Avatar impressions part 2 -- spoilers ahead, you've been warned.

[wakela]

The Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind also had "just okay" plot lines, 1-D villains, and cliche characters. Those films were similarly visually stunning for their time and they are considered classics today. I'm sure there are many other films that could be added to this list.

So, who's to say that just because the plot wasn't jaw-dropping that Avatar won't stand the test of time?

I would argue that Avatar lacks some kind of hard-to-define humanity that the other stories have.  There's very little humor and very little fun -- to clarify: there's stuff-blowing-up fun, but not silly, dancing scarecrow fun.  Not much is charming in Avatar.  I don't rewatch Aliens, Terminator, and The Abyss because of the effects or the complex plots, but because the characters are fun and/or human (in the sense of humanity, not species-wise).

[eytanz]

You make an excellent point, particularly in reference to Wizard of Oz

Actually, I do not think the point is valid about Oz - I mean, it's a fair criticism from our current point of view, but I don't think that at the time the plot would have been considered cliche'd.

I didn't say the plot was cliche, I said it was "just okay". But now that you mention it:
      Restless protagonist goes on epic journey, works hard to return to the comforts of home.
Hmmm, sounds like several Greek classic and European fairytale plots to me....

There's a difference between adhering to a classic trope and being a cliche'; it has to do with how much you add to it. The Wizard of Oz is hardly the most sophisticated of stories, but it had something to add. Avatar had nothing to add except visuals.

[Bdoomed]

really, really, really, REALLY good visuals.
and Unobtanium

[stePH]

really, really, really, REALLY good visuals.
and Unobtanium

I'd have called it "MacGuffinite"... or did I mention that already?

[wakela]

really, really, really, REALLY good visuals.
and Unobtanium

I'd have called it "MacGuffinite"... or did I mention that already?

spacepatrolium
spice

[Bdoomed]

the Na'vi are the unobtanium!
pure.  unrefined.  unobtanium!  It's changing me.


and how can this be?  for he IS the Quizatz Hadderach! (sp?)

[deflective]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/uJarz7BYnHA" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/uJarz7BYnHA</a>

[Anarquistador]

One thing I found frustrating was the reveal of the sentient planet, and how apparently every creature on Pandora has a plug in their heads to tap into the vast hive mind. That's just such a fascinating concept, and I wish that had been explored a little more. I mean, was life on Pandora engineered somehow? Could such a thing evolve through simple natural selection?

And of course that leads to a whole host of story problems. If you're able to plug yourself into any other creature on the planet, see what they see, feel what they feel - indeed, if you're able to access some planet-wide organic memory bank that stores the consciousness of every individual, living or dead - you're not going to be a hunter-gatherer society. You're going to go vegan in about three seconds flat, just so you're not haunted by the memories of being devoured by yourself. Being a hunter on such a world is vaguely disturbing, to be honest. No matter how respectful or merciful you are about it, you're one extension of a collective consciousness killing another extension, with the implication that the consciousness as a whole is okay with this arrangement.

And that further makes the movie's condemnation of the human race a little unfair. I mean, it's not our fault we evolved on an indifferent planet! It's not our fault we don't have organic USB ports in our heads! We didn't kill our Mother; we never had one in the first place! All the Wolf-Dancing stuff about living in harmony with nature is pretty convenient if you live on a planet where nature is capable of telling you what to do.

...I just put more thought into this than James Cameron did, didn't I?

[stePH]

...I just put more thought into this than James Cameron did, didn't I?

That's a little thing I like to call "setting the bar so low, you could step over it." 

[eytanz]

One thing I found frustrating was the reveal of the sentient planet, and how apparently every creature on Pandora has a plug in their heads to tap into the vast hive mind. That's just such a fascinating concept, and I wish that had been explored a little more. I mean, was life on Pandora engineered somehow? Could such a thing evolve through simple natural selection?

