Movie Review: Avatar

by Eric Melin on January 7, 2010

in Print Reviews

“Avatar” is already out in theaters and shows no signs of slowing down at the box office. I usually don’t review films after the opening weekend (I missed the press screening because it happened on the same day that I was fulfilling my rock destiny), but I’ve had several requests for this one, so here it goes:

You already know that “Avatar” is the much-hyped, long-gestating James Cameron project that spotlights a war between desperate humans and the Na’vi, natives from an otherworldly planet called Pandora.

Besides the revolutionary motion-capture technology that allowed Cameron to see his real-life actors as CGI-created Na’vi while shooting, “Avatar” sports expansive, wholly believable computer-generated scenes that make up a major portion of the movie.avatar 2009The detail of this palette, combined with state-of-the-art immersive 3D (not gimmicky throw-stuff-at-the-screen type shots), makes “Avatar” a visual wonder. (Take it from me, what looked like bad videogame graphics on small-screen ads and trailers is quite elaborately rendered once you see it on a giant IMAX screen.)

But you already knew that, right?

What amazes me about James Cameron here (and to a lesser extent with 1997′s overbudgeted told-you-so triumph “Titanic”) is what amazes me about George Lucas and J.R.R. Tolkien (and, by extension, Peter Jackson): These men were able to tackle the power of myth head-on and come out with huge epic films and books that recreated entire worlds. They then filled those worlds with immediately recognizable archetypes and put their protagonists through the adventure of a lifetime.And somehow, despite the abundant stereotypes and cliches (and a long list of other filmmakers who’ve tried the same thing and failed), the stories work.

worthington avatar 2009Cameron has a worthy hero: Sam Worthington is sympathetic and subtle (as subtle as you can be in a movie with themes this big) as a paraplegic ex-Marine named Jake Sully who experiences what it’s like to walk again as his consciousness is uploaded into the body of a Na’vi avatar. Screw that–the guy does more than walk. He runs for miles, jumps off cliffs, climbs enormous trees, and rides on the back of magnificent winged creatures. Who wouldn’t want to do that?

That in itself is a great key to why this movie has such mass appeal. “Avatar” taps into a very modern, seemingly not-too-far-off fantasy. It’s the “virtual reality” idea that anyone anywhere could become someone (or something) else and experience three-dimensional movement and feeling in a completely foreign world. It feels so real in this movie; the CGI Na’vi bodies so corporeal, that maybe, just maybe the technology is not too far down the road. (I have read recently about some uber-fans of the film that have expressed a kind of depression when they come down from the movie’s high and have to face facts that Pandora isn’t real!) This is big wish-fulfillment stuff here, kids.

Cameron veteran Sigourney Weaver (“Aliens”) lends credibility and a little gravitas to the movie as a human scientist studying the Na’vi, while Giovanni Ribisi (as a corporate bureaucrat) and Stephen Lang (as a gung-ho warring Colonel) are on hand to play the typical one-dimensional bad guys that come with this kind of storytelling.

avatar 2009 winged creaturesOf course, Ribisi and Lang are no Darth Vader, but Cameron’s got a bigger villain in mind; one that President Eisenhower warned us about on his way out of office way back in 1961–the entire U.S. Military-Industrial Complex.

Enter “The Movie’s Politics,” stage left:

Let’s summarize: Unobtainium is a rare mineral with anti-gravitational properties that the U.S. needs to allow the citizens of an environmentally ruined Earth to leave that dried-up rock and colonize other planets. Is it the government trying to chop down all the trees in the Pandoran rainforest to extract this element? Nope. It’s a corporation whose ultimate goal is to exploit the land for it’s non-renewable energy.Hmmm…doesn’t sound that much like science fiction to me. That’s one of the reasons the movie hits home on a certain level with mass audiences.

lang 2009 avatar colonelAs humans, we are familiar with ourselves and therefore always yearn for “the other,” and that’s exactly what Jake gets in this fantasy; one where good and evil are black and white. (I’m NOT talking literally here, although I making that point wouldn’t be too much of a stretch either.)

