• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

James Cameron's "Avatar" (grading and discussion)

Grade "Avatar"

  • Excellent

    Votes: 166 50.0%
  • Above Average

    Votes: 85 25.6%
  • Average

    Votes: 51 15.4%
  • Below Average

    Votes: 11 3.3%
  • Terrible

    Votes: 19 5.7%

  • Total voters
    332
Are there such outstanding performances in "Avatar", though? I'm having a hard time seeing that when so much of the time is spent in the animated realm. Voice acting is probably underappreciated, but even taking that into consideration I don't see that any acting performance was what I'd call "oustanding". The only one I might consider is Saldana's, possibly

this is not to say that I felt "Star Wars" was rife with them, because it really wasn't. nothing embarrassing, mind you... but nothing of special note.
 
Braindeer, I have to say that I am just amazed by someone of your "feminist" persuasion (if I understand you correctly) would criticize Cameron for his use of female characters. :wtf:

Either you are ignorant of history, or you are choosing to ignore it (not sure which is worse) , but Cameron is probably *the* action film maker for strong female roles, and Avatar is no exception.

I mean, if you criticize Cameron for this, how do you even STAND TO WATCH any other SF or action films??? :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

I'm fine with you disliking Avatar - but this is just such a batshit crazy argument to make. Oh well.
 
Funny, I thought Grace and the female soldier pilot died like heroes. Why can't women be heroes? Why was it sexist for the pilot to go down in battle, honoring her principles by not having fired on the holy tree of souls? There's nothing sexist about her death and there's nothing sexist about women dying as soldiers. Neytiri was a fighter. She saved her husband at the very end. What's this "safe" little mate argument anyway?

They didn't die like heroes, they were punished for not fitting the roles appointed to female characters, ie. wife or mother. Also, it wasn't their principles they died for. It was Jake's.

Traditionally in film if women step outside of their pre-arranged roles, they are punished. See pretty much any literature on feminism and film criticism.

You know, Braindeer, I teach American literature and cultural studies (meaning I'm not entirely uneducated on the matter) and while you're right that this is a motif that can be tracked through film history (literature, too), it is one possible reading. Since you're alluding to feminist criticism, you should know that there is never only one possible (let alone a "right") reading. Feminists are notorious for having all kinds of critical discourses going on (not a bad thing per se), but in fact so all over the map that it is positively antithetical to feminist thought to imply that there is.

Your argument strikes me as an attempt to pseudo-scientifically justify your dislike of the film. And I now realize that is precisely what bugged me about your post, your undue invocation of the gender card, which, in my opinion, is uncalled for in this case. Attack Transformers for stereotypical representation of women. Or the horrible It's Complicated. Or many other films this year or any year. But Avatar? Sure, women are always marginalized or penalized. But that's our culture, Avatar didn't invent that. Instead, one should be thankful for small favors and celebrate the fact that at least, this one has prominent female characters - in positions of power, no less - brilliant scientist, clan leader/warrior, a soldier... and they're all good guys (gals ;)). Those who die die in fact for their own ideals, not Jake's: Grace gets killed trying to save the Na'vi from exploitation, which she has always tried to work against (long before Jake arrived), Trudy dies doing the same after having not only broken the MALE HERO out of prison and deciding not to take part in the slaughter not because of him, but her own conscience. There's lots of female agency in Avatar that not male-initiated or aimed at traditional female stereotypes - seeking the domestic life and husband or motherhood. Watch An Education (or Twilight, if you want to feel like banging your head on the furniture afterwards) for some of that.

As for your argument about Neytiri... it just goes to show that when arguing with feminists, you're often just wasting your time if they insist on regurgitating the old hat "female characters are always portrayed as such-and-such". That's Cultural Studies 101, not feminism. A modern feminist perspective might point these things out and then also see the other possible reading above. Except of course when you're pursuing a certain political agenda and you plan to abuse a movie for tired polemics in service of same agenda.

I'm grateful that I can enjoy a film such as it is, let myself be absorbed by it - and then also see it from a scientific perspective and shred its ideology to pieces. But doing that will never compromise my enjoyment. That's called dialectics. Try it!

EDIT: As for Cameron's misstep being making Neytiri "sexy", you're utterly misunderstanding not just the medium film, but our culture itself. Where in the world is "physically attractive" not being peddled as the ultimate ideal? Film, music, advertising... Anything commercial sells with sexiness, male or female. How is this unique to Avatar? How can this be a point of criticism here when this is so ubiquitous? You're making such basic and obvious points that methinks it's you who has only started her reading of (feminist) criticism.
 
