I love the movie “Avatar”. So naturally I’ve noticed that Avatar-bashing has become sort of a fad in the past year, and it drives me crazy that people pick a side just for fun instead of actually formulating their own opinions. For a while I’ve thought about writing some sort of review/defense of the film, and I finally decided what I’m going to do: I’m going to go systematically through all the complaints and address them, just to prove that there actually are reasons for which “Avatar” was a good movie. If you honestly just didn’t like it, I get that I’m not going to change your opinion. I’ll warn you – this is a rant. But have a look below anyway.
1. “The plot sucks.”
Before I even start, let me just express my frustration that so many people use a vague, meaningless, judgmental statement like “the plot sucks” as the main point of their argument and think they’ve automatically won. I mean, it’s okay if you think the plot sucks, but why? Like, what am I supposed to say to that besides “the plot doesn’t suck”? I could go into a lot of detail about why the plot doesn’t suck, but without a starting point I just sort of have to fight stupidity with stupidity here.
Bitterness aside, here is why I think the plot doesn’t suck. It’s based on the classic hero’s journey. It’s a smooth rising action of two parallel conflicts, man v. man (humans/Nav’i) and man v. himself (Jake’s loyalty to the military/his love for Neytiri), which converge at the same moment right before the climax. It’s based on a classic three-act structure. It makes use of twists and turns, red herrings, and slow reveals. It sows suspense by turning the tables here and hin; dangling characters over the brink of death and then bringing them back again. That’s great action storytelling. These are all elements of a plot that doesn’t suck.
Before I get into the meat of the former tirade (because these details are hard to recall in the middle of an argument), the other person usually regains their wits and elaborates on why the plot sucks by dredging up this old classic:
2. “It’s Pocahontas with blue people.” and sometimes, “Disney did it first.”
Let’s address the second one first, just because it’s a little more fun to hammer into the ground. If you think that Disney invented any of their plots, you need a serious reality check. All that Disney’s “Pocahontas” did was choose a quasi-historical legend as the next material to squeeze into their corporate machine and turn into fodder for their Princess Collection. Disney did not “do it first”, history did it first. And while we’re on that subject, we could go so far as saying that Disney took a historical event and made it into a blatantly incorrect retelling, while Avatar took the same event and made it into an allegory.
But let’s assume you don’t need to be told any of that (and if so, I’m sorry for the sass). I would still maintain that there are no original plots; every story is a variant of another, and all of it can be traced back to Greek mythology. Anything, even stories that seem incredibly original, can be broken down into just another tired old plot with new clothes – if you’re cynical enough to look with X-ray glasses. That doesn’t mean a movie is bad, just because it applies to every movie. Check it out:
- “Fight Club”, “Little Shop of Horrors” : alluring mentor calls protagonist to be more daring than he is, then ironically must be defeated using this newfound courage.
- “Harry Potter”, “Mathilda”, “A Wrinkle In Time” : gifted and deserving child/children living in awful circumstances is/are called into a magical world in which their gifts are recognized and must be used.
- “The Matrix”, “1984”, “Fahrenheit 451” : status-quo-accepting Everyman in oppressive dystopian society is awakened to the injustice around him and attempts to break free
You get the idea. So you can make Mad Libs (like this one) about how similar “Avatar” and “Pocahontas” are, sure. The point is, you could make a Mad Lib joke linking any famous movie to another if you really wanted to.
Even within a context where we admit how similar the two movies are (and of course, on a surface level, they are), “Avatar” and “Pocahontas” handle the basic plot totally differently. One is told from the native perspective and the other from that of the settlers; one is told from the female perspective as a romance, the other is told from the male perspective as a hero’s journey. You may as well say that “Wicked” is pointless because “The Wizard of Oz” did it first.
“Avatar” brings so much to the table of this basic, quintessential story. There’s the use of dreams as a motif for perspective, and how hard it is to change yours when you already have accepted ideas of reality. There’s the tension of Jake’s betrayal as a double agent and his internal struggle as he slowly switches sides (in contrast to John Smith’s generic Disney-prince righteousness). There’s the moral of how expectations can doom or save you – if you believe that you will encounter Hell in the jungle, then you turn the jungle into a hell of your own creation.
Enough blabbering. The Pocahontas thing does feed understandably into another complaint, which is this:
3. “It’s predictable.”
Yeah, it sort of is. But only in the sense that a lot of big-budget pop movies are, meaning: you know how you want it to end, and you definitely expect a blockbuster movie like Avatar to give you what you want. In my opinion, that doesn’t make it less satisfying. When the prince leans over Sleeping Beauty to kiss her, do you really need to be wondering whether or not she’s going to wake up? Besides, the movie takes plenty of detours on the way. Even if you know how the whole thing is going to end, there are still moments that make you stop for a second and think “…how are they going to get out of this one?” And yeah, sure, you saw Jake’s taming of the wingèd dragon creature coming, but I’m pretty sure that was deliberate. It’s like the noir movie where where they guy passes by the garbage chompers and says, “You fall into those things, you’ll be ripped to pieces in a second.” Hmm, how do you think the villain is going to die at the end? It’s camp, people. Calm your tits, they did it on purpose.
4. “The only reason it was good was the 3D.”
Yes, the 3D was incredible, and the movie is weaker without it. All I would say is that it’s well-used 3D in that it’s not pretty for no reason. The plot of this movie depends on the viewer’s investment in the safety of the Pandoran jungle, and after racing through the treetops and experiencing Pandora’s beauty, I really did care about conserving it. This movie is pure escapism, and it’s good at it. But the escapism is part of the whole package. Seeing is believing, and the beautiful effects in “Avatar” serve to sell the story to you.
In the end, what really makes this movie for me – and what makes me so passionate about defending it – is the level of attachment it fosters for the characters and the spectacular virgin world of Pandora. I cared desperately about their fate when I was watching the movie, and I guess I secretly think that anyone who didn’t is a horrible person. But I know that’s not the case. I just wrote this to put some weight in the pro-Avatar camp, and to make people think twice about hating on the movie. Opinions are funny things. Shitting all over someone else’s opinion with blatant disrespect is usually frowned upon, until for some reason society agrees on a whipping-boy, and then suddenly it’s not. I guess I’m just trying to nudge people toward noticing how unfair that is.
Four bullet points isn’t as extravagant or comprehensive as I imagined when I started writing this argument, but I think I’ve said enough. Whether I change anyone’s mind or not is icing on the cake to me. I love “Avatar”, and I’m not sorry. And the great thing about stories is that you can discuss them for hours, and never reach an agreement. But when it comes to the end of the day and it’s just you and your imagination, alone with the story – nothing and nobody can ever mess that up.