten stew?

Clocking in at nearly three hours, “Avatar” is an incredible waste of time.  It’s essentially a remake of “Dances With Wolves” and every other movie where we evil Americans terrorize the indigenous natives, kill them, take their land, and are just all around imperialistically wicked and inhumane.  Oh, and we’re destroying the environment, clearing precious giant trees and natural landscapes and killing rare animals and their habitats, in order to invade and harvest valuable substances under the ground.  Sound familiar?  Yup, just like a million diatribes from Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and every other far-left outlet about how we invaded Iraq for oil.

Yes, “Avatar” is cinema for the hate America crowd.

And, like “Dances With Wolves,” there is, of course, the standard stock White male and/or human character who “becomes one of them” and sympathizes with their plight, begging the evil humans–or evil Americans, take your pick–to stop the invasion, destruction, and wholesale theft.  It’s been in a million movies you’ve seen, including this summer’s far superior if equally heavy-handed and manipulative, District 9″ (read my review).

The story: Sam Worthington (who was fantastic in “Terminator: Salvation” – read my review) plays Jake Sully, a paraplegic U.S. Marine, who was injured while at war. His twin brother, who died under other circumstances, was a scientist and part of a government project developing “avatars” for interaction with the native race of the planet Pandora (wow, what an original planet name).  He’s not actually working for “the government” or “the military,” but a contractor a la Blackwater.  Yes, the propaganda is that thinly-veiled.

The U.S. has invaded Pandora to harvest a valuable mineral beneath the earth. It is using the avatars–beings comprised of the mixed genetic material of their human operators and the alien race on Pandora–to communicate with the natives and try to get them to cooperate and sympathize with the human goals.  Each avatar is controlled by the mind of the human possessing its DNA, while the human is “sleeping” inside a computer-equipped pod.

Jake is recruited because he has the same DNA as his deceased twin and, like his brother, resembles his avatar and can connect with it. The scientists are headed up by Susan “Sigourney” Weaver who plays her typical indignant, bitchy liberal self. Weaver is mad that the military people don’t want to understand and interact with the natives and instead want to harvest minerals instead of keeping the ancient trees that interact like computers with the other beings on the planet. But Jake is secretly working for the Marine General who wants to ship in, destroy the trees and the natives, and ship out, so we can save the dying earth, where “they’ve destroyed the mother” (meaning, Mother Earth).

Ultimately, though, Jake falls in love with one of the most prominent natives, the chief’s daughter, and learns to fly his flying dragon. He begins to oppose the Marine General. But it is too late. The soldiers are ordered in to start destroying Pandora’s nature and people.

Sound exciting to you? Trust me, I’m making it even more interesting than it is. I could barely stay awake. And the 3D isn’t as great as people are saying, either. Smurf-like natives made to look like overgrown American Indians, complete with warpaint, mohawks, and long ponytails (that have computer-like USB cable tendrils in them, which can communicate with nature–ludicrous).  Does that sound like earth-shattering stuff to you? They looked like Jar Jar Binks with arrowheads.  That’s not to mention the basically topless state of the female avatars, whose nipples are barely covered by a few strategically placed threads. Nice for a PG-13 flick with audiences sure to be populated by kids galore.

Sure, it was cool to see floating mountains and different animals and plants in bright colors. But ten minutes of that was enough. I didn’t need a full-course meal of three hours of America-hatred to go with it.

And I laughed a lot . . . at times that were supposed to be serious. To me, this joke of a movie was ridiculous in its absurdity and overt hating on Western civilization.

My father used to say that one can judge the strength of capitalism and freedom in a society by the level of creativity and originality in that society. “Avatar” is yet another loud, garish example from Hollywood that capitalism and freedom in America aren’t strong at all. It’s neither original nor creative.

It’s just a long bore. And a waste of your ten bucks. Not to mention three hours you’ll never get back.

Why drive to the movies, pay for tickets, and spend hours in a dark room, when you can just as easily read Noam Chomsky or the speeches of Hugo Chavez in the comfort of your own home and couch?

Same difference.

“Avatar” is an intelligence test.  If you fell for it, you failed.