Last edited:
Saying "she lands nicely in a non-threatening domestic pigeon hole" makes me think one didn't even see the movie. There's nothing in it to suggest that, whatsoever.

Christ...she saved his ass at the end.

"One" thinks perhaps you have never read ANY feminist criticism. No reason you should have, I'm just saying.

As a character, she IS non-threatening. For one thing, she's a sex object. A love interest. That is essentially her character. Or at least, that's all I got from her. There is never any question that she might do anything other than marry a) Jake, or b) the other guy. Whatever his name was. She may fight, she may be "spunky", a skilled warrior, whatever - all of this is negated by Cameron making her SEXY. That's pretty standard in modern society - a woman with power must be made non-threatening by turning her in to a sex object/love interest/wife. Which Cameron does, quite successfully.

I'm afraid I can't argue against your statement on her saving his ass. My memory's a little fuzzy, it was a few weeks ago that I saw the film and I can't remember how the final fight with the military muscle man plays out. So I'll let you have that one ;)

Actually, I have studied feminism quite extensively. How do you feel she's non-threatening? I found her powerful.

Women can be sexy and fall in love without being weakened. Jake was just as sexy and fell in love just as hard, why is he not weakened by that? You're making the classic feminist mistake of assuming the only way a woman can mean anything is if she's sexless.

They fell in love, yes. She was sexy, yes. But she was also a powerful warrior and heir to the keeper of her culture's sacred rights. It was quite obvious to me in the film that their tribe was neither a patriarchy or a matriarchy, but was shared equally. When Jake first showed up at home tree, it was Neytiri's Mother who shut everyone up with her presence and made the big decisions. On top of all that, Neytiri saved Jake's ass...his avatar and his human one.
 
Are there such outstanding performances in "Avatar", though?

Not that the Academy need take note of. Speaking entirely in comparison to Star Wars, though, there are several quite good ones - Saldana, obviously, for one. Weaver is, as usual, strikingly grounded. Worthington, while playing an action hero of sorts not much more sophisticated than Skywalker or Solo is a more skillful performer than either Hamill or Ford at the time, and Lang is excellent.

There's a lot more to the performances of the actors who play Na'vi than "voice acting," and the technology involved in recreating their performances here is much more than motion capture as audiences have grown used to it by way of Zemeckis and more subtle than the excellent work done previously by WETA.

On top of all that, Neytiri saved Jake's ass...his avatar and his human one.

It's almost a signature of Cameron's that the female protagonist saves everyone's bacon in the end.
 
I didn't find Worthington's or Lang's performances to be anything of note. In fact, they struck me as being rather one dimensional, but then they also didn't detract from the film either. Weaver... ehhh, I will have to see the film again to have a better idea, but at first impression it didn't stand out either. Again, Saldana's did stand out and nicely so, but that's the only one that stayed with me.
 
Well let's be honest. The reason so many of the female characters got killed off isn't that Cameron was finished using them to advance the male character, it's that like many women they incorrectly reacted to what they thought was an insult to their gender but actually turned out to be a heat-seeking missile. It happens all the time.
 
Okay, look, forget I said anything. You all made a lot of good points and I'm going to think about what you've said.

For what it's worth, I actually have a degree and a Masters in cultural studies, so I'm not a completely uneducated fool. When I watched Avatar, it made me angry. Just the way I felt. Sorry. Perhaps I'm over sensitive, but there it is.
 
Christ...she saved his ass at the end.
Yes, she did. Very much so. I'm of a feminist bent or so they tell me, and I wasn't in the least offended by the womens roles in this film. I had some problems with it, but that certainly wasn't one of them. Grace wasn't punished for being a smart, compassionate female scientist. She was trying to help the natives and happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and took some fire. It had NOTHING TO DO WITH HER GENDER. If its best for the story that a particular character die, I don't want the writer hamstrung and thinking he/she cannot kill off that character because said character happens to be a woman or a minority.
 
What else can I do in a thread devoted to a movie with such problems? On the surface it's great, but underneath it fails on multiple levels. The Na'vi as Native Americans doesn't work because Native Americans were smart and adapted to technology quite handily, quickly taking command of US infantry, naval, and air forces. The idea that anyone would show up wearing a native body is ridiculous, as the natives would of course assume extremely evil magic and the possession of people's bodies from other tribes.