As it’s been pointed out, Jake’s journey is nothing new. He is inundated with Na’vi culture. Like Kevin Costner in “Dances With Wolves” or Pocahontas, he is the stranger in a strange land. That is, until he (the noble white man) becomes one of the Na’vi. Then his allegiance changes.

Besides all this, the film has a serious Buddhist slant: “Everything is connected.” In “Avatar,” that idea is as literal as it gets. As the Na’vi stride through Pandora’s forest, their bare feet light up the ground beneath them, a visual representation of this idea. Trees are spiritual kin to the Na’vi. They are tall, noble extensions of the rainforest-like planet and form a kind of all-encompassing exoskeleton. The ends of the Na’vi’s long ponytails have strands that are in constant motion; they’re alive with a certain energy and literally tie together with those of the flying beasts to create a kind of symbiosis.

saldana avatar 2009As silly and obvious as some of this may sound, like Lucas and Jackson before him, Cameron plays it completely straight. It’s the only way to tell this kind of story. If the characters were winking and self-aware, it would distract us. As Jake experiences the ultimate hero’s journey, all the supporting characters (including his Na’vi guide and love interest, voiced and acted underneath layers of CGI wizardry by Zoe Saldana) are there to do just that–support his journey and play their intended part.

In other words, there is nothing new in the story department of “Avatar,” but let’s give it some credit for tapping into a cultural zeitgeist of sorts (especially with everyone giving so much undue credit to “Up in the Air” for the same thing) and approaching its well-worn story with renewed technical pizazz.This kind of movie has been made before. This kind of movie will be made again. But right now, it works. It’s immersive. It’s transportive. (For the main character, it’s transformative.)

Isn’t that what good movies do?

Eric is the Editor-in-Chief of Scene-Stealers and regular critic for KCTV5. He’s a member of the BFCA, VP of the KCFCC, and drummer for The Dead Girls and Ultimate Fakebook. He is also the current 2013 Air Guitar World Champion Mean Melin. Eric goes to 11. Follow him at:

Facebook Twitter Google+ YouTube 

{ 38 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Xavier January 7, 2010 at 7:16 pm

For me apart from a couple of cool battle scenes and the cgi (mostly) Avatar was a complete failure that didn’t live up to its own hype and was excruciatingly long. The similarities with other movies are just that, too similar and the political/environmental metaphor was way too thin and obvious. I thought the cgi/3-d stuff was really good, but not really, change-the-way-we-make-films good, the cgi acting still has a way to go before it even starts to compete with human characters, although in avatar it was a step forward. There is no way I would ever consider this movie remotely in the same league as LOTR or Star Wars (the original trilogy). A complete bore for me.

Reply

2 Xavier January 7, 2010 at 7:16 pm

For me apart from a couple of cool battle scenes and the cgi (mostly) Avatar was a complete failure that didn’t live up to its own hype and was excruciatingly long. The similarities with other movies are just that, too similar and the political/environmental metaphor was way too thin and obvious. I thought the cgi/3-d stuff was really good, but not really, change-the-way-we-make-films good, the cgi acting still has a way to go before it even starts to compete with human characters, although in avatar it was a step forward. There is no way I would ever consider this movie remotely in the same league as LOTR or Star Wars (the original trilogy). A complete bore for me.

Reply

3 Shelby January 8, 2010 at 12:38 pm

I agree 100% with everything @1 Xavier said and honestly can’t believe that you, Eric, gave this heap such a glowing review. Wow.

Reply

4 Shelby January 8, 2010 at 12:38 pm

I agree 100% with everything @1 Xavier said and honestly can’t believe that you, Eric, gave this heap such a glowing review. Wow.

