I love Cameron, always have. I loved Titanic, Terminator, Aliens, those Iconic films. This IS an iconic film, but...
Okay, I..., as a white anglo saxon American, am embarrased by what my forefathers did..., which essentially amounted to cultural genocide, ...to the native american tribes. It's not that it wouldn't have happened anyway (which is never brought up by the way), that these societies, given millenia, wouldn't have become more technologically advanced with medicine and other things, and therefore, by extension evolved outside their less technologically advanced state to become aggrarian, sedentary, and possibly..., 'conguerors' themselves. Lest we forget. The native american's WERE conguerors. Many fought with other tribes, with one wiping out the other either weaving the conquered into their fold, or possibly killing them all for food. What do you think a cannibalistic socieity would have done if their survival had depended on cutting down a tree?
...BUT what WAS wrong with what OUR 'conguerors' of the past DID was presume that because one society was not as technologically advanced as the other, or that the one did not worship the Christian God like the other, or that the former was 'less' human, 'less' evolved... 'less' civilized than the other, that they should be treated like animals, and or exterminated.
Having this been said, I'm so sick of the spin that Hollywood is taking... repeatedly... on this subject. This story is just another take on Columbus and subsequent dominance by anglo saxon cultures against the native, nature loving tribes of America, who, let's face it, were not ALL nature loving, just less technologically advanced than the Europeans.
Granted... things were 'bad'. They were, but get over yourself!
So..., I saw this 'story' as light, another LONG
whine fest, unimpressive, and more so, UNORIGINAL, based on the current popular premise that seems to permeate any big budget script these days (Day After Tomorrow, 2012, The Day the Earth Stood Still, etc...).
Please allow me to deconstruct the big four fer ya. 1. Humans are bad for the earth's environment. We should all commit suicide and let the roaches have the earth back... (in this case the 'tree of life' is the central issue, which we unevolved 'anglo saxon' humans are just to stupid to recognize, so let's burn it down) 2. All aggrarian Anglo Saxon societies are plagued with the disease of greed & conquest, the rape of the natural world, and to the destruction of all things that get in our way (giovanni ribisi = Columbus), 3. All of the number 1's and 2's are racists! [in the eyes of the #1's and 2's, all Na'Vi are sub-human) 4. All who do not agree with premise put forth in #'s 1, 2, or 3 are idiots, unevolved, and part of the problem.
Actors and writers have pulled away from great story telling, and instead feel like they should take it upon themselves to promote what's popular/important to them. Whatever they get behind, the rest of us dumb hicks follow along like dumb struck puppy dogs. What's wrong with this? It never... EVER lasts. It's just what's popular today. For example. What ever happened to the whole 'deforestation' issue? Based on Sting in the 80's, the Amazon should be a desert by now.
Hey! Whatever sells tickets, right!
Give us a break Hollywood, and get off your high horse. Until James Cameron and every billionaire actor/producer/director/executive sells their multi million dollar estate/complex and give up all their wealth and live under the open sky in the woods eating only that which grows naturally, then they have no room to preach!
They are all such hypocrites.
Why can't the powers that be find someting else to get passionate about? Further, why do these idiots who are no better than you or I take it upon themselves to weave political issues into their story lines? It's like all originality has seaped out of the minds of the writers, or that instead of just writing a story, they feel that they HAVE to include something that advocates their point of view about current politically charged issues, whether it's the economy, racism, sexuality, etc... I'm so sick of it.
Why can't these brilliant people be original AND entertaining?
Example: Why wasn't it possible for Cameron to depict those involved in the destruction of the Na'Vi as being truly conflicted?! What if the 'un-obtanium' had been necessary to sustain life on earth, and it's absence meaning the extermination of all human life? What then? You are telling me that you wouldn't cut down a tree if the cutting down of that tree would save the life of your child? My point is, at least then, within the context of the film and story itself, the audience would have been more conflicted about BOTH sides, as opposed to have to listen to another film preach about how terrible we all are!
Are they so blind that they can't see the irony in their indignation? The Na'Vi try to conguer the little flying 'creatures' or the 'horse like creatures'. Aren't they dominating another species to THEIR advanatage? What? Not the same? Bull Sheet! Sure it is! It is exactly the same. It's just not on the same technological timeline. We're addicted to romanticizing those cultures that seem more primitive in their technological advancement. What are you people saying, that until we 'humans' digress back to a time of hunter's and gathers, that we're raping the natural world? Hunter's and gatherers had to KILL other species, dig holes in the ground, make shelter from the environment to survive. Who gets to draw that line between what's natural, what's a part of evolution, and what's inately human, but not 'natural'? Isn't the circle of life just that... a circle? Just because I am not dying out in the open, or because my waste is 'processed' doesn't mean that it doesn't end up right where the lion's waste ended up on the Serengeti, or where my ancestors waste ended up 25,000 years ago...in the ground. It ends up being recirculated, as do all things.
It is still a circle. Is the invention of the wheel part of evolution? Yes... The spade for plowing? Yes... Human invention IS a part of evolution. It's the natural course because our brains evolved to a point where we would know how to build things (to cross a river, rather than die swimming in the current)... but I digress.
Great stories and passion are that which win awards, AND garner ticket sales. The line between good and evil is not always so patently clear. Always leave the audience conflicted as to what IS right? Had Cameron seen fit to make the humans more empathetic, and understanding than to make them like 19th century gold diggers, and had the Na'Vi been seen as not caring about our extinction, and in their OWN stage of evolution, then we would have had both the most incredible visual effects ever put forth on film AND a great story! Still, it was worth the price of 3D just to see the effects.
