"...bows and arrows against the lightning."*

Dec 19, 2009 13:43

There was no time yesterday for a blog entry, as we had to drive to Massachusetts to find a screening of Avatar that wasn't 3-D.But, had I made an entry yesterday, I would have said that, on Thursday I somehow went from completely locked up (first half of the day, carrying over from Wednesday and Tuesday) to writing 1,106 words on "The Jetsam of ( Read more... )

paganism, planetary murder, parahumanism, massachusetts, writing, aliens, movies, the road

Leave a comment

Comments 29

chris_walsh December 19 2009, 18:12:50 UTC
More Avatar thoughts later; I have some thinking to do. That said,

I know that it's too easy to see what we want to see in art that we love.

Which reminds me a bit of the neo-cons who looked at the Lord of the Rings films and said Tolkien thought war was great! ...said by a bunch of people who've mostly never served in war, unlike Tolkien. (Also said by at least some people who didn't necessarily love those films, but wanted to use the pop-culture touchstone to make their "war yay!" thoughts seem more pop-culturally relevant.)

I'm glad you had a good experience at Avatar.

Reply


derekcfpegritz December 19 2009, 18:58:03 UTC
I would say Avatar is more an anti-all-too-human picture: a film that reinforces the notion that humans as we currently exist are not the pinnacle of creation, but are, in fact, little more than over-hungry apes--a state which can be transcended by the embrace of technology and a less limited, more holistic worldview. The Na'Vi, despite their apparent primitiveness, are actually surprisingly advanced--more so than the humans--in that they have access to a planetary datanet of biological origin and are thereby more aware of the interconnection and interdependence of all factors in one's environment. Fortunately, humanity as it currently exist will never expand beyond the Solar System--but our own heavily-modified, distributed-intelligence successors probably will...and I strongly doubt they will have any motives whatsoever for disturbing other life-bearing worlds.

Reply

greygirlbeast December 19 2009, 19:02:48 UTC

The Na'Vi, despite their apparent primitiveness, are actually surprisingly advanced--more so than the humans--in that they have access to a planetary datanet of biological origin and are thereby more aware of the interconnection and interdependence of all factors in one's environment.

Yep. Well said. It's also interesting to consider the film (SPOILER ALERT) as one in which "the goddess" is found to have an objective (though non-supernatural and non-universal) existence.

Fortunately, humanity as it currently exist will never expand beyond the Solar System--but our own heavily-modified, distributed-intelligence successors probably will...and I strongly doubt they will have any motives whatsoever for disturbing other life-bearing worlds.

And here we have to agree to disagree.

Reply

derekcfpegritz December 19 2009, 19:39:19 UTC
I was thrilled to see that Eywa had an empirically-verifiable and biologically-plausible presence. At first I thought it was just going to be more hackneyed Gaian pseudotheology, but giving Eywa a biological basis was a pretty smart move.

BTW, I had the weirdest dream about you later night. I was visiting Providence and you gave me the idea to do a steampunk/surrealist detective story called "The Unpossible" starring a sleuth from turn-of-the-20th-Century New Orleans named Cassius Bilk. I'm plotting it out even as I write this. Thanks for the oneiric hint!

Reply

greygirlbeast December 19 2009, 19:48:49 UTC


BTW, I had the weirdest dream about you later night. I was visiting Providence and you gave me the idea to do a steampunk/surrealist detective story called "The Unpossible" starring a sleuth from turn-of-the-20th-Century New Orleans named Cassius Bilk. I'm plotting it out even as I write this. Thanks for the oneiric hint!

That's pretty cool. I love the name, Cassius Bilk. Rather wish I'd been less generous and kept that one for myself....

Reply


mojave_wolf December 19 2009, 19:58:58 UTC
Haven't seen Avatar yet, but your rec increases the likelihood that I will.

Also, some of the things you mentioned liking about it make me think you might like reading Elizabeth Bear's Undertow, if you ever get a chance to check it out. It's not her most critically acclaimed book, but I think it's my favorite.

Reply

greygirlbeast December 19 2009, 20:25:18 UTC

Also, some of the things you mentioned liking about it make me think you might like reading Elizabeth Bear's Undertow, if you ever get a chance to check it out. It's not her most critically acclaimed book, but I think it's my favorite.

I officially blame WoW for my not having read more books the last year or so.

Reply


sovay December 19 2009, 20:02:26 UTC
There was no time yesterday for a blog entry, as we had to drive to Massachusetts to find a screening of Avatar that wasn't 3-D.

Where was it playing?

But there's more here than some hackneyed, naive fairy-tale of the "noble savage." At the core of this film is an ingenious sort of evolutionary surprise that gives the Na'vi a fighting chance.

Good. That was difficult to tell from the trailers, or the hype.

I hope I can get to see this one in theaters.

Reply

greygirlbeast December 19 2009, 20:26:19 UTC

Where was it playing?

We saw it in Attelboro. Did I spell that right?

Reply

robyn_ma December 19 2009, 20:39:41 UTC
'We saw it in Attelboro. Did I spell that right?'

Close enough.

I myself was asked by a co-worker if there would be any 2D showings locally because her son has one eye. There's a 2D playing in North Dartmouth. It seems it's harder to find 2D showings than 3D, which is unusual. I was going to go to the local 3D showing this afternoon, but that was before the snowpocalypse was prophesied.

Reply

greygirlbeast December 19 2009, 20:43:09 UTC
Close enough.

Damn.

I myself was asked by a co-worker if there would be any 2D showings locally because her son has one eye. There's a 2D playing in North Dartmouth. It seems it's harder to find 2D showings than 3D, which is unusual.

Well...as Ebert points out, this is a film that Cameron wanted to be seen in 3-D, and one that is not filled with the usual contrived "poke you in the eye with the movie" gimmicks that makes most 3-D unbearable. But I worry at this fad, and hope it does not actually become a trend. I take comfort knowing it's failed at least twice before.

Reply


from_ashes December 20 2009, 04:12:22 UTC
Your "review" was perfect. About all I could come up with was that it was stunning. I keep forgetting that this world is not real. I saw it in 3D and it really enhanced Pandora, rather than detracted from it, which I had feared. The world, its people, its creatures, flora and fauna and even the culture created for these characters were so well thought out. I found Pandora much more believable than the world of the military and humans.

Reply

greygirlbeast December 20 2009, 06:40:40 UTC

I keep forgetting that this world is not real.

Which, I think, is about the most any fantasist can fairly ask of her or his audience.

Glad you liked it!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up