FOUR MARXES PLUS AN OBAMA
karlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgkarlmarxmovies.jpgplus.jpgobamasmilingsmaller




Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,


204 Responses

I’ve been calling her “Susan” Weaver for years-first time I can recall seeing it in print.
Jim’s cartoon has nothing for me. After watching “Terminator Salvation” I said, “Playing in Jim Cameron’s sandbox, you know you’re going to get plot holes, no honest character motivations, bad dialogue, etc.”
Ava-tar this movie with the same lousy brush.

Douglas Q on December 17, 2009 at 2:37 pm

    You realize that James Cameron had nothing to do with Terminator: Salvation, right? I know if you say he did enough times then it becomes true in your head but that doesn’t make it actually true.

    I thought Avatar was a good flick. And, I would like to know exactly who out there really wanted the corporation to win? You are probably the same people who routed for the Hutu Death Squads in Hotel Rwanda.

    (Also, on a side note, they weren’t U.S. Marines and it never says they were. They were mercenaries most of which used to be “Marines” and knowing Cameron that means Colonial Marines.)

    T: Uh, where did I say that Cameron made Terminator: Salvation? RIF–Reading Is Fundamental. Try doing some . . . before you engage in premature articulation. And, no, I opposed the horrible stuff that happened in Rwanda and have written about it. Nice incorrect assumption, though. There you go again with your premature articulation. DS

    Tungsten on December 22, 2009 at 8:19 pm

Just what I thought when I posted my comments about the film earlier this week. I liked Cameron’s “Terminator” movies. But this isn’t one of them where he shines. I like a compelling, original story. Not 3 hours of leftist propaganda dressed up with special effects. The studio won’t make back the money they spent on this film, making the “Heaven’s Gate” flop look like a minor loss. Hollywood is the only business that can tell its customers to take a long awful movie. Oh it might win an Oscar for special effects but not for the story. “Dances With Wolves” was already a Best Picture winner almost two decades ago.

NormanF on December 17, 2009 at 2:41 pm

All I saw was the Apple QuickTime® trailer to come to a similar conclusion.

rus on December 17, 2009 at 2:42 pm

They better sell alot of toys and video games if they want to make any money.

patrick on December 17, 2009 at 3:03 pm

… and even that it “caused motion sickness.” …

Hmmm, I thought they were referring to people just tossing their lunch while trying to watch!

Freddy on December 17, 2009 at 4:05 pm

But this one does go a step further-it actually glorifies treason when marine betrays the Corps and goes to fight for the enemy. This is even one more step beyond John Walker Lindh and Adam Gadahn.

Skushnirov on December 17, 2009 at 4:09 pm

This movie will be number 1 for the weekend but it will be difficult if not impossible to turn a profit. What made Terminator 2 and Titanic so successful was the story and the stars Arnold and Leonardo Decaprio. Both films had people seeing them several times in theaters. I saw T2 three times and my sister-in-law saw Titanic 4 times. This film has none of that. My wife thought the previews looked stupid and thought it was either a video game or a cartoon. Cameron has alienated his female fan base and made a movie only for the liberal fanboy “Avatards” who will flock to this turkey this weekend.

majoru on December 17, 2009 at 4:20 pm

We kinda did kill the indigenous natives and take their land. Sorry if that sullies your denialist worldview and historical revision.

Bobo Teh Clown on December 17, 2009 at 4:30 pm

    No, we didn’t and it wasn’t their land.

    lexi on December 17, 2009 at 6:20 pm

    Oh, go read something new and true. Approximately 80-90% of the Indians died of communicable diseases for which they had no immunity, most of them without ever seeing a white man. A great many of the warrior tribes were spectacularly barbaric, encouraging even toddlers to participate in prolonged torture and cannibalism of captured enemies. The Spanish slavery and mass slaughter was certainly real – but I’m SURE that doesn’t interest you.

    poetcomic1 on December 17, 2009 at 7:15 pm

    Dear Mr. Clown: The natives wern’t indigenous. They came from Asia.

    Miranda Rose Smith on December 18, 2009 at 3:47 am

    It wasn’t their land… they were here first. Show me ANYWHERE in the freakin world where the indigenous people won out. We tried to live amongst the indians and some allowed it and some did not.

    There is a lot to know about how our forefathers tried to deal well with the indians and there is plenty on the record about how there was disgraceful behavior mixed with honorable agreements and treaties. Ultimately, the indians were overcome due to the rapid expansion of the United States and that expansion was incompatible with many tribes way of life. It’s not like we should have just stopped. We’ve done more with this country than they ever could have or desired to.

