Why Cameron Failed.

[joeylovesgaia]

Reposting this.

People were rooting for the RDA. Not everyone, but many. If Cameron meant this story as more than entertainment (and he clearly did), if he meant to change people's minds with this, then he screwed up. What looks evil to a liberal looks justifiable, even honorable, to a conservative. And with the scene in SE showing that the attack on Hometree was provoked, well...civilian targets have been bombed before, and the casualties accepted as a cost of war.

Now to anyone who was following the Na'vi, sympathizing with the Na'vi, the loss of Hometree is felt as a holocaust, a horror. But to boys who idolized Quaritch, loved all the cool hardware, and felt bored (and maybe grossed out) by this "unity of people and nature" thing, it was a victorious battle.

James, you failed. You should have made Quaritch, Selfridge, and the RDA more of a clear villain if you wanted to convert people. You should have screen-tested this movie to conservatives, and tweaked it until they agreed that the RDA was in the wrong. You should have shown the true horrors that empires inflict on the innocent. Slavery and rape, even macho hardasses understand that these are wrong.

[Elyannia]

.............

Adding things like slavery and rape would have made the movie rated R which then the movie wouldn't have been able to reach a broader audience.

I don't think for a second that James Cameron failed.

[LOVEavatar]

Well if all that content would've been shown... Avatar age limit increased lot?

Not that I have absolutely any problem with gore/violence in movies... but IMO, it suits only for certain types of films. And Avatar, an epic story... well, for me... it wouldn't fit. Wouldn't be the same tbh

Edit:

I don't think for a second that James Cameron failed.

Agrees

Also, the main message JC was looking for with Avatar was obviously the environmental destruction and disrespect we have on our planet. THAT, he definitely succeeded with

[Vauktu]

Avatar wouldn't have been such a huge box office success if Cameron failed to have audiences grow hatred towards the humans near the end of the movie.

Do you know why some people fell into depression? Because Avatar showed how much of a perfect life the Na'vi have, and just how terrible humans treat the environment and each other.

I remember a time where I was sitting in the theater, and right as Quaritch was shot in the chest with Neytiri's arrow, the audience cheered and clapped. That says something, doesn't it?

[Banefull]

I for one applaud Cameron for not making the movie so black and white. To everything, there is more to learn and another side. I highly sympathized with the Navi but saw the common grunt within the RDA as misguided, not evil. They were doing what their superiors told them. It adds to the intricacy of the story rather than detracting from it. If anything it is more reflective of what goes on in the real world. Evil does not usually come out in the open, it hides behind false justification. Some outside force is not going to stop us, we have to overcome ourselves.

[Elyannia]

Plus if you watch the extended version, Selfridge isn't as bad as we think he is. Quaritch was the main villian in Avatar.

[Neytiri.]

Originally Posted by Elyannia

.............

Adding things like slavery and rape would have made the movie rated R which then the movie wouldn't have been able to reach a broader audience.

I don't think for a second that James Cameron failed.

Slavery and rape would have been to much, this isn't Schindler's list.

I think Cameron did an excellent job with the movie.

[caveman]

One of the big criticisms of the movie was actually it being too black and white. I found that acceptable considering it was a sci-fi movie. Sci-Fi's often have extreme contrasts, which is done on purpose to make a point on where society is heading. And I don't think its fair to say Conservatives enjoyed the horrific parts of the movie. But that beats me, I'm fairly liberal.

[ZenitYerkes]

If he failed, then why are we here?

Art is subjective, the message depends on who watches it -in spite of what the author meant. Even if JC wanted it to look like an "interruption of free trade" tale, we still hold the meaning we give to the movie true.

[Neytiri.]

Originally Posted by ZenitYerkes

If he failed, then why are we here?

Art is subjective, the message depends on who watches it -in spite of what the author meant. Even if JC wanted it to look like an "interruption of free trade" tale, we still hold the meaning we give to the movie true.

Agree'd, It all depends on how you interpreted it, I doubt it "failed" though, Due to the billions of dollars it made and all the ridiculously dedicated fans you can find all over the internet...

[Nulkrr'zo]

i tended to be pretty dang conversative on most fiscal and social issues before seeing this movie, and after it, I am definitely libertarian and liberal on social issues now.....soo in that regard Cameron definitely succeeded!