Reply

5 Nina January 8, 2010 at 2:50 pm

I went to the movie with very low expectations and found myself really enjoying it. I expected Cameron to somehow undermine the visuals with a weak story (Titanic) but the story was simply told and even enough that it didn’t ruin the movie for me. I’ve always admired Jackson for using cgi as a believable tool in his story telling and felt for the longest time he was one of the few that did it well. Lucas did it in the past but I felt his recent Star Wars efforts were more flash than substance. Feel that Cameron might now be able to edge in on the club.

What I really enjoyed was this review. I love the Campbell reference. It read more like a paper where the title was ‘The Hero of a Thousand Faces and Hollywood’. I found that oddly refreshing. Perhaps I’m pining for the days of when or read the review too quickly. Either way enjoyed the movie for what it was and enjoyed this review for the same.

Reply

6 Nina January 8, 2010 at 2:50 pm

I went to the movie with very low expectations and found myself really enjoying it. I expected Cameron to somehow undermine the visuals with a weak story (Titanic) but the story was simply told and even enough that it didn’t ruin the movie for me. I’ve always admired Jackson for using cgi as a believable tool in his story telling and felt for the longest time he was one of the few that did it well. Lucas did it in the past but I felt his recent Star Wars efforts were more flash than substance. Feel that Cameron might now be able to edge in on the club.

What I really enjoyed was this review. I love the Campbell reference. It read more like a paper where the title was ‘The Hero of a Thousand Faces and Hollywood’. I found that oddly refreshing. Perhaps I’m pining for the days of when or read the review too quickly. Either way enjoyed the movie for what it was and enjoyed this review for the same.

Reply

7 Trey January 8, 2010 at 5:44 pm

Eric,

Nice review. I think I completely agree with you on this one. While the story was at times (most times) heavy handed, it still was strong enough to carry the viewer through and give substance to what ultimately is a huge action film/special effects extravaganza. This thing’s not super intellectual, but you don’t feel dumber for watching it either. Add in Cameron’s penchant for strong female character and a solid and not too distracting love story, and you have a film that appeals to a massive audience. This may not be one for my DVD library, but I left really happy.

Trey

Reply

8 Trey January 8, 2010 at 5:44 pm

Eric,

Nice review. I think I completely agree with you on this one. While the story was at times (most times) heavy handed, it still was strong enough to carry the viewer through and give substance to what ultimately is a huge action film/special effects extravaganza. This thing’s not super intellectual, but you don’t feel dumber for watching it either. Add in Cameron’s penchant for strong female character and a solid and not too distracting love story, and you have a film that appeals to a massive audience. This may not be one for my DVD library, but I left really happy.

Trey

Reply

9 .alphamonkey. January 8, 2010 at 6:06 pm

My grizzled and cynical brain has a hard time overlooking blatant pablum, but I have to admit: Everything about how Cameron makes a film leads me to believe that were you to take the wee monkey lad that sat in a theater in 1977 in utter awe of Star War and plopped him in front of Avatar, he’d be just as hooked for life as I was for Star Wars.

Reply

10 .alphamonkey. January 8, 2010 at 6:06 pm

My grizzled and cynical brain has a hard time overlooking blatant pablum, but I have to admit: Everything about how Cameron makes a film leads me to believe that were you to take the wee monkey lad that sat in a theater in 1977 in utter awe of Star War and plopped him in front of Avatar, he’d be just as hooked for life as I was for Star Wars.

