A slightly different perspective
I recently read the following article found here:
http://ca.movies.yahoo.com/feature/hmg-avatar-hidden-messages.html
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/w...-a-stylish-film-marred-by-its-racist-subtext/
I recently read the following article found here:
http://ca.movies.yahoo.com/feature/hmg-avatar-hidden-messages.html
One of the links in the above review led to this site:Does 'Avatar' Contain Hidden Messages?
by Brett Michael Dykes
December 23, 2009
Since it opened last week, James Cameron's much-anticipated film "Avatar" has won praise from movie critics and been a juggernaut at the box office. But some who have seen the film say that it contains hidden messages that are anti-war, pro-environment, and perhaps even racist.
For the benefit of those who haven't seen the film, a little nonspoiler background might be useful. The story is set in the year 2154 when Earth's inhabitants, having used up most of their natural resources through decades of living in excess, plan to use military force to conquer Pandora, a moon roughly the same size as Earth. Pandora, inhabited by a wise, peaceful, and nature-respecting people with blue skin called the Na'vi, is rich in a resource that the people of Earth desperately need.
The earthlings send in a crew of special-forces mercenaries armed with guns, bombs, and other sophisticated weaponry to attack and conquer the Na'vi (who some think resemble American Indians and Africans), despite the fact that they represent no direct threat to the inhabitants of Earth. Since humans can't breathe in Pandora's atmosphere, the military employs mind-controlled avatars that resemble the Na'vi in every way to venture out from their landing craft and explore the landscape. Sympathizing with the Na'vi after becoming acquainted with them and their customs, one of the human-controlled avatars becomes a turncoat and helps lead the people of Pandora in the defense of their homeland.
Are you beginning to get a sense of why some viewers noticed what they believe are underlying messages in the film?
Some prominent members of the media who screened the film certainly took note. In a glowing review for the Chicago Sun-Times, Roger Ebert noted that "Avatar" "has a flat-out Green and anti-war message" that is "predestined to launch a cult." Meanwhile Ben Hoyle, writing in the Times of London, noted that the film "contains heavy implicit criticism of America's conduct in the War on Terror." Further, Will Heaven of the Daily Telegraph said that the plot line involving people of color who wear "tribal" jewelry while sporting dreadlocked hair, being saved by a noble white man gave the film a "racist subtext" that he found "nauseatingly patronising."
But are these hidden messages really all that hidden? James Cameron himself hasn't been shy in publicly proclaiming the fact that he's an environmental activist who believes that humans and "industrial society" are "causing a global climate change" and "destroying species faster than we can classify them." In a recent interview with PBS' Tavis Smiley, Cameron admitted that he made "obvious" references in the film to Iraq, Vietnam and the American colonial period to emphasize the fact that humans have a "terrible history" of "entitlement" in which we "take what we need" from nature and indigenous peoples "and don't give back."
Further, one of the film's stars Stephen Lang told CNN that he is "not surprised at all" that some people have taken note of the film's political messages, mainly because the central theme of humans "destroying" a "pristine world" out of "blindness and greed" is so "overt."
Despite the obvious political undertones in "Avatar," at least one right-leaning critic doesn't think people who disagree with the film's ideology should totally dismiss it. In his review on the website Hot Air, Ed Morrissey writes, "Conservatives have more or less primed themselves to hate this film because of the presumed anti-war politics of the movie. It's there -- in fact, it's unmistakable -- but it's not as bad as one might presume." He goes on to note that "Avatar" is "entertaining" though "hardly a deep intellectual exercise."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/w...-a-stylish-film-marred-by-its-racist-subtext/
James Cameron's Avatar is a stylish film marred by its racist subtext
By Will Heaven
Last updated: December 22nd, 2009
Avatar was a spectacle, I’ll grant you that. The film’s 230-million-dollar budget guaranteed extravagant and often beautiful 3D special effects. But as I left the cinema last night, I couldn’t help questioning the weird mind behind it all. Was it James Cameron’s intention to be so nauseatingly patronising? And how could the famously Left-wing director have failed to pick up on his film’s racist subtext?
I won’t spoil the plot, but here’s the basic set-up: a group of mercenary humans have colonised a faraway planet, called Pandora, in order to extract an enormously valuable mineral found there. Pandora’s “natives” – a race of tall, blue-skinned aliens called the Na’vi – live on an area of land which is set to be mined. They won’t relocate, so the humans attack.
But the Na’vi aren’t your average extra-terrestrials. Blue skin aside, they’re essentially a childish pastiche of the “ethnic”, with recognisably human features. They wear Maasai-style necklaces and beaded jewellery which Cameron has borrowed from tribal East Africa. Their long, dark hair is dreadlocked. Their clothes are apparently Amerindian. They are armed with bows and poisoned arrows, and wear facepaint into battle. The main Na’vi characters are voiced by four black actors: Zoë Saldaña, C. C. H. Pounder, Laz Alonso and Peter Mensah; as well as one Cherokee, Wes Studi. The evil humans, needless to say, are white, male and middle-aged.
James Cameron has been very open about the politics behind Avatar. It’s about how “greed and imperialism tend to destroy the environment,” he said in a recent interview. “It’s a way of looking back on ourselves from this other world.”
If we look at his version of our planet, however, the view is overwhelmingly repellent. Pandora is to Cameron what Africa was to Joseph Conrad – it’s another, fictional ‘Heart of Darkness’, a place where a cruel imperial power subjects what is (perhaps unwittingly) depicted as a lesser race. Chinua Achebe, Conrad’s fiercest critic, wrote that “Heart of Darkness projects the image of Africa as ‘the other world,’ the antithesis of Europe and therefore of civilization, a place where man’s vaunted intelligence and refinement are finally mocked by triumphant bestiality.” Almost the exact same could be said of Avatar.
Take, for example, the relationship between the ethnic Na’vi and the animals which inhabit Pandora. Every interaction between them involves an act of quasi-consummation. The “natives” attach a spindly appendage to whatever raging animal they are trying to tame, resulting in a short struggle followed by an almost post-coital quiet. In another scene, one of the Na’vi is warned not to play with the same appendage or, he is told, “you’ll go blind.” The hint is heavy enough – it’s the same “triumphant bestiality” which Achebe criticised in Heart of Darkness.
By far the most contemptible theme in Avatar involves the hero, a young disabled American called Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington. Before the humans declare war on the Na’vi, Sully is sent to them (in the form of a blue-skinned avatar) in a last ditch attempt to find a diplomatic solution. But, lo and behold, he becomes one of them – sympathising so much with their plight that he decides to lead them into battle against the humans.
As Left-wing conceits go, this one surely tops all the others: the ethnic Na’vi, the film suggests, need the white man to save them because, as a less developed race, they lack the intelligence and fortitude to overcome their adversaries by themselves. The poor helpless natives, in other words, must rely on the principled white man to lead them out of danger.
Yuck. And there I was, thinking this sort of patronising world-view was dying out. But plainly it lives on in Hollywood. Avatar is artistic evidence of the ugly mindset which underlies so much of Left-wing thinking today: the belief that only the superior Western liberal is fit to lead the world into a better future. Other than a whole lot of style, this is all Cameron’s film has to offer – so I make that 230 million dollars wasted.