It is a movie… entertainment for some… political statement for others… If I go to a movie I don’t analyze it for its socio-economic-politcal flavor of the minute…

I suppose this guy would find something terribly anti-ethnic in Quiet Man…

It is a movie…

Another attempt to keep the blue man trapped beneath the heel of the white man. I should have guessed. I’m calling Al Smurfton about this.

btw. something around the eyes reminds me of Glasspool. Perhaps? Nah…

Barney, I think the objection is that they slather on the political correctness in an inept way, where it’s so obvious it prevents you from enjoying the film. That’s the impression I got from the reviews, which is why I’m not tempted to see it. All I’d be conscious of would be Cameron’s didactic intent. I’d rather have a story teller.

Mmm – one commenter over at John C. Wright’s blog thought that they had failed with the Evil Military Leader character, in that (and I quote) “Evil Military leader was so manly and badass that his manly-badassness overcame his evil and made him a likable character despite James Cameron’s efforts.

He was like the best parts of Clint Eastwood and Arnold Schwartznegger all rolled together. I mean, the guy made me think things like “Explosion next to me? Feh. No Oxygen? Scoff! Oxygen’s for pussies!”

Another commenter said “Do listen to the stuff that “evil” military leader says, though. I swear I could feel more hair grow on my chest every time he spoke. Watching him fight made me want to grow a beard and go bear-hunting with a black-powder rifle.”

So sounds like lots of enviro-preaching, patronising appropriation of ethnicity in a mish-mash of native Human cultures, but tons of fantastic effects and mega-cool asskicking by the Evil (yet So Bad He’s Good) Leader. Depends if one element will make up for the other, I suppose.

There are threee issues here:
1: Is it propaganda? Clearly it is, as its creator explicitly says that he has an agenda.

2: Is it good propaganda artistically? That is, does the message overwhelm the story? This is where the heaviness of the hand is a factor. From what I have read the story is pretty shallow and cliche. Cameron in his statements seems clearly to be pushing the spectacle of his visual technology. That doesn’t speak well for the merits of the movie.

3: Is it good propaganda philosophically? That is, is the message a good one or a bad one, or an incredible trite and stupid one?

I don’t mind message films, but they have to be well done. Does anyone not think To Kill a Mockingbird doesn’t have a message it is preaching? But it is a good film. I just can’t get into the worthy Christian films that make up for poor acting and writing by constantly preaching. And that’s with a message I agree with. Films that artlessly pound a message I don’t agree with, or even detest, I cannot sit through unless there are massive entertaining distractions (great FX) and I am sufficiently medicated so that I can ignore the dialogue. Of course that’s true of most bad films. The Phantom Menace went much better with a double whiskey.

Of course, even a well done message film I won’t enjoy very much if the message is really odious. I will never watch The Last Temptation of Christ and have little desire to watch Philadelphia or any film by Oliver Stone or Michael Moore.

Now for those who want to say “It’s just a movie”, think how Bambi and other like films have affected our view of hunting and animal rights. There is not much more important in a culture that the storyteller. That is why authoritarian and totalitarian rulers have sought to enslave that function to the service of the state.

Huh, sort of sounds like the way the Episcopal Church views it’s African brethren.

I will never watch The Last Temptation of Christ

I was required to watch that movie for a graduate theology class. Fortunately, the archbishop had forbidden attendance, which made the Orthodox priest (!!) instructor snicker when I brought it up, but he did allow me to read the book instead.

Yeah, right, Barney – “It’s only a movie.” Just as the homosexual propaganda put forth in “Milk” with Sean Penn and “Brokeback Mountain” were “only movies. Or, just as the left-wing trash spewed forth by Michael Moore’s documentaries, such as “Sicko” which praised Fidel Castro’s health care system, were “only movies.” And, the Bush assassination film and the spate of film depicting American soldiers in Iraq as blood-thirsty killers and rapists were “only movies.” Of course, “Triump of the Will” showing the virtues of the Nazi gathering at Nuremburg was “only a movie,” too.

The difference being that Triumph des Willens was a work of genius, and the Nazis aren’t around anymore. Nobody can see that flick and rush over to an SS-Totenkopfverbaende recruiting office.