Reply

11 Xavier January 9, 2010 at 6:13 am

@nina I always felt that jackson succeeded because most of the cgi in LOTR also used humans/costume/make-up as a basis and blended the two together to be perfectly in sync whereas cameron’s seemed to be cgi from the base up, which still leaves a lot to be desired in the acting department

Reply

12 Xavier January 9, 2010 at 6:13 am

@nina I always felt that jackson succeeded because most of the cgi in LOTR also used humans/costume/make-up as a basis and blended the two together to be perfectly in sync whereas cameron’s seemed to be cgi from the base up, which still leaves a lot to be desired in the acting department

Reply

13 Nina January 10, 2010 at 3:26 am

@xavier True, you have a point on LOTR and other Jackson movies. He is quite skilled with that. Cameron, not so much on that level of interaction. I think it was a smart move on his part to minimize the real humans interacting with his pandora world where the contrast could be a distraction. I could just enjoy the visuals and chuck any awkwardness to the medium. It was like an impressive cgi animation movie and the 3D just helped with the suspension of disbelief. As for the acting, it was far better than expected when something is so effects heavy and better than many of the movies out there. It wasn’t as distracting as it could’ve been and I’d say keep demanding the perfect movie and maybe they’ll achieve it.

Reply

14 Nina January 10, 2010 at 3:26 am

@xavier True, you have a point on LOTR and other Jackson movies. He is quite skilled with that. Cameron, not so much on that level of interaction. I think it was a smart move on his part to minimize the real humans interacting with his pandora world where the contrast could be a distraction. I could just enjoy the visuals and chuck any awkwardness to the medium. It was like an impressive cgi animation movie and the 3D just helped with the suspension of disbelief. As for the acting, it was far better than expected when something is so effects heavy and better than many of the movies out there. It wasn’t as distracting as it could’ve been and I’d say keep demanding the perfect movie and maybe they’ll achieve it.

Reply

15 Xavier January 10, 2010 at 6:16 am

I agree the cgi acting was better than most, but there was so much hype before the movie that basically said that all movies are going to be made like this shortly and I just didn’t think it was that good, still has a way to go before it comes close to being a good replacement for human characters

Reply

16 Xavier January 10, 2010 at 6:16 am

I agree the cgi acting was better than most, but there was so much hype before the movie that basically said that all movies are going to be made like this shortly and I just didn’t think it was that good, still has a way to go before it comes close to being a good replacement for human characters

Reply

17 ABBA January 11, 2010 at 8:44 am

I’m quite bemused by some of the comments here regarding the acting & CGI. I’d like to ask: which (I assume) CGI character’s part was poorly acted? I felt the strongest performance was Zoe Saldana’s – and she was completely CG! Also, which other incidents exactly showed that the acting suffered because of the CGI?

And so what if there are similarities with other movies? There are only so many ways of presenting a movie, and sooner or later we’ll run out of them all. It’s not whether this or that premise has been done before, but how it achieves its objectives, and in this respect Avatar came out tops for me.

Reply

18 ABBA January 11, 2010 at 8:44 am

I’m quite bemused by some of the comments here regarding the acting & CGI. I’d like to ask: which (I assume) CGI character’s part was poorly acted? I felt the strongest performance was Zoe Saldana’s – and she was completely CG! Also, which other incidents exactly showed that the acting suffered because of the CGI?

And so what if there are similarities with other movies? There are only so many ways of presenting a movie, and sooner or later we’ll run out of them all. It’s not whether this or that premise has been done before, but how it achieves its objectives, and in this respect Avatar came out tops for me.

Reply

19 Nich January 11, 2010 at 11:09 pm

This review is an exact reflection of how I felt.
The story was a crude rendition of pocahontas, with most characters being so one-dimensional it was almost funny.
BUT.
It was one of the most amazing looking films for quite awhile (although Lord of the Rings is still superior). Everything was incredibly well designed, the landscape was phenomenal, and characters were good, if a bit on the ridiculously colourful side.

Reply

20 Nich January 11, 2010 at 11:09 pm

This review is an exact reflection of how I felt.
The story was a crude rendition of pocahontas, with most characters being so one-dimensional it was almost funny.
BUT.
It was one of the most amazing looking films for quite awhile (although Lord of the Rings is still superior). Everything was incredibly well designed, the landscape was phenomenal, and characters were good, if a bit on the ridiculously colourful side.

