Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Found these snippets on the Avatar film page of Wikipedia, and they've been posted for months now (practically ever since the film's release) but they've been bugging me, so I wanted to share them. Here they are:
- Armond White of the New York Press wrote that Cameron used villainous American characters to misrepresent facets of militarism, capitalism, and imperialism.
- Russell D. Moore in The Christian Post concluded that propaganda exists in the film and stated, "If you can get a theater full of people in Kentucky to stand and applaud the defeat of their country, then you've got some amazing special effects."
Where to begin? Really? Where, exactly, in the film, was any facet of militarism, capitalism, or imperialism misrepresented? Is this Armond White serious? The plot of Avatar pretty much sums up how this country was purchased (without the Na'vi's victory, of course. In reality, warriors like Jake Sully just don't exist). And as Jake Sully so rightfully said: the strong prey on the weak, and nobody does a thing. That's the way it's always been, and always will be, unless we as a race undergo some seriously transcendental evolution. Greed and violence have always been the hands of imperialism, that irrational and unfounded belief of a superior race or culture. And left unchecked, you get exactly what Avatar conveys: a scorched earth. A big hole. Any country's military is nothing but an engine of lethal authority to further the ruling power's progress (and that is the agenda, if you ask me), and if the orders say "shoot", the trigger will be pulled: whether you're guilty or innocent. And as for capitalism, well, does anything really have to be said? It's a system that coddles greed and inequality and encourages an empty, embalmed outlook on other living beings as nothing more than competitors in a socio-economical ladder. And though Russell D. Moore's "enlightening" comment may flatter the more patriotic flagwavers, I can't help but take note of the idiosyncrasy of a "Christian" post expressing distaste of a film's aversion to militaristic violence. Common sense will tell anyone who has seen Avatar that the film is about, above all, I think, a respect for the beauty and value of life. Something that humans need to learn, and quickly. And if a love for peace and life makes me unpatriotic, well, there are worse things to be called. But I just don't want to listen to myself rant here. I want to know what others are thinking.