When I go see a movie, my review of it is usually binary: Funny (or not); Kickass (or not); Scary (or not). I’m always amused when people try to find the “deeper message” in popular films. I haven’t seen Avatar yet, but here is a list of things I’m being told it’s really about:
Annalee Newitz says it’s “just the latest scifi rehash of an old white guilt fantasy.”
Ross Douthat says it’s ”crass embodiment of capitalistic excess wrapped around a deeply felt religious message.”
Peter Klein says it’s the same age old Hollywood theme of “evil, materialist, capitalist, militarist humans versus nature-loving, low-carbon-footprint, New Agey savages so noble they would have made Rousseau blush.”
Stephan Kinsella says “at its core it was very libertarian.”
Peter Suderman says it’s a “derivative, overlong pastiche of anti-corporate clichés and quasi-mystical eco-nonsense.”
Emma Rosenblum says it’s got some gender issues too.
I wonder, because for all the sociological talk about people absorbing the messages they see in such films, how much does the average Joe (I know, that’s a gendered ethnocentric term) really notice these things and internalize them? My guess is that it’s a lot less than thought. Secondly, can you really attribute an objective message to a film (minus the director’s intentions) given the subjective perceptions of millions of individuals? It just seems mighty hard.
I’ll add my own interpretation when I go see it. For now, feel free to post any interesting reviews you find in the comments.
- Josh McCabe
People are funny eh
If you went and saw a vampire movie you’d not be inclined to be critical of the director or producer for his/her implied views on murder and blood sucking – you’d recognize it for what it is – fiction
Yet Avatar has piqued the ire of a lot of “economically minded” folk. I’ve seen many criticisms of the movie by people who seem to think there’s some sort of moral imperative there.
Is it possible that those who react to the “message” of the movie are confusing it with a documentary?
The lady doth protest too much, methinks…
It’s “just” a movie. It’s a brilliant movie too because it leverages on a lot of fundamental human nature and recent human culture. So what that it might seem to imply that nature is good and corporate greed is bad, that natives are good and consumerism is bad – so what? Will it have any effect on the way of things?
Cameron is a genius – he’s an example of who in the past might have been a Mozart or a Shakespeare – someone who gives the masses what they want paid for by whoever has the money to pay.
To purposefully fail to see the movie is in my opinion just foolishness akin to deciding you’d never want to listen to a Mozart opera – but worse, to see the movie and not thoroughly enjoy it for what it is here and now because your moral compass gets confused by the “messages” that resonate with your own personality disorder is a sign that you maybe need some serious therapy.
Pingback: The Sociology of Avatar « The Social Lens