Reply

21 Xavier January 13, 2010 at 3:57 pm

@ ABBA I didn’t say the movie suffered for the cgi acting, or that it was bad I was just saying that it still isn’t up to scratch compared to human acting, maybe in Avatar compared to the human character’s the CGI was on par but none of the performances by the actors were that brilliant. Don’t get me wrong I liked the CGI in it its just that after all the hype and the revolutionizing cinema stuff that was put out before the film was released it wasn’t earth shattering stuff. As Nich said LOTR looked better and that was what about 8 or 9 years ago now. Yes ideas are going to be recycled but people are still coming up with original ones and there are always new and alternate ways of presenting them and making the old conventions seem new. Avatar for me was just way too similar to pocahontas and was presented in a pretty obvious and traditional way.

Reply

22 Xavier January 13, 2010 at 3:57 pm

@ ABBA I didn’t say the movie suffered for the cgi acting, or that it was bad I was just saying that it still isn’t up to scratch compared to human acting, maybe in Avatar compared to the human character’s the CGI was on par but none of the performances by the actors were that brilliant. Don’t get me wrong I liked the CGI in it its just that after all the hype and the revolutionizing cinema stuff that was put out before the film was released it wasn’t earth shattering stuff. As Nich said LOTR looked better and that was what about 8 or 9 years ago now. Yes ideas are going to be recycled but people are still coming up with original ones and there are always new and alternate ways of presenting them and making the old conventions seem new. Avatar for me was just way too similar to pocahontas and was presented in a pretty obvious and traditional way.

Reply

23 Cameron January 14, 2010 at 2:46 pm

Xavier,

I am just curious and not just for you but for all of those talking about the CGI acting… I think the one thing that we are missing here is that James Cameron didn’t use motion capture technology for this film. He used performance capture. Which I though was really interesting because when I watched the film and as I continue to watch the film the movement of the Na’vi seemed really realistic. Why, because all the actions you see the Na’vi make are done by humans. I am going to assume that you already knew that. Now comparing it to LOTR.. I am not a huge fan of LOTR thematically but their use of motion capture pales in comparison to Avatar for the sole purpose of the realness of the face. I had no idea when I first saw this film that Zoe Saldana played Neiteryi (sp). But while watching the film I kept saying to myself she looks like somebody I have seen before… James Cameron’s intent. But even the movement of the face are excellent and nothing out there can compare to the face rendering that went into this film. I just find this cool and that all of the action in the film was acted out. I still find that interesting. But as a comparison to previous CGI films… There is nothing out there to compare to Avatar. Avatar is as close as you are going to get to human acting with CGI. I agree with you nothing will every replace or be as good as human acting.

Reply

24 Cameron January 14, 2010 at 2:46 pm

Xavier,

I am just curious and not just for you but for all of those talking about the CGI acting… I think the one thing that we are missing here is that James Cameron didn’t use motion capture technology for this film. He used performance capture. Which I though was really interesting because when I watched the film and as I continue to watch the film the movement of the Na’vi seemed really realistic. Why, because all the actions you see the Na’vi make are done by humans. I am going to assume that you already knew that. Now comparing it to LOTR.. I am not a huge fan of LOTR thematically but their use of motion capture pales in comparison to Avatar for the sole purpose of the realness of the face. I had no idea when I first saw this film that Zoe Saldana played Neiteryi (sp). But while watching the film I kept saying to myself she looks like somebody I have seen before… James Cameron’s intent. But even the movement of the face are excellent and nothing out there can compare to the face rendering that went into this film. I just find this cool and that all of the action in the film was acted out. I still find that interesting. But as a comparison to previous CGI films… There is nothing out there to compare to Avatar. Avatar is as close as you are going to get to human acting with CGI. I agree with you nothing will every replace or be as good as human acting.