    These facts and history are not unique to the United States and we are not special in our history EXCEPT we did, in many way, make great attempts to deal fairly with the local tribes; and failing that, we pushed them out or if they fought us, we fought back. There is nothing uniquely American about it. This is what happens when cultures collide and an overwhelming force of modernization overcomes a more primitive one.

    yippie on December 18, 2009 at 11:33 am

    @ bobo- quote:”We kinda did kill the indigenous natives and take their land. Sorry if that sullies your denialist worldview and historical revision.”

    I’m half cherokee – got direct ancesters who were on the trail of tears. But before you hang your hat totally on the injsutice and inhumanity of whites vs redman, here’s a factoid for you – the “five civilized tribes” displaced to oklahoma under the Jackson adminstration were at the time, and continued to be, owners of black slaves. Many, including my mother’s great grandfather fought for the confederacy. So, there’s injustice and there’s injustice. Even today the Cherokee Nation (the ones in Oklahoma, not the Eastern band still in the Carolinas) won’t allow tribal membership to blacks having Cherokee ancestry.

    Again, all of this was 150 years or more ago. No American alive today engaged in either genocide or slavery,despite the left’s rants on Cheney-Bush, and the tendency of certain domestic born minorities to scream foul and play the victim from generation to generation in perpetuity. Many refugees and european immigrants however, HAVE been the victims of both in their lifetimes. This movie apparently, like nearly everything coming from the left, is a canard /red-herring to continue the “Blame America, first last and always” proposition.
    ***********************************************************
    Btw, Debbie – I nearly spit on my keyboard laughing, when I saw the “Four Marxes plus an Obama” rating you gave the flick. 😀

    Mistress_Dee on December 18, 2009 at 12:00 pm

    More accurately, we joined in the general contention for land and scalps that was well under way before Columbus ever showed up. Just so happened that gunpowder kinda gave us the edge. One thing worse than ethnocentrism is temporocentrism, defined as imposing our present standards back onto previous times. Always remember, Bobo, the past couldn’t have been too terrible, for out of it came …you!

    GJ Tryon on December 19, 2009 at 12:27 am

So you didn’t like “Avatar,”huh? Well,I hope you like “The Princess and the Frog” better. I sure did.

Ghostwriter on December 17, 2009 at 4:50 pm

Thats what I told my wife about 2 weeks ago Debbie. It’s simply Dances with Wolves in space.

James on December 17, 2009 at 4:53 pm

Well Bobo, at least the “indigenous natives” here are getting their land back, one Indian casino at a time.

JimA on December 17, 2009 at 6:12 pm

we were right, we said you’d not like it! yay!

lindapolver on December 17, 2009 at 6:32 pm

After watching this soppy mess of a freak show, my brain began to feel like a thick tar had congealed in my brain, leaving little room for neurons to sputter back to life. I sucked my thumb and watched fox news for six hours to get my bearings back.

Hava (Brain)Tar on December 17, 2009 at 6:48 pm

What an ignorant review.

Every note has been played a million times, just as every story has been told. Name one movie that has come out in the last 10 years that is truly a new idea.

While the rest of Hollywood is remaking classics like King Kong or Clash of the Titans, or turning comic books and cartoons into full fledged feature films, or milking the past with sequels, prequels and spin-offs; Cameron gives us something bold and daring, a true leap from anything we’ve seen before.

In the end, only the box-office figures will tell, and only the test of tim can show how the public will receive this film.

I enjoyed it and plan on seeing it again. It was the most original thing I’ve seen in years and the first time I bothered paying for a movie ticket in months.

Ex-Pat on December 17, 2009 at 6:51 pm

    “a true leap from anything we’ve seen before.”

    How? By remaking Dances With Wolves in a Ferngully setting? That’s original? The visuals look like a bad PlayStation game.

    Douglas on December 17, 2009 at 10:54 pm

I plan on waiting for the DVD…at discount. Anyone making a cursory pass at my weblogs knows that American society has numerous flaws, but providing oil so I don’t have to freeze my butt off every winter isn’t one of them. Avatar is an old story retold with the assistance of sorta-kinda new special effects. It will appeal to those in their early teens who haven’t had to pay their own bills yet.

