Avatar: seen it, liked it (mostly)
SO, just seen J Cameron’s latest blockbuster, ‘Avatar’, and like most people am in awe at the sheer beauty of this film. Set 150 years in the future on Pandora, a fictional (probably) moon a few light years (and then some) from here, the film is populated by gorgeous blue alien humanoids (the Na’vi) and ugly nasty (and very human) battle-scarred warriors, all in a landscape channeling the imagination of Roger Dean, creator of ethereal album covers for ’70s UK prog-rock band Yes. The plot revolves around greedy commercialism wanting to mine unobtanium (sic), which happens to be bang underneath a forest community of Na’vi, who like most aboriginal cultures value their land as they do their own lives, and refuse to move. They have a really big tree, too. The ‘avatars’ are cloned Na’vi, remotely controlled from Human HQ by men and women (including Sigourney Weaver) for negotiation with the Na’vi on how to obtain acquiescence for a compulsory purchase order, or the 2160 equivalent.
OK, so the story – nature good, machinery/modernity bad – is nothing new. Tolkien has it covered in ‘Lord of the Rings’, as did Huxley in ‘Brave new world’, Thoreau 150 years ago in ‘Walden’ (interesting symmetry) and before that Rousseau. There are two things that make this film intriguing however. One is of course the special effects. About two-thirds of the way through, I naturally thought the huge multi-coloured winged creature swooping on the futuristic helicopters was real; and half expected famed BBC naturalist David Attenborough to appear describing the life-cycle of this monster.
The second is how much of a trope the narrative is; how many archetypes are hanging around like bats on a cave roof. So, the love story is Pocahontas in blue. The battle scenes recall the ‘shock and awe’ tactics early in the current Iraq conflict. When the protagonist (an ex-marine who switches sides) tames the winged monsters, virtually EVERY cowboy film ever made comes to mind – as with the attempt at forcibly moving indigenous communities to another location (see ‘How the West was Won‘). According to Christopher Booker, there are only seven possible narratives in storytelling, and I can safely say all of them are in this film. The ending is happy (that’s not a plot spoiler), and at least doesn’t have the eye-wateringly bad taste finale of that other recent mega-film, ’2012′, where billions have to die just so John Cusack can recapture his luurve, Amanda Peet.
The film is therefore almost allegory, perhaps even myth, and at that level nearly works. Science fiction tends to be either dystopian (‘Brazil’, ‘Terminator’, ‘District 9′), or as this one, utopian (similar to ‘Star Trek’, where humans apparently get on so well they work TOGETHER and send explorers to boldly go out into the universe – yes, well…). What irks me is the naïveté of ‘Avatar’. It teaches us nothing new, and whilst its escapism can’t be denied – and that’s not a bad thing – the central thesis is simply a trite re-working of old ideas, framed within what is an astonishing landscape. That said, it is streets ahead of George Lucas’ risible attempts to do the same thing with the Star Wars franchise in the ’90s – wrapping big themes around futuristic settings. I need say no more.
SO, go see the film. Enjoy its ravishing landscapes and bask in the glory of nature and its interconnectedness. Just remember that people running around in forests have no electricity. Imagine that! No iPhones!