Okay, I..., as a white anglo saxon American, am embarrased by what my forefathers did..., which essentially amounted to cultural genocide, ...to the native american tribes. It's not that it wouldn't have happened anyway (which is never brought up by the way), that these societies, given millenia, wouldn't have become more technologically advanced with medicine and other things, and therefore, by extension evolved outside their less technologically advanced state to become aggrarian, sedentary, and possibly..., 'conguerors' themselves. Lest we forget. The native american's WERE conguerors. Many fought with other tribes, with one wiping out the other either weaving the conquered into their fold, or possibly killing them all for food. What do you think a cannibalistic socieity would have done if their survival had depended on cutting down a tree?
...BUT what WAS wrong with what OUR 'conguerors' of the past DID was presume that because one society was not as technologically advanced as the other, or that the one did not worship the Christian God like the other, or that the former was 'less' human, 'less' evolved... 'less' civilized than the other, that they should be treated like animals, and or exterminated.
Having this been said, I'm so sick of the spin that Hollywood is taking... repeatedly... on this subject. This story is just another take on Columbus and subsequent dominance by anglo saxon cultures against the native, nature loving tribes of America, who, let's face it, were not ALL nature loving, just less technologically advanced than the Europeans.
Granted... things were 'bad'. They were, but get over yourself!
So..., I saw this 'story' as light, another LONG
whine fest, unimpressive, and more so, UNORIGINAL, based on the current popular premise that seems to permeate any big budget script these days (Day After Tomorrow, 2012, The Day the Earth Stood Still, etc...).
Please allow me to deconstruct the big four fer ya. 1. Humans are bad for the earth's environment. We should all commit suicide and let the roaches have the earth back... (in this case the 'tree of life' is the central issue, which we unevolved 'anglo saxon' humans are just to stupid to recognize, so let's burn it down) 2. All aggrarian Anglo Saxon societies are plagued with the disease of greed & conquest, the rape of the natural world, and to the destruction of all things that get in our way (giovanni ribisi = Columbus), 3. All of the number 1's and 2's are racists! [in the eyes of the #1's and 2's, all Na'Vi are sub-human) 4. All who do not agree with premise put forth in #'s 1, 2, or 3 are idiots, unevolved, and part of the problem.
Actors and writers have pulled away from great story telling, and instead feel like they should take it upon themselves to promote what's popular/important to them. Whatever they get behind, the rest of us dumb hicks follow along like dumb struck puppy dogs. What's wrong with this? It never... EVER lasts. It's just what's popular today. For example. What ever happened to the whole 'deforestation' issue? Based on Sting in the 80's, the Amazon should be a desert by now.
Hey! Whatever sells tickets, right!
Give us a break Hollywood, and get off your high horse. Until James Cameron and every billionaire actor/producer/director/executive sells their multi million dollar estate/complex and give up all their wealth and live under the open sky in the woods eating only that which grows naturally, then they have no room to preach!
They are all such hypocrites.
Why can't the powers that be find someting else to get passionate about? Further, why do these idiots who are no better than you or I take it upon themselves to weave political issues into their story lines? It's like all originality has seaped out of the minds of the writers, or that instead of just writing a story, they feel that they HAVE to include something that advocates their point of view about current politically charged issues, whether it's the economy, racism, sexuality, etc... I'm so sick of it.
Why can't these brilliant people be original AND entertaining?
Example: Why wasn't it possible for Cameron to depict those involved in the destruction of the Na'Vi as being truly conflicted?! What if the 'un-obtanium' had been necessary to sustain life on earth, and it's absence meaning the extermination of all human life? What then? You are telling me that you wouldn't cut down a tree if the cutting down of that tree would save the life of your child? My point is, at least then, within the context of the film and story itself, the audience would have been more conflicted about BOTH sides, as opposed to have to listen to another film preach about how terrible we all are!
Are they so blind that they can't see the irony in their indignation? The Na'Vi try to conguer the little flying 'creatures' or the 'horse like creatures'. Aren't they dominating another species to THEIR advanatage? What? Not the same? Bull Sheet! Sure it is! It is exactly the same. It's just not on the same technological timeline. We're addicted to romanticizing those cultures that seem more primitive in their technological advancement. What are you people saying, that until we 'humans' digress back to a time of hunter's and gathers, that we're raping the natural world? Hunter's and gatherers had to KILL other species, dig holes in the ground, make shelter from the environment to survive. Who gets to draw that line between what's natural, what's a part of evolution, and what's inately human, but not 'natural'? Isn't the circle of life just that... a circle? Just because I am not dying out in the open, or because my waste is 'processed' doesn't mean that it doesn't end up right where the lion's waste ended up on the Serengeti, or where my ancestors waste ended up 25,000 years ago...in the ground. It ends up being recirculated, as do all things.
It is still a circle. Is the invention of the wheel part of evolution? Yes... The spade for plowing? Yes... Human invention IS a part of evolution. It's the natural course because our brains evolved to a point where we would know how to build things (to cross a river, rather than die swimming in the current)... but I digress.
Great stories and passion are that which win awards, AND garner ticket sales. The line between good and evil is not always so patently clear. Always leave the audience conflicted as to what IS right? Had Cameron seen fit to make the humans more empathetic, and understanding than to make them like 19th century gold diggers, and had the Na'Vi been seen as not caring about our extinction, and in their OWN stage of evolution, then we would have had both the most incredible visual effects ever put forth on film AND a great story! Still, it was worth the price of 3D just to see the effects.
Top Box Office
- 1.$70.2M
- 2.$35.8M
- 3.$23.9M
- 4.$3.2M
- 5.$3.0M
- 6.$2.8M
- 7.$2.3M
- 8.$2.2M
- 9.$2.2M
- 10.$1.2M