The Terrorist's Advocate on December 17, 2009 at 7:13 pm

James Cameron was at his best in three movies: the first two Terminators and Aliens. Abyss wasn’t too bad. My favorite part of Titanic was when Leo DiCaprio froze to death.

Richard on December 17, 2009 at 7:13 pm

The natives in this look like the bastard children of smurfs and volley ball players in a Pepsi commercial.

tempus fugit on December 17, 2009 at 8:10 pm

I though “Aliens” was the most bad-ass sci-fi movie I’ve seen. I thought Sigourney Weaver was far better in it than in “Avatar.” You know its a bad movie when an actor is just there to collect a much-needed paycheck.

NormanF on December 17, 2009 at 10:59 pm

C’mon, Debbie! It’s the perfect flick for the Age of Obama —
http://penetratinginsightsintotheobvious.com/obamatar.html

MA: OMG, that is Frickin’ HILARIOUS!!! Is that your artwork? I LOVE IT! DS

Michael Asher on December 17, 2009 at 11:50 pm

    Thanks, Debbie! Guilty as charged.

    Michael Asher on December 18, 2009 at 2:07 pm

I guessed right.

Screw the big budget movie, I hope the producer goes bankrupt and doesn’t get a bail out.

Joe on December 18, 2009 at 1:14 am

Everyone go see The Blind Side instead.

Don’t give your money to the anti-American, pro-communist Cameron.

mark on December 18, 2009 at 1:19 am

Regarding DANCES WITH WOLVES, which I found boring, pretentious and overlong: you don’t have to be a 20th or 21st century America-hating Hollywood lefty to sympathize with the American Indians (I grew up before people started saying “Native American.”) CHEYENNE AUTUMN anyone? KEY LARGO? As early as the 19th century, Louisa May Alcott painted a sympathetic portrait of a White man in sympathy with the Indians. Anyone besides me remember the charcater of Dan in Jo’s Boys?

Miranda Rose Smith on December 18, 2009 at 2:06 am

“Oh, go read something new and true. Approximately 80-90% of the Indians died of communicable diseases for which they had no immunity, most of them without ever seeing a white man. A great many of the warrior tribes were spectacularly barbaric, encouraging even toddlers to participate in prolonged torture and cannibalism of captured enemies. The Spanish slavery and mass slaughter was certainly real – but I’m SURE that doesn’t interest you.”

Oh, so that means we can take someone’s land that’s not ours because they’re barbaric. That makes it ok?
You right-wing crazies!

Alex on December 18, 2009 at 2:09 am

    Dear Alex: Every occupied inch of land on the planet was taken from SOMEBODY.

    Miranda Rose Smith on December 18, 2009 at 2:23 am

I knew I saw this before, just couldn’t remember the name, it was “battle for terra”. Netflixed it a few months ago then saw avatar commercials and thought they just remade it it in live action with more crappy evil human messages.

might netflix avatar, but not at the top of my list.

ender on December 18, 2009 at 2:27 am

Thanks Debbie and co for reminding me why I am no more a conservative than a bleeding liberal. The denial here over the destruction of Native American culture, way of life, the theft of their land – hey it never happened according to reactionaries like you lot and if it did, they got what they deserved ’cause you know Native Indians weren’t as pure as the driven snow, and warred among themselves. Just because so many of them died from diseases they contracted from Europeans for which they had no immunity doesn’t mean many of them weren’t massacred by the white man – it’s in the history they don’t teach you at school, and their land was stolen and their way of life destroyed. The reservation system – how do you think it happened? Some moron above says their land wasn’t stolen, no that’s right, the Indians were living on the clouds and under water in the Great Lakes with the fishes. And Native children weren’t forcefully taken from their parents, sent to white schools far away from their communities, beaten if they spoke their native tongue and Indians weren’t harrassed for practicising their own religious ceremonies well into the twentieth century, even though they were. Sand Creek, Wounded Knee, the trail of tears – hey it never happened according to you lot and if it did it’s what them Injuns deserved for stealing the white man’s land before he got there or for not being perfect angelic human beings unlike the arriving European immigrants.

Your attitude to Native Americans and the guilt that drives your denial of this dark side of American history reminds me of the Left and their hostile attitude to Jews that they can’t even admit to.