Ed the Roman: My point is that at the time, “Triumph of the Will” was a glorification of the Nazi regime and Hitler and was meant to be propaganda. Perhaps there was “genius” in the technical aspects, but it was “genius” in the employ of evil. For that matter, both “Mrs. Miniver” and Spencer Tracy’s speech at the end of “State of the Union” were also propaganda of a sort, as was “Yankee Doodle Dandy.” But to say, as Barney did, that something is “only a movie” ignores the fact that folks like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone are not trying primarily to entertain but to persuade and further political viewpoints. It is naive to suggest that modern Hollywood does not have political viewpoints and politically correct causes which are promoted in many of its productions, explicitly and implicitly. Also, while my brother is fluent in German, my language skills are limited to English, awkward French, Latin liturgical responses, the names of Italian menu items, Czech swear words and Pig Latin, so I know not what “Totenkopfverbaend” means. A German dish with dumplings and kraut of some sort, I assume, served with exquisite Bavarian beer, right?

The issue is, Barney, that a lot of people are not able to ignore the socio-economic-political flavor of the minute as you seem to be. Some movies are just out and out propaganda pieces and are attempting to persuade and/or further an agenda – Milk being an ideal example.

Oliver Stone is noted for letting his agenda get in the way of truth in his films. Perhaps Cameron is the same way. I note that the only Cameron films I have seen have been Titanic and the Terminator movies.

We must be vigilant so that we can counter any poisonous emanations from Hollywood. Fortunately, as in the case of The Golden Compass, sometimes the Good Guys do win one of those battles.

Haven’t seen the movie yet, but just looking at the previews makes me think: “This is what the Ewoks should have been like, then Return of the Jedi would have made sense”. I hope that in 30 years, after Lucas is gone from the picture, the Films can be remade with a more coherent story line.

Avatar will be on Netflix eventually and I’ll probably watch it, although, to be honest it doesn’t sound like much of a story. Unlike 2012 (my guilty pleasure of 2009), it sounds so terribly earnest. Good propaganda entertains as it inspires.

Titanic subordinated the worst commercial naval disaster in history to a tawdry romance. That it made tons of money says more about culture than I really want to know.

Avatar sounds like perfect grist for the Rifftrax mill! I’ll wait until they’ve come out with the riff on it before watching it (on dvd).

As for ‘Triumph of the Will’, I remember when it came out on video, back in the 80s. The box had a big orange WARNING label on it! Dean and I rented it, feeling a bit dirty as we took it to the checkout – but it was a famous historic film, and we wanted to see what all the fuss was about. I confess to feeling rather nervous when we put it in the machine; I was a bit scared to be exposing myself to this notorious propaganda. I had a vague fear that somehow I could be brainwashed right through the TV and across the decades.

No fear. As a matter of fact, I fell asleep after about half an hour. “Hmmm…pictures of clouds, more clouds, music…zzzzzzzz….” I don’t remember even seeing the famous Nuremburg Rally scene with Hitler and his two pals walking up the long alley between the assembled ranks of Party members. Maybe that scene is always shown because it’s the best part of the film.

Don,

Sorry. The TKvB were the Death’s Head units in charge of the concentration camps.

And the other movies you mentioned are all shilling for bad ideas that haven’t been universally renounced yet. TdW is pretty much in the same basket as Birth of a Nation: you’re free to admire the execution.

Doctor M., IMAO the best Riefenstahl movie is Olympiade. Hitler didn’t like it very much, because she showed Jesse Owens winning.

Riefenstahl spent much of her time filming the Nouba in the Sudan after the war. For a Nazi propagandist she didn’t seem to have a racist bone in her body.

Running like the wind; living in a tree house; hunting with a bow and arrow; flying around on your own bird; chicks wearing next to nothing; beating the
#%@& out of the bad guys. Mr. Avatar, you got it good. Beats shoveling snow up here in the midwest.

Mr. Avatar learned vertical envelopment in the Marine Corps. The Navi picked up on it real quick.

James C. ain’t no racist and the movie ain’t no expensive morality play.

I just watched District 9, which was really strange and I almost turned it off. But it does seem to play some of the thematic material from Avatar without being preachy.

Weird, but not preachy.

I went and saw Avatar today in IMAX 3D and found it entertaining. The plot wasn’t a third as preachy as, say, your average episode of Captain Planet or anything from Michael Moore. The only obviously unlikeable character for me was the corporate administrator and he was more apathetic than over-the-top evil. Racist? The Na’vi are presented with a lot more dignity than the Gungans in the Star Wars prequels. Preachy? Sure, a little. So much so as to destroy the entertainment value? Not with those amazing visuals.