Avatar & related rants (2a is as spoilery as a review and 1 is as spoilery as a preview)
1. "Post-Avatar Depression" or "I wish real life was in 3D."
I've heard & read that some people are suffering from post-Avatar depression because our world doesn't involve light-up trees, flying on dragony-critters, and living in harmony with the magic tree. These people then return to see the film time and time again in an attempt to immerse themselves in the environment. Now, some of these people probably do have a genuine mental illness and Avatar may just be the current inspiration for on-going depression. I get that, I know how hard it is to get help especially when you desperately need it.
The rest of these people, honestly, strike me as whiny and entitled. You want to live in harmony with others in a beautiful rain forest? Go join a charity. If your life really holds no meaning for you anymore, joining the peace corp or Greenpeace shouldn't be much of a sacrifice. Want to fly in the open air between rocks? Take up hang-gliding. If your real life feels lacking, do something about it!
This [I am not your therapist, so please don't tell me that you made the same mistake for the hundredth time] could be an essay in and of itself, so I shall simply ask if you're working toward your goals or if you're simply wishing that things will change. Maybe you need professional help, but maybe you just need to get out of the damn theater and "be the change you wish to see in the world."
2a. "Dances with Fern Gully" or "Pocahontas Doesn't Need a White Male Imperialist to Save her from the Other White Male Imperialists."
Normally, I'm opposed to film spoilers, but the plot to this is so scarce that it's impossible not to give the whole film away just by telling you the premise, so, if you're really concerned about spoilers, skip down to 2b.
Everyone from The Hathor Legacy to my friend Arwen at the Smithsonian Native American History Museum has pointed out that this film is about the guilt of the entitled white man that doesn't actually want to give up the societal privilege to which he has become so accustomed. In this film, a white male from Earth is learning about the blue people on Pandora while most of the other Earthlings are trying to figure out the best way to strip-mine Pandora. The other "researchers" are building schools to teach the blue children English, a well-intentioned cultural condescension that deserved so much more than one line of commentary.
As our protagonist lives with the blue people, he completes years of education in a few months, becomes kick-ass at everything, and wins the heart of the chief's daughter. He feels that he is now one of the blue people and endeavors, with the help of the well-meaning Earthlings, to save the planet of Pandora and its people from the evil Earthlings. Because they couldn't do it themselves. And the blue war-lord-in-training is totally unfair when he doesn't trust the protagonist or feel that he's really one of them now. Umm, yeah . . . Then they start a band called Gary Stu and the Primitive Blue People Whom He Saved with his L33t Skillz.
2b. "It's just a movie!" or "Please switch your brain to 'on.'"
As I said, Arwen was one of the people that brought the racial issues up, as she posted a link on her Facebook. One of the replies that she got, to which I did not respond because I decided that going off on the commenter or not was her prerogative, was something like "Geez, it's just a movie."
Because when you go into a theater you shut your brain off, enjoy a completely random pattern of light and noise, and come back out without any interaction between you and the film nor has the film in anyway reflected ideas of its creators.
As a writer I'm insulted and as a social historian I'm appalled.
You mean to say that what writers (directors, producers, artists, musicians, etc...) create means nothing to them? That it in no way reflects their interests or values? That there is no idea in their head that is conveyed into the art? And that, thusly, no cultural idea, value, or issue if filtered through the artist into the piece? If it's "just" art and thus not in anyway derived from the culture in which it was created, there would be no trends in art and scholars could not learn about a society from its art and literature.
Conversely, "just" a movie also could not affect its audience, establish norms, or define cultural expectations. In this sense, one is denying both the very field of behavioral psychology -- that our ideas are shaped by our experiences -- and the definition of life -- which includes responding to stimuli. Films are cultural propaganda. Whether they urge us to seek a certain change or to be content with the status quo, all ideas that we encounter shape our own ideas. It's called learning. It's called acculturation. It's called not having a rock where your brain should be. I bet you even got that "just a movie" idea from somewhere.
