The Guardian headline reads “Avatar: hit or miss? We can’t really tell you” — then they proceed to tell us anyway.
So by saying Avatar was really much, much better than expected, that it looked amazing and that the story was gripping – if cheesy in many places – the Guardian is in technical breach of the agreement. It is not a breach, however, to report that other journalists leaving the screening were also positive: the terrible film that some had been anticipating had not materialised. It was good.
Cheesy? Gromit’s got no problem with that. For a film like this, a little cheese is a tasty enhancement to the CGI wine. If all the cheese were banned from Academy ballots, we’d have time for an extra hour of Honorary Oscar acceptance speeches.
There is, though, a certain amount of suspension of disbelief needed when watching Avatar. Cynics might sneer at the plot. The film, set in 2154, revolves around a paraplegic marine assigned to a planet where brutish humans are forcing the natives from their homes to mine a precious mineral, unobtanium, which is the only thing that will keep Earth going…
Perhaps most surprising was the politics. At one stage the deranged general leading the attack, with echoes of George W Bush, declares: “Our survival relies on pre-emptive action. We will fight terror, with terror.” There is more shock and awe in this movie than almost any other.
Cameron agreed there was a connection to recent events but there were also references to Vietnam, and to the 16th- and 17th-century European colonisation of the Americas. “There is this long wonderful history of the human race written in blood going back as far as can be remembered. We have this tendency to just take what we want. And that’s how we treat the natural world as well. There’s this sense of we’re here, we’re big, we’ve got the guns, we’ve got the technology, therefore we’re entitled to every damn thing on this planet. That’s not how it works and we’re going to find out the hard way if we don’t kind of wise up and start seeking a life that’s in balance with the natural life on Earth.”
As usual, I wish Cameron — and most artists — would stop feeling compelled to explain the significance of their art to us. Like we weren’t going to get that message without the footnotes? Still, this is very good news, right?