And of course that leads to a whole host of story problems. If you're able to plug yourself into any other creature on the planet, see what they see, feel what they feel - indeed, if you're able to access some planet-wide organic memory bank that stores the consciousness of every individual, living or dead - you're not going to be a hunter-gatherer society. You're going to go vegan in about three seconds flat, just so you're not haunted by the memories of being devoured by yourself. Being a hunter on such a world is vaguely disturbing, to be honest. No matter how respectful or merciful you are about it, you're one extension of a collective consciousness killing another extension, with the implication that the consciousness as a whole is okay with this arrangement.

That's an interesting take, but I think you're over-conjecturing here. Several issues arise:

- First, no-one was plugging in dead animals. The dead Na'vi were stored in the planet, but maybe animals don't get their last moments recorded (and certainly, once dead, anything further that happens is irrelevant anyway).

- Second, the movie seemed to imply that the information transfer was not fully bi-directional. It's not like everyone could read the minds of everyone else plugged in. It seemed to me that you sent information out, and received a different kind of information back. You may get a sense of "oh, the creature I just killed is with the planet", but not any details on how it felt.

- Third, the view you're proposing assumes that the collective cares about its elements as individuals - something that the movie explicitly denied. An analogy would be the human body - do you care about every one of your cells as an individual? If one of your white blood cells destroys another cell, do you stop to consider whether it was an invading microbe or a symbiotic one that is essential for the body's function but happened to end up in the wrong place? As long as the system is in balance, I don't see why there's anything wrong with some elements being used as sustenance for other elements. I don't see why a sentient eco-system would find a problem with a food chain existing among its components. It's just a way to transfer energy from one point to another, after all. The movie itself made a point of stating that the planet over-mind does not intervene - and the fact that it did in the end was to react to an external threat, not to an internal element. To return to the body/cell analogy, we normally don't give a damn what any individual cell does - but if some of our cells start becoming cancerous, we get a scalpel (and someone competant to wield them), and cut them out.

[eytanz]

...I just put more thought into this than James Cameron did, didn't I?

That's a little thing I like to call "setting the bar so low, you could step over it." 

My comment above notwithstanding - yup

[CryptoMe]

If you're able to plug yourself into any other creature on the planet, see what they see, feel what they feel - indeed, if you're able to access some planet-wide organic memory bank that stores the consciousness of every individual, living or dead - you're not going to be a hunter-gatherer society. You're going to go vegan in about three seconds flat, just so you're not haunted by the memories of being devoured by yourself.

- Third, the view you're proposing assumes that the collective cares about its elements as individuals - something that the movie explicitly denied. An analogy would be the human body - do you care about every one of your cells as an individual? If one of your white blood cells destroys another cell, do you stop to consider whether it was an invading microbe or a symbiotic one that is essential for the body's function but happened to end up in the wrong place? As long as the system is in balance, I don't see why there's anything wrong with some elements being used as sustenance for other elements. I don't see why a sentient eco-system would find a problem with a food chain existing among its components. It's just a way to transfer energy from one point to another, after all. The movie itself made a point of stating that the planet over-mind does not intervene - and the fact that it did in the end was to react to an external threat, not to an internal element. To return to the body/cell analogy, we normally don't give a damn what any individual cell does - but if some of our cells start becoming cancerous, we get a scalpel (and someone competant to wield them), and cut them out.

Also, in regards to the eating yourself concept, consider that many human vegans feel this kind of sympathy without the "biologic USB port" and many other humans have no problem consuming flesh. So, it's logical to suppose that you could similarly get both extremes in the Navi.

And I like eytanz cell analogy. I was going to use nail biting, but the cell thing is soo much better.

[Bdoomed]

I think we need a disclaimer:
any defense of the workings of avatar is in no way affiliated with the writing of the aforementioned film.  It is purely circumstance and coincidence that any logic can be made in it's defense, and is entirely the byproduct of intelligent people.  Mr.Cameron is not liable for any logical sense that this movie may make.

Thank you.

[stePH]

I think we need a disclaimer:
any defense of the workings of avatar is in no way affiliated with the writing of the aforementioned film.  It is purely circumstance and coincidence that any logic can be made in it's defense, and is entirely the byproduct of intelligent people.  Mr.Cameron is not liable for any logical sense that this movie may make.

Thank you.

Laughed.

[goatkeeper]

I loved it!