"No, we didn't steal it from another tribe! We made this body in a lab, around another star. I swear it!!!! Um, no, we're not going to replace ALL of you with alien bodies - I think."

The flaws in the story go on and on, and are common to the whole genre of these Hollywood re-imaginings of native cultures.
 
Okay, look, forget I said anything. You all made a lot of good points and I'm going to think about what you've said.

For what it's worth, I actually have a degree and a Masters in cultural studies, so I'm not a completely uneducated fool. When I watched Avatar, it made me angry. Just the way I felt. Sorry. Perhaps I'm over sensitive, but there it is.

Hey, at least you aren't a Marine! They're really pissed off. ;)

Anyway, what does cultural studies have to say about a culture that desperately wants to be portrayed as evil? As has been noted, the movie makes you want to reject all the technological skills that made the movie possible. Go figure. :shifty:

I guess that's not as crazy as watching a movie called "Avatar" which is actually about a waldo, though. I guess "Waldo" just wouldn't have quite the same ring to it.
 
Um, no. Are you?

I am having fun watching one of my rabbits make sexual advances at my cat, which rejects them by moving away and using his paw to bonk the bunny on the head, while bunny seems to assume this is some sort of cat mating ritual.
 
What else can I do in a thread devoted to a movie with such problems? On the surface it's great, but underneath it fails on multiple levels. The Na'vi as Native Americans doesn't work because Native Americans were smart and adapted to technology quite handily, quickly taking command of US infantry, naval, and air forces. The idea that anyone would show up wearing a native body is ridiculous, as the natives would of course assume extremely evil magic and the possession of people's bodies from other tribes.

Why do you assume this is proof that the Na'vi are not a technological advanced species? The technology is different but in the end, the biological technology of Pandora proved to be the stronger. If I were writing the sequel I believe that would be the direction I would take.

Jake said that the humans couldn't win by diplomacy because they had nothing the Na'vi wanted, but that doesn't mean the Na'vi were really backward. It's possible that the humans saw a backward unsophisticated people because that is what they wanted to see.


Brit
 
It's also possible that the whole concept of "technology" is likely very alien to the Na'Vi. Hence their decision to completely reject it.

I don't think you are completely wrong either with this train of thought, but I would add that it's also possible that the rejection comes from lack of "need" rather than lack of "understanding." After all they were interested to see if Jake could be cured of his insanity.
 
But that doesn't really work on any reasonable level that isn't horribly insulting to real "natives." Even in the heart of Africa people have become dependent on cell phones because they make instant communication over long distances not only possible, but very convenient. Pots, pans, glassware, steel axes, guns, and other such things were snatched up by natives everywhere because they're useful. American plains Indians switched to firearms for buffalo hunting, since even flintlock muzzle loaders proved superior to bows and arrows. So we're presented with a Na'vi who are too stupid to even realize what would be useful to them, so we pretend that they don't really need anything to make the story work. Such a situation could exist as a stand-alone science fiction piece but Cameron went to great lengths to make the story an allegory about how Westerners interacted with native cultures, which is what causes the jarring disconnect. Not only does this ignore so many realities about native cultures, it casts them into a role in a Western fantasy about what natives would be like if they had been invented by Westerners for our own artistic amusement.

When Cameron wrote the story, way back when, such a misconception was popular in Hollywood and elsewhere. The sentimental idea of the noble savage living in perfect harmony with his environment, ala Rousseau, is best left in the eighteenth century where it belongs.
 
It's also possible that the whole concept of "technology" is likely very alien to the Na'Vi. Hence their decision to completely reject it.

Technology serves ends, and the question for the Na'vi we saw is "what end does the tool serve?"

When people talk about the pros and cons of "hunter/gatherer" societies and "primitive societies" versus "technological societies" there's a tendency to act as if there's a single, monolithic definition of these things. Depending on the local environment, there have been hunter/gatherers on Earth who have lived - do live - in near-starvation, and other groups who lived long, healthy lives with minimal exertion (measured in terms of the number of calories expended in order to obtain the calories necessary to sustain the group. And BTW, in that respect our own modern society is one of the most wasteful and inefficient ever to exist on this planet. If we like our way of doing things it's because we value a lot of things other than that rather austere yardstick).

One thing we do know is that the Na'vi have some confidence based on experience that it's possible for the individual to survive and be a member of the group after they have died. Such experience is going to have an impact on how they measure the value of everything and how they evaluate change to their way of life.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top