Poll: Avatar - Who did you root for

Josdeb

New member
May 22, 2008
369
0
0
Layz92 said:
JinxyKatte said:
Layz92 said:
iLikeHippos said:
I rooted for the humans, MERELY because the ending part was so mother fucking cheap.

I've discussed this before, and my opinion hasn't changed, but what the fuck was it with all the vicious animals SUDDENLY cooperating with the Na'vi and in an instant know who their enemy was that they HAD to unite to fight against?

It's so cheap, not even air can compare to its fucking cheapness.

And so little is explained, but I'd side with the humans, no matter the cause, any day of the time.

... I'm still angry that the Na'vi won. Such a fucking cheap shot by the story. They were about to get mother fucking crushed. *-.-
Hmmmm I never quite bothered thinking about it... It really is a literal Dues Ex Machina.
Isnt the whole point, everything on the planet has a connection. The planet is literally alive and when the moment called for it protected its self.
They say specifically that the planet never acts on dangers and lets them solve themselves. The end of the first time is the first time within their knowledge of it happening so I would still call it a Dues Ex Machina, they had no other way of making the problem better so they had to phone up a god/deity.
I think that's because that was the first time the planet had ever been endangered by aliens?

And in response to the topic, I went for the Na'vi (Yeah, I know, whatever :p)
Only because the humans literally went onto their planet, said 'Hey, piss off, we own everything now' and started shooting them.
 

WanderingFool

New member
Apr 9, 2009
3,991
0
0
Hubilub said:
On an emotional level I stayed neutral, but I believe the Na'vi are right and the humans are wrong.

It was never explained that humanity needed unobtanium to survive, only that it's really expensive stuff they can get rich on. On an entire planet there should be more than just one place where they can find unobtanium, but apparently they didn't want to make the effort of relocating to another side of the planet.

And of course, that is considering that there are no other places in the entire universe where you can get unobtanium, which frankly sounds far-fetched. If it's so damn rare, then I don't see how humanity would survive for long on that stuff.

Jake Sully isn't a jerk. Why should he side with the humans in this conflict when they are the bigger assholes? And why should they just let the humans get their will through? They'd probably start harassing and killing other Na'vi as they went looking for more unobtanium.

And who the hell can support the idea of the humans uplifting the Na'vi from their primitive society? Remember the words Manifest Destiny?
I was going to say something along these lines, but Hubilub beat me to it. Hell, its almost exactly what I was going to say, though I'm going to add a bit more. I cant help but think of the early years of our (USA) country, and how we handled the Native Americans. We took their land, forced them onto small territories, crowding them with other creeds of Native Americans, and if we wanted the land for something (Gold, anyone?) We boot them off to another territory and so on. The same shits been done to other countries, Great Britain is one of the more predominant perpetrators, having taken a large number of colonies all over the world back in the last century. So this story was basically a retelling of events that happened on earth hundreds of times, only difference, the natives won... until a sequal comes out and the epic story get screwed up for the sake of a "few dollars more".

*Edit*

jumjalalabash said:
I for one can't want the humans to win being that they all look like rednecks. Really have you seen what of those guys look like. Course I hate the Na'vi more so GlaDos option for me.
Yeah, thats right. I honestly feel that they made the humans a bunch of gun-troting rednecks and complete D-bags (specially that CEO dude, the soldier dude was funny as shit). It seemed painful to actually hope the humans would win, cause than you would be cheering for a bunch of jerks. I would have made the humans more like-able, thus making it much hard for the audience to side with just one side, but as it stands, it like if you dont side with the Na'vi, your a bad person. There would be a number of people who did side with the humans, but I do feel the movie gult triped you into liking the Na'vi.
 

LaBarnes

New member
Oct 23, 2009
46
0
0
I reluctantly supported the Na'vi.

