Jerome and I went to see Avatar last weekend and I left the theater with my proverbial wheels turning. Here's where they've taken me so far.
I think everyone agrees that this movie’s visual aspects are a technical achievement that sets the bar at a new level and are just flat-out beautiful. We saw a brief “how it was done” piece on YouTube and the creativity and sheer hard work necessary for this film is astounding. The world where the story takes place -- Pandora…hmmm, could that mean anything? -- is gorgeous and the 3-D technology, while it takes some getting used to, was amazing. You can judge for yourself whether seeing it in 3-D is worth the extra cost (two tickets were $27 for us). I say probably and my husband says no.
The writing, however, is another matter. In a word, it’s disappointing. It is entirely predictable and James Cameron, who wrote as well as directed, paints every character in the broadest possible terms. The bad guys are 100%, over-the-top evil in the most stereotypical way possible, the good guys are angelic and there is no in-between, or there is but it‘s ignored (more about that later). Such black-and-white characterization is unrealistic and, in my mind at least, boring. It’s also a strange counterpoint to the incredibly rich color and visual texture of the Pandora world. It's a world of great beauty and dimension populated by cardboard cutouts.
Particularly problematic for me is the portrayal of the main characters. The Na’vi -- the race of blue beings native to Pandora who, I‘m sorry, look like stretched out Thundercats -- are rather obviously modeled on a mishmash of Native American, African and other tribal cultures. I’m no film major but I’m pretty sure one would say they exemplify the “noble savage” stereotype, magnificent, unspoiled natives at one with nature in a perfect utopian existence. While Cameron puts in some magical visual moments, the Na’vi characterization, especially their spiritual practices and beliefs, felt superficial. It seemed like Cameron read some blurb on Wikipedia about Native American spiritualism and then watched The Lion King with his kids and thought, “Yeah, that will work here. Let me toss in a little of this and a little of that and so what if I don’t have the first clue what any of it really means. People will think it’s all deep and spiritual and stuff.” I was also a bit troubled by the seemingly African features and accouterments of several of the Na’vi coupled with other features that were feline (meaning animalistic). Portraying people of African descent as animals or animal-like has an ugly, painful history and, while I may be seeing something that’s not there, it did give me pause. The Na’vi aspect of the movie would have been so much better if Cameron had created something original and not used a stew of identifiable Native American and African tribal imagery that he probably doesn't really understand.
There is a definite political and cultural message in this film, which in itself is not a problem. My issue is that Cameron puts it out front in such a heavy-handed way, using it as a blunt object and pounding the viewers with it constantly. I wanted to say, “OK I get it! You think the military people are amoral meat heads and nature is always perfect and harmonious and wonderful. The world is black and white, good and evil and everyone always knows which is which, all the time.” Now, I tend toward the peace/love/harmony, tree-hugger, nature-lover mentality myself so you’d expect me to dip this message in my coffee and eat it up for breakfast, but it was just way too obvious, stereotypical and force-fed for me to like.
One potentially interesting piece of the story is left completely untouched: Pandora is being mined by a private company for its stores of the laughably-named Unobtainium, aided by a group of scientists, with security provided by former military, and they are willing to commit genocide in order to get what they want. Yet the narrative perspective of the film holds that the scientists -- who are aiding this sacrilege in every way possible -- are the good guys while the company and the military/security are evildoers. (Hmm, I think there’s a message here about the military-industrial complex, if only I could figure it out. Think brain, think!) Why are the scientists wearing the white hats and the people they’re helping are wearing the black hats? Exploring this “good people doing bad things” aspect would have brought some depth and texture to the story but it’s never touched.
I realize I’ve spent most of my time talking about my problems with this movie. The bottom line for me is that it is without question a visual feast and is a good “popcorn movie” if you’re willing to overlook the obvious stereotypes and plot development you’ve seen a million times. It’s worth seeing for the technical achievement alone and should be viewed on the big screen to really get the full impact. I am, however, disappointed in the writing. James Cameron should, I think, stick to using his substantial envisioning and directing skills and let someone else write the scripts.