On the movie Avatar itself, it does look a long bore with awful dialogue that I am going to avoid. There has been enough original and good SF written that can be adapted for the screen but instead it’s usually awful Star Trek fodder or this Avatar crap that gets made.

Hey Debbie, the destruction of the Lakota (and other tribes) Indians under successively ruthless US administrations toward the end of the nineteenth century actually happened (what ‘Dances with Wolves’ for all its significant flaws covers). Denying this as you clearly appear to, is no different to denying that the Jews were persecuted, harrassed and massacred by the Russians under the czars. Hey Debbie you know what a reactionary is, look it up – it’s what you are. Along with lightweight. Debbie S is like the right-wing equivalent of Ralph Nader.

Larry on December 18, 2009 at 2:38 am

    Larry,
    All nations and peoples have done good and bad things over the centuries. The problem I have with the political left is that they wish to define America by only the negative. The fact is that America has done more good than any other nation in world history. We have freed more people from tyranny and allowed more people to prosper than any other nation. Have we done wrong? Yes, but name me a nation that has not. On balance, no country has done better than the U. S. Those who hate America only wish to see the negative.

    Dan on December 18, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    Larry seems to be a typical lib. All talk but no action. If he REALLY meant what he said. He would give all of his possesions back over to some indian tribe and pay for his return trip to Europe… never to return!

    MO on December 18, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Seen it. Loved it.

Once again Cameron helps push film technology one step further, with his groundbreaking take on 3d projection. Its understandable that this movie is not for everyone. I believe it demands a certain level of intelligence as well as participation from the audience to get the most of it.

If you want to go to a movie to shut of your brain and get fed information, then “21”, “Spy Kids 3d” or “Pluto Nash” might be your thing.

Avatar rocks!

It is definetly going to make its money back, and then some.

As for the whole US comparison, with Iraq for Oil and all that. Step outside the US for a moment and see how many countries out there that support these wars (Iraq, afghanistan). Even though a handfull of silly republicans on this site disliked this movie for this reason, that does not mean the rest of the world will follow.

This might even be a likely reason why so many outside of America will dig this movie.

g.f.y.s. on December 18, 2009 at 4:27 am

Larry, you are reading into Debbie’s post things that she never said. She put down the movie, but did not say things you claim she did. Reread her post without having those coloured glasses of yours.

Regarding the movie itself, I won’t go see it. In general if movie takes three hours, there should be very good reason for it and most that long movies don’t have it. Reading the synopsis I see no reason why the story couldn’t be told in hour and half by competent screenwriter and director. That’s one reason. Second one is that Cameron’s directing in general has dropped over the years (his over reliance to special effects has degenerated his skills in directing) so why should I waste money on this when there is better films out there to see. I’ll rather see small budget film that is well made, than hyped big budget film.

Niko on December 18, 2009 at 5:07 am

    Dear Niko: DANCES WITH WOLVES was half an hour too long. The ending should have been “The cavalry attack the village. Dances with Wolves, like Louisa May Alcott’s Dan, dies defending his adopted people.”

    Miranda Rose Smith on December 18, 2009 at 5:22 am

The very basic problem of this movie is that it totally disregards its own premise once they get to Pandora. Given the state of Earth, unobtanium is the savior of the human race. Among other things, it lets us get off the shithole planet. And maybe make it less of a shithole. Fixing your power transmission and waste issues probably helps life on Earth. But the big one is that it plausibly let’s the human race leave by enabling FTL coms and effective .7c space travel. And energy-free superconductors are of course highly desirable on the spacecraft because it cuts your heat sink requirements dramatically and cuts your power requirements for running the ship. And you don’t get into the loop of having to cool the superconductor to save energy.

In the scriptment, it’s also clear that Pandora is not the only resource exploitation area for a resource-starved Earth. RDA operates elsewhere and they would need .7c starships for those resources as well.

So unobtanium helps the energy situation on Earth, enables easier far-solar and extra-solar resource exploitation, and enables a chance for humans on a large scale to escape Earth if they find something that is either habitable or can be made that way.

The story should have been over a lot more than greed and I suspect that Cameron did realize that at one point or another in the 10 years of working on this. It’s probably not in there because it exceeded his storytelling grasp to still make Jake “right” in those circumstances.