Reply

25 Eric Melin January 14, 2010 at 11:16 pm

Xavier-
Obvious? Yes.
Traditional? Yes.
I believe, however, that there was enough character development to be convincing (even as broad as it played everything) and amazing first-person experiences (through Sully’s avatar) to be thrilling.
As far as the perfrmace capture technology, I found it to be quite convincing once you got used to being in a CGI world. It lacks the maturity and deeper storytelling of LOTR, but succeeds on many otheer fronts.

Thanks for all the great comments, everybody. We’re really getting into the reasons this film works for some and not for others.

Reply

26 Eric Melin January 14, 2010 at 11:16 pm

Xavier-
Obvious? Yes.
Traditional? Yes.
I believe, however, that there was enough character development to be convincing (even as broad as it played everything) and amazing first-person experiences (through Sully’s avatar) to be thrilling.
As far as the perfrmace capture technology, I found it to be quite convincing once you got used to being in a CGI world. It lacks the maturity and deeper storytelling of LOTR, but succeeds on many otheer fronts.

Thanks for all the great comments, everybody. We’re really getting into the reasons this film works for some and not for others.

Reply

27 Xavier January 15, 2010 at 1:25 am

I think people are misinterpreting my comments, I really enjoyed the visuals, cgi, 3-D etc it is just no replacement for a man in a suit, I’m just a little concerned that with the advances in cgi we’re going to get a tirade of cgi characters that just cannot compare to the emotional range of a human. A combination of human/suit/make-up shot in live action and cgi has been shown to work very well not only in lotr but where the wild things are, where the cgi faces ellicit deep emotional reactions. Maybe the cgi elements themselves were better and more complex than other movies but the overall look and feel wasn’t.
I go to movies for storytelling and emotional impact, they’re the most important things for me, I can be impressed by special effects but if the movie doesn’t make me feel anything then the special effects can only get it so far. Avatar in both emotion and storytelling failed massively for me which is the real reason I didn’t like it.

Reply

28 Xavier January 15, 2010 at 1:25 am

I think people are misinterpreting my comments, I really enjoyed the visuals, cgi, 3-D etc it is just no replacement for a man in a suit, I’m just a little concerned that with the advances in cgi we’re going to get a tirade of cgi characters that just cannot compare to the emotional range of a human. A combination of human/suit/make-up shot in live action and cgi has been shown to work very well not only in lotr but where the wild things are, where the cgi faces ellicit deep emotional reactions. Maybe the cgi elements themselves were better and more complex than other movies but the overall look and feel wasn’t.
I go to movies for storytelling and emotional impact, they’re the most important things for me, I can be impressed by special effects but if the movie doesn’t make me feel anything then the special effects can only get it so far. Avatar in both emotion and storytelling failed massively for me which is the real reason I didn’t like it.

Reply

29 Xavier January 15, 2010 at 1:28 am

I guess a good example of why I don’t really find cgi as impressive is that it’s always more impressive to have done things in real life. Like in Dark Knight to see a truck with semi trailer attached flip end over end is way more impressive than seeing say the two trucks colliding and exploding in the matrix.

Reply

30 Xavier January 15, 2010 at 1:28 am

I guess a good example of why I don’t really find cgi as impressive is that it’s always more impressive to have done things in real life. Like in Dark Knight to see a truck with semi trailer attached flip end over end is way more impressive than seeing say the two trucks colliding and exploding in the matrix.

Reply

31 Cameron January 15, 2010 at 4:44 am

Xavier,

I see exactly what you are saying. I will have to agree with you, the two trucks colliding in the Matrix was just ok in my opinion. The scene in the Dark Knight was awesome. As stated before CGI or any technology for that matter will never replace anything done live action actiong or special effects.

Reply

32 Cameron January 15, 2010 at 4:44 am

Xavier,

I see exactly what you are saying. I will have to agree with you, the two trucks colliding in the Matrix was just ok in my opinion. The scene in the Dark Knight was awesome. As stated before CGI or any technology for that matter will never replace anything done live action actiong or special effects.