Frankly, I hated the Na'vi, I hate all the stupid primitive tribal nonsense and their unwillingness to develop past living in trees, but what I do support is property rights. Regardless of how backwards their culture may have been, they still owned the tree and outlying areas, and the humans used force to take it from them.
In a smaller scale, this is known as robbery, something of which I am not fond.
 

imnot

New member
Apr 23, 2010
3,916
0
0
rabidmidget said:
That's strange, I don't recall GLADOS being in that movie, I ought to go rewatch it.
Remember the part where the humans shot a blue portal on the moon, and an orange one under the tree, and it fell through, GLaDOS said"to ensure the safe performance blah bla h blah, Fling fling yourself!"best bit in the movie, you must of dozed off.
 

jumjalalabash

New member
Jan 25, 2010
360
0
0
I for one can't want the humans to win being that they all look like rednecks. Really have you seen what of those guys look like. Course I hate the Na'vi more so GlaDos option for me.
 

SwagLordYoloson

New member
Jul 21, 2010
784
0
0
I think that the humans should of just planet busted (or Death Starred, your choice) Pandora and used a magnetic containment field to hold any material that is worth mining (metals) in orbit so that they can easily extract large chunks of unobtanium. That way no poor humans would had to die, don't all we humans got to stick together?

On a second more realistic note, i liked the helicopters
 

ShrooM_DoughKiD

New member
Jan 14, 2010
344
0
0
Does anyone here realise that Avatar is a remake of Pocahontas? an exact copy of the story. humans taking over a "barbaric and alien" race, does that not ring any bells to anyone?

OT: Na'vi. Humans were just portrayed as gluttonous rabid animals.

**afterthought**

I wonder if Nintendo chucked a shit over Na'vi, what with it being so much like Navi (Zelda OoT) I mean.. they were both blue.. but did anyone say, "Hey, Listen"?
 

Quid Plura

New member
Apr 27, 2010
267
0
0
I think it shows that the meeting between two cultures always is more complicated then people want to acknowledge. It's very easy to root for the Na'vi, because they are clearly less developed technically and strategically. But is it really that easy?
 

trooperpaul

New member
Apr 14, 2009
141
0
0
GLaDOS, because I like Valve.
On Topic, I liked the Na'vi, because I have so many Native American friends that are still a bit "angry" over the whole Manifest Destiny thing. I just expected it to turn into "Trail of Tears: Pandoran Edition".
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
Chunko said:
I always thought that the Na'vi were being arrogant and unreasonable. Humanity was offering them a lot and they refused. Humans were out there for there own survival and the Na'vi would not be diplomatic. That gave them only one option. The humans didn't care about exterminating the Na'vi, just surviving.

Jake Sully specifically was a jerk. Aside from showing no emotion he damned his own species. In addition to this he was hurting the Na'vi as well. If he had not united them maybe like twelve aliens would have died. Instead hundreds perished, both human and Na'vi. I'm sure that after the mining had been set up Na'vi would have been forced to negotiate with humanity, and maybe they could be uplifted from their primitive society.

In addition to this I quite frankly did not like any of the aliens. The only characters who stuck out to me were humans. I liked the executive and the macho military guy (I can't remember their names, sue me). On a really shallow level I didn't like the movie which made me immune to its propaganda.
1) Humanity was offering the Navi roads, education and medicines. What use had they for that? They had their own knowledge, their own transport and their own remedies. They were in harmony with their environment, not seeking to change and control it. In return for what the humans were offering, they wanted to be allowed to basically rape the planet, open-pit mining it to haul away the planet's mineral riches.

What you have here is an exact repeat of all those early European colonial movements; seeking out new lands, impressing the natives with cheap shiny and then pillaging them for all their worth. The lack of 'diplomacy' on behalf of the Na'vi was simply them not kowtowing to the demands of the invaders. The humans failed to understand the nature of the Na'vi, as it was fundamentally different to their own and the corporations were more interested in turning a quick buck than real diplomatic relations.

2) "Humans were out there for there own survival" is bullshit :/ They use unobtanium in trains and fusion reactors to power their ships. It's not survival, it money, through and through. The corporation would have loved to have just exterminated the Na'vi as it would have made their job soooo much easier, but that would have looked bad in the press and hurt their stocks. Yeah, aren't they just made of heart?

3) Criticism of Jake should really focus on how he took so long to convey the message he was meant to deliver, contributing to the military intervention, but be honest that that was going to happen anyway when you have a corporation with big guns and a titanic pot of gold sat right there for the taking.