The reason I say ignoring this angle is poor is because it lets you make some fantastic “bad” guys. Instead of a greedy corporation, you now have wide-eyed true believer crusaders. Doesn’t have to be all of them on planet, but it would be considerably more jarring to have a couple characters leaning this way. Some implicit reluctance given the stark situation – maybe they like the Na’vi – but absolute Knight Templar brutality and ruthlessness to get the job done because humanity is at stake.

It also would screw up the strawmanning by giving the audience competing rooting interests. Good book sci-fi would tend to do just this. Authors like Sophie’s choice situations like “two worlds enter, one world leaves.” To wit:

Humans: “We need to rip your planet apart to save our species.”

Na’vi: “The deposit is under our sacred tree, the flying mountains are sacred, and we’re not too thrilled about this whole ‘remove 20% of Pandora’s mass and ship it to your solar system’ long term plan either.”

Humans: “You’r right, that would probably be the end of your biosphere. We’re sorry for your loss.”

Na’vi: “….this is bad.”

Of course, this would make Jake’s choice to associate with the natives more asinine than it is and we can’t have the other side actually having a point. It would still be a much more interesting plot and require characters to make much more difficult choices.

Add to this the whole stupid Vietnam and 9/11 analogies plus the “noble savage” clichee (why Hollywood still clings to that one I just cannot fathom) and even from the POV of someone who is not an American (me) you get a movie that is preachy, anti-civilizational propaganda about living in harmony with nature made by people who have the luxury not having to do just that.

Stratomunchkin on December 18, 2009 at 5:20 am

It’s also really bad and inconsequential story-telling if you think about it for more than a second. Just imagine what the Na’vi did just did:

How does eradicating a mining colony make it less likely that you’ll be burned down to the bedrock in the long run? Your stuff is still valuable, you’ve proven you’re unwilling to negotiate, and you’ve demonstrated you’re a threat on the ground . . . Hey, wow, the atmosphere’s on fire, and what’s that big rock…?!

Stratomunchkin on December 18, 2009 at 5:27 am

On the movie itself, it is worth pointing out that ‘navi’ means prophet in Hebrew, like the prophet Daniel for example is ha(the)Navi Daniel in Hebrew. I haven’t read what Cameron has said on this, but I assume this is not a coincidence. In other words, the indigenous Navi are as wise as ‘prophets’, in tune with the cosmos and nature’s harmonies and thus having powerful intuitive aspects to their nature, they prophecise the consequences of greed and disregard for nature’s balance blabla.

Larry on December 18, 2009 at 7:12 am

I figured you wouldn’t like it. You asked us what we thought aobut this movie and after seeing the trailer I knew it was liberal puke. It is funny I just talked to a dim bulb lady and she said she watches movies because she hates politics. Idiots like her are tools for the Hollywood set and yeah she voted for Obama.

CaliforniaScreaming on December 18, 2009 at 8:38 am

I have to agree with Richard, the first 2 Terminator flicks
and Aliens were Cameron’s best and he’s been slipping ever
since. Hollywood loves a production where we are whipping
ourselves over our society’s past sins and you throw it some
environmental propaganda and it’s an instant winner for the
Oscars. Sure Cameron is a genius at adapting new technology
into his films, but this one sounds like a stinker.

For those who want to punish us for our ancestors’ treatment
of the Indians, if America hadn’t expanded all the way to the
Pacific, the British or the Russians would have gotten there
first. Whether they would have been nicer to the Indians is
debatable, but I had nothing to do with it. Apparently there
are those among us who would rather our ancestors had just stayed in Europe.

Daniel on December 18, 2009 at 8:59 am

I don’t understand the love of T2 and Titanic from the people here who don’t like Avatard.

T2 was more of the same left wing junk. It was totally ridiculous with the liquid stuff the Terminator was made of. The John Connor, played by Furlong, character was such a jerk I was hoping he got killed. And, as usual, the far left pinko Cameron junk.

Titanic was an overrated chick flick. All the poor people were happy and jolly, the people with money were jerks and murderers. Yawwwwwwwn. The story of Jack and Winslett’s characters was just plain silly and unoriginal. And I gag everytime I hear that stupid Celine Dion song.

Cameron does make movies that stretch the boundaries technically, but he basically recycles the same plot.

Hmmmm…I wonder how much resources and energy Cameron has consumed making these movies and all the jet fuel and other promoting his movies?

I loved the first Terminator and Aliens, but Cameron hasn’t put out a decent movie afterwards.