[Rainbowhawk1993]

Those people who suposably were fans who like Quaratch were just people who don't see. I Like the military hardware, but I put peoples lives infront of that. I wouldn't kill a person unless they have murderous intaions.

Camron didn't fail. He created an arsonal of kick butt military hardware, but the morjority of the fans on the internet like to learn about the Na'vi, not Human Technogy.

I'm in a liberal family and this movie strangthens my liberal feelings. So Camron was Secessful. The Box office and the fan sites say so too.

[rapunzel77]

I don't think he failed. Most people saw it to be entertained and it succeeded because we have a conversation going about all the themes in the movie and what the messages are. In fact, some of the messages in Avatar, like with any book or movie, may not be what the original writer/director, etc intended. Many people dismissed Avatar for being too simplistic and black/white which we know isn't true. I don't think that Cameron or anyone else can expect people to change over night but if it brings up thought provoking issues that people can actually talk about then he did his job.

I am a conservative on social issues and liberal on some political issues but after seeing Avatar, it got me thinking and pondering about various issues related to the environment, etc. Good art should make one think and allow for conversation. I feel that the "conservative" response was sad. They readily dismissed it without truly watching it. I think it could be due to some of the cringe worthy lines. I love Avatar but there are a few clunky lines that can take someone out of the movie and into the current political situation. That may be why some people were upset and dismissive of the movie.

[Ashen Key]

Originally Posted by joeylovesgaia

Reposting this.

People were rooting for the RDA. Not everyone, but many. If Cameron meant this story as more than entertainment (and he clearly did), if he meant to change people's minds with this, then he screwed up. What looks evil to a liberal looks justifiable, even honorable, to a conservative. And with the scene in SE showing that the attack on Hometree was provoked, well...civilian targets have been bombed before, and the casualties accepted as a cost of war.

Now to anyone who was following the Na'vi, sympathizing with the Na'vi, the loss of Hometree is felt as a holocaust, a horror. But to boys who idolized Quaritch, loved all the cool hardware, and felt bored (and maybe grossed out) by this "unity of people and nature" thing, it was a victorious battle.

James, you failed. You should have made Quaritch, Selfridge, and the RDA more of a clear villain if you wanted to convert people. You should have screen-tested this movie to conservatives, and tweaked it until they agreed that the RDA was in the wrong. You should have shown the true horrors that empires inflict on the innocent. Slavery and rape, even macho hardasses understand that these are wrong.

.....Wow. I'll have to remember that trying to show people as complicated and not cardboard cut-outs means I fail as a writer. /sarcasm

I disagree with EVERYTHING here. I think the horror of Hometree was clearly there, even if the RDA's actions were understandable to a point (psychology goes off in circumstances like Pandora; the RDA had clearly been holding back from taking violent action against the Na'vi in most cases). How could it not have been? And yes, I think Quaritch is awesome. He's a fascinating character and just pure badass.

That doesn't change the fact that he ordered the destruction of a village. And frankly, I'd prefer it if more writers would remember the fact that their audiences aren't stupid, that showing complexity is good, that things aren't black-and-white. Most soldiers are not bad people - they are just PEOPLE who HAVE to obey orders and who, yes, sometimes do bad things. Showing them to be EVIL would have...well, if Cameron had done that, I probably would have walked out of the movie in disgust. I've read too much of what goes on in war and the psychology of it all.

If anything, I would have preferred it if Cameron showed MORE complexity of character; Avatar is far more black-and-white than I prefer my movies.

And also, I have to ask - having the freedom to choose which characters to like and which to not is...bad? Being treated like I have the maturity and awareness to go 'yes, Quaritch was an *ss and he did awful things that make me flail, but DAMN did he pull it off with badass' is...bad? The writer failed?

Yeah, I really disagree with you.

[Icu]

This is completely false.

You assuming that he set out to do things that he didn't actually set out to do and assuming some pretty awful things about "conservatives" (talk about generalizing!).

And do you really think it would have been a good idea to make every "evil" character completely horrific to the point where they lose their humanity? No. Not from a movie point of view, not from a story point of view, etc. It's almost like you're saying that Cameron failed because he didn't slap anyone who disagreed with him across the face hard enough for them to finally agree with him. As if that's going to "convert" them anyway?

This is nonsense. JC set out to tell a story and let people draw parallels however they saw fit. He succeed.