The same sort of movie critics who raved about garbage like "Redacted" and "Syriana" are practically masturbating over "Avatar" which is always a warning sign.The UK critics were particularly sticky fingered.
You can pretty much get the plot from the trailers - evil US corporations backed by a proto-fascist military with a genocidal commander are teaming up to take the land and wealth of a tribe of Noble Savages...and one sympathetic, sensitive 'hero' type guy sent to spy on the natives to help provide intel to destroy them ends up learning to Love And Respect Them ( aided, of course, by a native heroine he'd also like to Love And Respect in an up close and personal way), so he goes over to the other side to defeat his Eee-vil compatriots.
Yes...eeewww.
John Nolte has an in-depth review over at Big Hollywood and calls 'Avatar' "a big, dull, America-hating, PC revenge fantasy":
['Avatar' is] sanctimonious thud of a movie so infested with one-dimensional characters and PC clichés that not a single plot turn – small or large – surprises. I call it the “liberal tell,” where the early and obvious politics of the film gives away the entire story before the second act begins, and “Avatar” might be the sorriest example of this yet. For all the time and money and technology that went into its making, the thing that matters most – character and story – are strictly Afterschool Special.
Set in 2154, “Avatar” is a thinly disguised, heavy-handed and simplistic sci-fi fantasy/allegory critical of America from our founding straight through to the Iraq War.{...}
Think of “Avatar” as “Death Wish 5” for leftists. A simplistic, revisionist revenge fantasy where if you freakin’ hate the bad guys (America), you’re able to forgive the by-the-numbers predictability of it all and still get off watching them get what they got coming.
I'm not surprised to see this coming out of James Cameron. He's always been a predictably anti-military class warfare type Leftard (just watch "Titanic" or "Aliens" with a critical eye), who probably fancies himself as a fine fella because he's pleasant to the 'help' over at the mansion.
Here's the ironic part - this movie, because of all the hype and special effects will likely do good business, especially among Cameron's fellow Lefties.And a huge chunk of the profits will go to none other than FOX and Rupert Murdoch, who financed the film!
My goodness! Is the female lead character named Pocahontas? Is the male lead character named John Smith? Does she literally throw herself onto him in order to save his life?
ReplyDeleteRupert Murdoch (& Fox) will laugh all the way to the bank.
--dragon/dinosaur
More like "Dances With Wolves II - The Outer Space Connection"
ReplyDeletethis is pretty much off topic, but then again, ff is getting so used to it, or bored.
ReplyDeletei've long wondered why someone in hollywood, george clooney & matt damon & ben affleck, don't go together and do a remake of *the ugly american*.
they probably don't do it because they think it's about some ugly guy, and they all know they're boooeeeeful.
i think clooney in the lead would be fitting.
those three getting hold of *the manchurian candidate* would be a hoot.
denzel was a crappy sinatra.
i could/can see susan sarandon as an excellent choice for angela lansbury.
who the principles were would be up to hollywood.
but you can bet this hollywood would put the spin on it that the ones who got shot would be the conservative, sound economic principled, small gov't, law enforcement candidate.
i remember seeing an old movie late one night. cary grant was in it. there was an office scene where cary was talking to one of his supervisors about "why are we sending all our jobs overseas?"
the rebuttal from his boss type, (can you imagine cary grant in a movie with a boss?) was "just think how we're improving the living standards of the rest of the world."
never mind that maybe, just maybe, the rest of the world doesn't want their living standards improved.
no even then the liberal creep was coming into motion pictures. and that was the 1940s.