Criticising Jake for unifying the tribes to fight off the humans is bizarre - what, the Na'vi were meant to just roll over and take it? Is that what you would do if someone burned down your home and stole your land, just go 'ok'? Or would you, you know, stand up and make a stand against the thuggish invader? I find that you think forcing the Na'vi to negotiate through burning their homes and pillaging their land is an acceptable way of opening diplomatic relations worrying and immature, as is your assertion that theirs was a 'primitive' society :/

It's a shame that you feel an anti-colonial film with strong environmental preservation and spiritual overtones is a 'propaganda piece'. To be so closed to the beauty of nature and to so completely embrace technological advances at the expense of all else... I just find that shocking. You have completely bought into the consumerist propaganda of our time to the extent of not even realising that life doesn't have to be this way.

Chunko said:
Hubilub said:
On an emotional level I stayed neutral, but I believe the Na'vi are right and the humans are wrong.

It was never explained that humanity needed unobtanium to survive, only that it's really expensive stuff they can get rich on. On an entire planet there should be more than just one place where they can find unobtanium, but apparently they didn't want to make the effort of relocating to another side of the planet.

And of course, that is considering that there are no other places in the entire universe where you can get unobtanium, which frankly sounds far-fetched. If it's so damn rare, then I don't see how humanity would survive for long on that stuff.

Jake Sully isn't a jerk. Why should he side with the humans in this conflict when they are the bigger assholes? And why should they just let the humans get their will through? They'd probably start harassing and killing other Na'vi as they went looking for more unobtanium.

And who the hell can support the idea of the humans uplifting the Na'vi from their primitive society? Remember the words Manifest Destiny?
We all regret that, which is why I think we wouldn't treat the Na'vi the same way we treated the Native Americans. As for the unobtanium we needed the minerals for our economy, and therefor our species to survive. Besides that even if we didn't taking over Na'vi would allow for us to build a galactic empire and make the world better for everyone. Mass Effect Anyone. The unobtanium itself would just get the humans started on bigger projects. Once Pandora was depleated (which would probably take 1000 years) they could expand to other planets.
Erm, it was quite clear in the film that the corporation had learned no lessons from the past. They were there for exploitation, pure and simple - to the hell with the natives. Sure, the scientists were sent out on education missions and the such like, but their feedback was pretty much ignored when it couldn't be directly used for military advantage or commercial use.

Again, unobtanium wasn't necessary for survival, it was prized for the potential for expansion. Economy =/= survival of the species. Economy is no reason to wage war on another people - or at least it shouldn't be (glares at the carnage in Iraq).

As for humans going all Mass Effect utopia... no. If you read any backstory you would know that Earth is an industrial wasteland, devoid of nature. It's the antithesis of Pandora. Rampant industrial growth and the strength of corporate interests cost the planet dearly, and that sort of thinking was what led to the assumption that Pandora could be similarly exploited.

Really, I don't see how anyone who'd taken the time to think would support the humans, especially Americans - I mean, aren't you all meant to be anti-colonial? Or is that beaten by a deep-seated hatred of nature?
 

Kwatsu

New member
Feb 21, 2007
198
0
0
Not telling us what unobtainium actually is, was a major failing of Avatar. It basically took away our ability to have a properly informed debate about who was in the right and who was wrong. If it was, say, a mineral people could get high on, which is why it commanded such a high price, then yeah, the humans were just being exploitative and cruel.

But if it's something like starship fuel--without which human colonies and space explorers would be stranded and left to die--or some substance that can cure disease and the overpopulated Earth is suffering from endless plagues, then the human battle on Pandora is cast in a considerably different light. It would become a battle of two species trying to preserve their people and way of life. But it's never spelled out and it just becomes all about "humans want money, the Na'vi just want to be left alone."

Cameron didn't seem to realise that, with unobtainium being the crux of this conflict, he should tell us what it actually is. The conflict in Avatar could have been much more nuanced with villains and heroes on both sides. But because he clearly wanted to focus just on Jake Sully's Na'vi Adventure, he didn't bother. It reduces the film to the moral equivalent of a cartoon when it could have been much more, so easily.

This is why I only enjoyed Avatar as a very beautiful sci-fi nature documentary. Cameron doesn't put enough substance into the conflict for me to care about who wins.
 