Jeff_W on December 18, 2009 at 9:29 am

Oh, as I always say for the people shedding crocodile tears over the injuns and how the mean ole white guys treated and treats them, please find some and hand over your land to them to ease your conscience.

Sorry, but stuff happens and who said they had sole ownership, anyway?

There’s winners and losers. If there were someone else on the land and the injuns had more weapons I am sure they killed whoever was on the land before them.

Again, if it bothers you so much, do the right thing and hand over the deed to “your” land to the nearest tribe and feel better about yourself.

Jeff_W on December 18, 2009 at 9:34 am

One thing I’ll give Dances With Wolves: Not all of the indians were good guys. The scalping scene alone points out the blood thirstiness of some individuals/tribes.

So I ask anyone who has seen Avatar (or been involved in its making): is Avatar at least as balanced as Dances in this regard?

Speaking of which, couldn’t Cameron have made the “whites” non-Earth people who just happen to look like us? Nah, that would have defeated his in-your-face-America purpose.

I hope he fails, too (Cameron AND Obama).

nolotrippen on December 18, 2009 at 10:29 am

Just a question for defenders of this movie – particularly the Native American angle. Granted that Europeans came to American a did awful things to the Indians. I think anyone who’s been alive for the last twenty or thirty years has had time to absorb the message. So why does Cameron feel the need to preach to us about it? Alright, JC, we get it. We got it a long time ago. Now how about telling us a story we haven’t already heard a million times?

Bugs on December 18, 2009 at 10:52 am

Saw this movie last night and loved it.

Yes, Dances With Wolves redeux it certainly was, but it was every bit a specticle for the eyes as promised.

I’m as conservative as they come, but I don’t need to live in an echo chamber either. It does not offend me one bit to see greed portrayed as something bad.

That the greedy in this movie were what appeared to be an American corportaion, is something I can live with, I mean there have been greedy corporations that do dubious things in the past hasn’t there?

My fellow conservatives, we risk becoming like the leftist pc police, we start squeeling like little girls over a movie because it offends our sense of what is justice.

Lets not get too pompous and risk becoming one of the perpetually offended crowd. Pick our battles wisely, this aint one of them.

Silk on December 18, 2009 at 12:23 pm

    Right on!

    ggg. on December 20, 2009 at 5:09 am

Sorry, Silk, I disagree.

First, few are “squeeling like little girls” just because we are saying we don’t care for this pinko pablum.

My and most others’ objections is this is so unoriginal, the rich white evil corporation story.

Come to think of it, I think it’s you who is squealing like a girl trying to sound like too cool for school phony conservative.

Jeff_W on December 18, 2009 at 1:15 pm

You people with this “uber left” conspiracy mentality are a bunch of damned idiots. First of all, if you want to read into this MOVIE’s political perspective fine. Cameron obviously suggests he is pro environment and anti genocide. If that is uber left, then you are suggesting that the right is pro genocide and anti environment. While evidence suggests that many if our congressional leadership who call themselves conservatives actually do follow this line, as a conservative myself I reject and resent the notion. And as for the STORY being hard on the military, well if American marines EVER commit genocide I hope to god that the indiginous victims of said act rise up and cut them down in an equally brutal fashion as depicted in Avatar. If you put country, patriotism and profit before humanity you are trash and you with certainly suffer in Satan’s hell for all eternity.

Abraham Zilver on December 18, 2009 at 1:29 pm

Should call it “Dances with Smurfmonkeys”. I see treason, ani war, anti anything military and just plain ole commie BS. Not going to spend a nickle to see it. Or if i do I will go in and throw up and create a lawsuit for not warning me of motion sickness. I throw up real easy, so I should go after a big lunch huh???