I've heard & read that some people are suffering from post-Avatar depression because our world doesn't involve light-up trees, flying on dragony-critters, and living in harmony with the magic tree. These people then return to see the film time and time again in an attempt to immerse themselves in the environment. Now, some of these people probably do have a genuine mental illness and Avatar may just be the current inspiration for on-going depression. I get that, I know how hard it is to get help especially when you desperately need it.
The rest of these people, honestly, strike me as whiny and entitled. You want to live in harmony with others in a beautiful rain forest? Go join a charity. If your life really holds no meaning for you anymore, joining the peace corp or Greenpeace shouldn't be much of a sacrifice. Want to fly in the open air between rocks? Take up hang-gliding. If your real life feels lacking, do something about it!
This [I am not your therapist, so please don't tell me that you made the same mistake for the hundredth time] could be an essay in and of itself, so I shall simply ask if you're working toward your goals or if you're simply wishing that things will change. Maybe you need professional help, but maybe you just need to get out of the damn theater and "be the change you wish to see in the world."
2a. "Dances with Fern Gully" or "Pocahontas Doesn't Need a White Male Imperialist to Save her from the Other White Male Imperialists."
Normally, I'm opposed to film spoilers, but the plot to this is so scarce that it's impossible not to give the whole film away just by telling you the premise, so, if you're really concerned about spoilers, skip down to 2b.
Everyone from The Hathor Legacy to my friend Arwen at the Smithsonian Native American History Museum has pointed out that this film is about the guilt of the entitled white man that doesn't actually want to give up the societal privilege to which he has become so accustomed. In this film, a white male from Earth is learning about the blue people on Pandora while most of the other Earthlings are trying to figure out the best way to strip-mine Pandora. The other "researchers" are building schools to teach the blue children English, a well-intentioned cultural condescension that deserved so much more than one line of commentary.
As our protagonist lives with the blue people, he completes years of education in a few months, becomes kick-ass at everything, and wins the heart of the chief's daughter. He feels that he is now one of the blue people and endeavors, with the help of the well-meaning Earthlings, to save the planet of Pandora and its people from the evil Earthlings. Because they couldn't do it themselves. And the blue war-lord-in-training is totally unfair when he doesn't trust the protagonist or feel that he's really one of them now. Umm, yeah . . . Then they start a band called Gary Stu and the Primitive Blue People Whom He Saved with his L33t Skillz.
2b. "It's just a movie!" or "Please switch your brain to 'on.'"
As I said, Arwen was one of the people that brought the racial issues up, as she posted a link on her Facebook. One of the replies that she got, to which I did not respond because I decided that going off on the commenter or not was her prerogative, was something like "Geez, it's just a movie."
Because when you go into a theater you shut your brain off, enjoy a completely random pattern of light and noise, and come back out without any interaction between you and the film nor has the film in anyway reflected ideas of its creators.
As a writer I'm insulted and as a social historian I'm appalled.
You mean to say that what writers (directors, producers, artists, musicians, etc...) create means nothing to them? That it in no way reflects their interests or values? That there is no idea in their head that is conveyed into the art? And that, thusly, no cultural idea, value, or issue if filtered through the artist into the piece? If it's "just" art and thus not in anyway derived from the culture in which it was created, there would be no trends in art and scholars could not learn about a society from its art and literature.
Conversely, "just" a movie also could not affect its audience, establish norms, or define cultural expectations. In this sense, one is denying both the very field of behavioral psychology -- that our ideas are shaped by our experiences -- and the definition of life -- which includes responding to stimuli. Films are cultural propaganda. Whether they urge us to seek a certain change or to be content with the status quo, all ideas that we encounter shape our own ideas. It's called learning. It's called acculturation. It's called not having a rock where your brain should be. I bet you even got that "just a movie" idea from somewhere.