Duskwaith

New member
Sep 20, 2008
647
0
0
I get that the Na'vi were trying to protect there homelands and stuff but they seemed just as eager to kill the humans for it as the humans to kill them.

Why nukeing it from orbit then landing and scooping up the unobtanium(cheapest name ever) when everything is ashes, i do not know
 

Communist partisan

New member
Jan 24, 2009
1,858
0
0
who cares about Avatar than you have:
and only reason why I would be on the Na'vis side would..... well I have no reason why I would be on their side so I don't care if the humans would make Royale whith cheese of the Na'vi.
 

Reveras

New member
Nov 9, 2009
465
0
0
Humans. Let's kill the blue sons of bitches. Sweet lady progress marchers onward.
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
WanderingFool said:
... I cant help but think of the early years of our (USA) country, and how we handled the Native Americans. We took their land, forced them onto small territories, crowding them with other creeds of Native Americans, and if we wanted the land for something (Gold, anyone?) We boot them off to another territory and so on. The same shits been done to other countries, Great Britain is one of the more predominant perpetrators, having taken a large number of colonies all over the world back in the last century. So this story was basically a retelling of events that happened on earth hundreds of times, only difference, the natives won... until a sequal comes out and the epic story get screwed up for the sake of a "few dollars more".
Yep, the British, French, Spanish and Dutch are kinda the big boys from the colonial era, fucking up everyone's shit for a bit of cash and slaves. I can't really see how anyone with a bit of historical knowledge could condone the human's course of action in Avatar. The fact that so many seem able to makes me sad - especially when talk of orbital genocide starts getting thrown around. If that's public opinion, what's stopping governments from just busting into any blood diamond country and fucking their shit up for some diamonds? Or invading an oil-rich country to nick their wealth - oh wait, the US has done that one already :/
 

WanderingFool

New member
Apr 9, 2009
3,991
0
0
Kwatsu said:
Not telling us what unobtainium actually is, was a major failing of Avatar. It basically took away our ability to really understand who was in the right and who was wrong. If it was, say, a mineral people could get high on, which is why it commanded such a high price, then yeah, the humans were just being exploitative and cruel.

But if it's something like starship fuel--without which human colonies and space explorers would be stranded and left to die--or some substance that can cure disease and the overpopulated Earth is suffering from endless plagues, then the human battle on Pandora is cast in a considerably different light. It would become a battle of two species trying to preserve their people and way of life.

Cameron didn't seem to realise that, with unobtainium being the crux of this conflict, he should tell us what it actually is. The conflict in Avatar could have been much more nuanced with villains and heroes on both sides. But because he clearly wanted to focus just on Jake Sully's Na'vi Adventure, he didn't bother. It reduces the film to the moral equivalent of a cartoon when it could have been much more, so easily.

This is why I only enjoyed Avatar as a very beautiful sci-fi nature documentary. Cameron doesn't put enough substance into the conflict for me to care about who wins.
Quoted for the fucking truth, I could see the where the film was going, but Like I said earlier, the movie was made to practially shoehorn you into siding with the Na'vi.
 

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
Hang on, this movie made 2-d villains and used every trick in the book to make you hate the humans and love the psudo-hunter/religious natives, and you side with the cartoony villains?
 

Housebroken Lunatic

New member
Sep 12, 2009
2,544
0
0
Hubilub said:
Jake Sully isn't a jerk. Why should he side with the humans in this conflict when they are the bigger assholes? And why should they just let the humans get their will through? They'd probably start harassing and killing other Na'vi as they went looking for more unobtanium.
The Emperor of Mankind does not approve of your alien loving ways. Report to the couryard for flogging and execution at once!

Remember: "Look not upon the alien, listen no to the alien, speak not unto the alien!"
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
Duskwaith said:
Why nukeing it from orbit then landing and scooping up the unobtanium(cheapest name ever) when everything is ashes, i do not know
Sanctions imposed by the Earth governing body prevent the use of any space-borne weapons by the corporation seeking to exploit Pandora. There were also limits on the military hardware they were able to use. Hey, if you don't know something just knock up the official site - it's not like Cameron didn't write all this down on the internet.