Obama will love it I’m sure. If he could only be sitting in the row in front of me…

DUSTY on December 18, 2009 at 3:12 pm

i think, that if you are whatching avatar and feel nothing like ms schlüssel here: you are dead on the inside.
oh and if you are bored in the first ten minutes of a movie, you are not paying attetion or allready have decidet that you wont like it no matter what…

cut corners on December 18, 2009 at 4:44 pm

DS and commenters…. one thing everyone seems to ignore is that the prevailing themes of history tend to repeat. Presume for a moment that an emerging empire will come forth at the expense of America. Look at every single world dominating power and the story is the same. This should remind us of the need for vigilance. It is peculiar to me that the right is so pissed about the themes of the movie. Technically, it should be embraced since it would be prime fuel for motivating the kinds of defensive (and offensive) posturing that the right advocates. Think bigger picture. Push your thinking beyond simple talk-show drivel. Economic , information-based, energy-based (zero cost energy… no money in producing it), and other perculiar issues under the radar is what could push us aside. And it will not be obvious. Think!

reader on December 18, 2009 at 4:45 pm

The main character of the movie is inside a tube controlling his avatar by remote control. Are the space marines so inept that they couldn’t just pull the plug?

The Terrorist's Advocate on December 18, 2009 at 5:01 pm

Hey, Jeff_W, HOW THE HELL is Terminator 2 left-wing? Are you watching it from a distorted perspective that machines are whites and the humans are the underdog? Whatever perspective you are watching it from, the parallels with our world in terms of politics are too vague and convoluted to be drawn.

For me, the clear themes are heeding unchecked technology expansion. If that’s left wing, then so be it.

Vagabond75 on December 18, 2009 at 5:56 pm

@Jeff W.

Well now that I think of it, I am a too cool for school conservative.

I’m certainly not following lock step with the mentality that if what I’m watching doesn’t blend well with my world view I must be offended.

As I said before, if you’all want to go down this path of being offended at every corner, your gonna sound like whining wusses..yep, I am too cool for school, at least the school of the perpetually offended.

You on the other hand are free to take your soap box and list of greivances and have yourself a nice cyber tantrum.

Have fun with that…lol.

Silk on December 18, 2009 at 7:35 pm

Wow, thanks for saving me the big bucks. I was actually thinking of going too.

Nothing worse than seeing a nearly three hour flick. This one sounds like a watch watcher – someone like me in a boring movie, constantly looking at my watch to see what time it is.

John Rudolph on December 18, 2009 at 8:55 pm

Avatar is proof that one’s personal political views (left or right) need to be kept out of movies. People go to the movies to suspend themselves from reality, not to be educated on one’s biased viewpoints for 2 hours.

I had little interest in the flick for the special effects alone, but I just lost interest all together after hearing what it was basicly about.

Squirrel3D on December 18, 2009 at 9:36 pm

I was watching TV the other day, and a 1950’s movie “House of Strangers” came on. It was incredible, it was real, it talked about honor, love, hatred, family, forgiveness, duty, etc..

Hollywood has become irrelevant ever since it was hijacked by those with ulterior motives.

I say watch 50’s movies, the old ones show how America once was and what it should get back to. Almost everything since then is deterioration. Sure, there are some gems, but the vast majority is pure propagandizing. It would be irresponsible, if not downright dangerous, to subject one’s mind to that repeatedly.

Bill on December 19, 2009 at 2:48 am

Nav’i carry weapons, both men and women, in public. Gun rights?

The movie champions property rights. Kelo?

An outsider, whose people threatens war, is allowed into their culture to examine it and be a part of it. the US is an Open Society? Free trade?

The movie depicts a soldier who fights for a cause that transcends his culture and race. Revolutionary war? American Civil war?

And I got all that from simply watching the trailer.

I am beginning to think that conservatives did not loose the culture war but were so blinded by their own orthodoxy that they long ago surrendered it over to the left while simultaneously shooting themselves in the leg.

Anyway as a libertarian it is hard for me to miss the blinding, if not heavy handed, allusions to liberty found in this movie.

It may be stinker and boring but the knee jerk reaction of calling it left wing is misplaced.

Joshua Corning on December 19, 2009 at 4:57 am

    Was prepared to give this one a pass Joshua…

    But I have to say you made some pretty good points. One seems to be that it helps to read/watch between the lines of the overt lefty stuff to take away what really matters in life according to some:

    Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    Will think it over..

    =8-)

    mrrabbit

    mrrabbit on December 19, 2009 at 12:54 pm

It’s a 20th Century Fox movie. James Cameron has been all over the Fox Network promoting this. Fox = conservative/right. I’m thinking Fox slighted Deb in some way and this is her way of getting revenge. It’s never quite what it seems with people like her. She’s using that big ole high IQ of hers on some of you and I think it’s working. Don’t be a sheep. Think for yourself.

Brian on December 19, 2009 at 9:50 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field