Reply

33 John Clarke January 18, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Nothing new in the storyline! Sure, but why, after the endless number of similar tales that have been told do we STILL have mining exploration companies roving the length and breadth of Africa behaving in precisely the same way as the Earthlings in Avatar behave? I work as Social Worker on the Wild Coast of South Africa and took a group of indigenous people from Pondoland to see the film. The vast biodiversity of the area and the traditional way of life of the AmaPondo People are threatened by the ambitions of an Australian mining to mine their ancestral lands for titanium. They felt a remarkable, albeit chilling, sense of reality in watching the film, all the spectacular special effects notwithstanding. Next month the South African Minerals Board meets to consider their appeal against the South African governments award of the mining rights to what is nothing more than a dubious Australian venture capital outfit, MRC Ltd. They will be met by Pondo tribemen looking like the Na’vi with placards stating “This is not just titanium. It is unobtanium”. Will they get the message?

Reply

34 John Clarke January 18, 2010 at 3:22 pm

Nothing new in the storyline! Sure, but why, after the endless number of similar tales that have been told do we STILL have mining exploration companies roving the length and breadth of Africa behaving in precisely the same way as the Earthlings in Avatar behave? I work as Social Worker on the Wild Coast of South Africa and took a group of indigenous people from Pondoland to see the film. The vast biodiversity of the area and the traditional way of life of the AmaPondo People are threatened by the ambitions of an Australian mining to mine their ancestral lands for titanium. They felt a remarkable, albeit chilling, sense of reality in watching the film, all the spectacular special effects notwithstanding. Next month the South African Minerals Board meets to consider their appeal against the South African governments award of the mining rights to what is nothing more than a dubious Australian venture capital outfit, MRC Ltd. They will be met by Pondo tribemen looking like the Na’vi with placards stating “This is not just titanium. It is unobtanium”. Will they get the message?

Reply

35 Eric Melin January 18, 2010 at 4:29 pm

Wow. That’s impressive. Thanks for the comment, John. That’s why the big themes of this movie resonate with people and we can only hope that the ripple of these pro-Earth ideals will stay in the collective conscious. “Avatar” should be a way in to this conversation for a lot of closed-minded people. People who say movies don’t affect real life aren’t thinking.

Reply

36 Eric Melin January 18, 2010 at 4:29 pm

Wow. That’s impressive. Thanks for the comment, John. That’s why the big themes of this movie resonate with people and we can only hope that the ripple of these pro-Earth ideals will stay in the collective conscious. “Avatar” should be a way in to this conversation for a lot of closed-minded people. People who say movies don’t affect real life aren’t thinking.

Reply

37 Sinegugu Zkulu January 19, 2010 at 12:10 am

In deed as John says, this movie has been very inspirational for us in Pondoland. It has given us hope that one day we will be able to defeat the Government and MRC i their bid to mine our coastline. W know it will take a lot of sacrifice, but we are prepared even to die for it if needs be. Pondoland is a Biodiversity hot spot. It is protected b law but, Minerals departments stops at nothing to have it mined while people are opposed to it. So we need all the help we can get. If we fail in the hearing we will soon be going to court to defend our land

Thanks
Sinegugu

Reply

38 Sinegugu Zkulu January 19, 2010 at 12:10 am

In deed as John says, this movie has been very inspirational for us in Pondoland. It has given us hope that one day we will be able to defeat the Government and MRC i their bid to mine our coastline. W know it will take a lot of sacrifice, but we are prepared even to die for it if needs be. Pondoland is a Biodiversity hot spot. It is protected b law but, Minerals departments stops at nothing to have it mined while people are opposed to it. So we need all the help we can get. If we fail in the hearing we will soon be going to court to defend our land

Thanks
Sinegugu

Reply

Leave a Comment

 

Previous post:

Next post: