tarheel91 said:
I didn't say this was genius (I'd appreciate it if you quoted my post further down where I expanded on the three sentence reply you quoted instead), I said it was better than you were giving it credit for. By the way, I love how you're changing your description of it. First it was "not bad, but in a way that almost seems worse it's simply bland" (almost seems worse than bad, now what's the word for that? Oh right, terrible). now it's "well presented and solid." There's this word for telegraphing in story telling. It's called foreshadowing. This movie was full of it. It was a lot like a Miyazaki movie in that all of the minor stuff presented earlier on becomes full of import later in the movie. Nothing is shown without meaning. All of the portions of the training shown plays a role in Jake's survival. *SPOILERS*SPOILERS*
Even the seemingly meaningless jumping down from a high branch and rebounding off leaves to slow speed comes into play. The story about the massive bird (I forgot it's Na'vi name), foreshadows his capturing of it. The failed attempt at saving the lead scientist foreshadow's Jake's transformation at the end.
*END SPOILERS*END SPOILERS* What you call telegraphing is really planned from the beginning by Cameron (again, we call that foreshadowing, a legitimate technique). Why? Because the plot's purpose was not to excite you with plot twists (in the grand scheme; in individual scenes, of course there were surprises), but to convey a message, a warning almost. As I said before, this colonialism is practically its own genre at this point. In terms of literature, you've got Things Fall Apart, Heart of Darkness, Speaker for the Dead, etc. In film, you've got Dances With Wolves, Pocahontas, etc. Each of these go about showing the same message in very different ways. While nearly all of them try show you a culture entirely unlike yours, but still valuable and worth protecting. However, that isn't enough because they simply can't create a convincing enough world (this is especially hard in literature). They have to use something else as well. In Heart of Darkness, it's heavy symbolism. In Speaker for the Dead, it's the attachment of a family's tragedy with that of the native population. However, what this movie is able to do (as I said in my previous post) is create a world so real and beautiful that it on its own is enough. It's actually incredibly original in that respect. I've never read or seen anything where the world has been enough. But, he spends a lot time just developing that world, and it pays off. The other unique thing he did was justify the whole spiritual belief of the Na'vi with something that made scientific sense. Normally, it's just seeing value in the spiritual beliefs, but here, there's a tangible reason as to why they adhere to the whole "everything's interconnected, energy is only borrowed" belief.
About pilot: She's the one carrying the scientists around on the time. You don't see how that connection could possibly make her feel more sympathic towards the Na'vi when she gets to see them interact (also bare in mind she was in the Mountain hideaway for the three months watching Jake interact) all the time? |
Avatar doesn't feature true, classic foreshadowing, it features minimum effort placement of what the story needs and only calls them into play as necessary.
My attitude hasn't changed one bit. Avatar has great direction, amazing visuals and a bland story told in modern minimum characterization methods. Guy is in a wheelchair, guy will go gaga when albe to walk again. Nothing about whether guy is really torn trying to serve two masters (the scientists and/or the military) nor nothing about how torn he might feel colluding with the military to get his legs back even though that same military abandoned him. I never said it was terrible and bland certainly isn't terrible. Transformers 2 is terrible. It was simply by the numbers resuse of previous plots and themes with the twist of the location - which is bland. The story is not bad - I'm not unhappy with anti-war or eco friendly themes or against them, but you've got to ask whether it's great to marry cutting edge technological accomplishment to a below the best retelling of familiar tales.
As for the narrative devices, seeing a pilot take a couple of trips with some scientists doesn't explain a complete change of character - that's lazy and just because Cameron needs it. Maybe he trimmed more detail, but in doing so he took it below an acceptable level.
Whichever way you cut it, the story and dialogue in Avatar simply doesn't match the excellence of everything else on display. Stumbling with another toungue is one thing, but characters bouncing all over the place is another. Grace is terribly insensitive to Jake right away, so we get she doesn't like the military or him, but I seriously doubt she'd attack him over failing to be his brother nor show some remorse for her actions.
Scientists being a little remiss regarding social nicities is one thing, if more than a little cliche, but that is simply poor characterization. Then when he's messing up she's happy to see him simply because she's in her Avatar? It doesn't work. Cameron is particularly guilty in the film of having characters serve the needs of his story without staying true to other scenes, nor with more than the simplist motivation.
Take the pilot. You saw how the Colonel reacted to anyone going against him, right, so how come she can just fly away and refuse to attack then is wandering around to rescue our heros? It's pretty clear that he'd have grounded her and had her ass in the jail first for her actions.
I'm sorry, I'm not asking for 2001, and I have said often in my replies in this thread that Avatar is good just underwhelming compared to its technical aspects, but Avatar tells a familiar story in the most broad brush of strokes, failing to come close to the real classics exploring that theme and with a very lazy approach to narrative - for example I need Jake able to quickly regain trust and respect, so I'll plant a story about a big creature only rarely tamed, and then I'll have him tame it. That's not classic foreshadowing for thematic effect, that's plotting backwards from a known result, which is something else entirely.
If you watch The Abyss, watch Bud and Lindsey and other characters, you'll see the exact same inability to remain true to character or characters behaving in false ways because Cameron wants it. In The Abyss you're supposed to see Lindsey as some front office female bitch, yet she really appears as nothing other than strong and sensible the whole film. You can't just decide that, you have to put enough on screen to make it plausible, and Cameron, while a director I admire in many ways, simply isn't capable of that level of characterization. He's great at working out the characters he wants, but often falls short of realizing them - his films would instanlty be better if he did everything the same but hired screenwriters to flesh out his story ideas and overall narrative, but he doesn't and perhaps doesn't want to.
It's interesting you mention Heart of Darkness, beacuse really my point is, if you aren't going to get even close to that, why not tell another story you're better suited to rather than look like an immitation?
Because while I believe Cameron believes in the content he put into Avatar, which is admirable, he himself is clearly unable to extrapolate beyond what already exists in superior form in other works.
Take the world network you mention, it is a facinating idea, but in Avatar it only exists as a backwards device to allow for some unlikely reinforements to charge to the rescue and allow Jake to make a big change permernant - right there Cameron had a great, interesting idea he could have explored in a genuine SF film, such as Moon, yet in Avatar it is a plot point and comes dangerously close to a form of Deus Ex Machina.
Anyway, I'm not getting into any further back and forth on this. We see it differently and that's that - although I will say if you felt my response was somewhat attacking, don't start your responses with *facepalm* - that rarely gets you anything other than a slamming arguement in return.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
