Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Avatar - Life vs. Death



I saw Avatar nearly a week ago. I thought I would write a review earlier, but I haven't been able to get a full grasp of the movie. There is so much information online; and I didn't want to just repeat someone else's observations. And yes, there will be spoilers; so watch the movie first.

Bio vs. Mecho

One idea that popped out at me even as I watched the movie, which has not been explored, is regarding technology - but not technology in the ordinary sense. I'm referring to an alien technology which our human science is unable to fully comprehend. That technology is all around us and yet we take it for granted. It is the technology that allows you to read this page. It is the technology of Life.

We don't often think of Life as a technology. And honestly that is perhaps appropriate. Life is more than a technology. Life is a mystery.

I can say this without offending any religion or even science, because it is true. Life is a mystery. It is a puzzle without an answer. And at the same time, the answer is looking at you in the mirror.

Life is.

It is undeniably true. It is an everyday miracle. No one can claim to understand Life. It is a mystery and it is the source of all religion.

Science which bases its existence on the idea that everything can be studied and understood cannot explain Life. And Science simply ignores the question that the means of understanding is through the human brain which is itself a product of Life.

In the movie Avatar, the struggle between Bio and Mecho - or perhaps I should say Life and Death - is woven throughout the story. But it really becomes apparent during the final battle scene.

Here we see Life battling directly against the Death machines. And Life wins. Life wins because it can move in ways that the Death machines can never imagine - even when those Death machines are piloted by Life organisms.

Here we see the beauty of the motion of Life; the agility; the ferocity. The teaming masses.

James Cameron could have chosen some force of nature to destroy the invaders  of Pandora - like a giant Hurricane - but instead he chose Life. It is the animals that ultimately come to the rescue of Pandora.

Balance of life

Which brings up the question, why didn't the living inhabitants of the planet Pandora rise up against the invaders earlier? And the reason is that Life does not normally respond this way.

In a normal ecosystem Life destroys other Life for food, or in order to protect itself from a threat. This creates a balance - but not a rigid balance. It is more like a pendulum swinging back and forth around its resting spot. As it swings too far in one direction the natural forces pull it back; and it may overshoot. Overtime even the equilibrium point slowly changes as the system evolves.

You don't expect to revisit a forest one thousand years later and see the exact same pattern of trees. And as a result you wouldn't expect to see the exact same types of birds nesting there.

Life is constantly changing. It is dynamic. It responds to the natural forces. A volcano may destroy the natural landscape, but Life will recover. It will adapt.

And so Pandora does not respond immediately by destroying the invaders. Perhaps it thinks that the Death and destruction created by the invaders is part of a natural and organic process. Perhaps it thinks that in the healing of this deep wound created by the invaders a new Life will flourish.

What Jake Sully shows Pandora is that this invader is capable of causing wounds so deep and so extensive, that the planet will not be able to recover from them.

Choices

One reviewer I read points out that the Na'vi have not even discovered the wheel. This is true.

But let's think about this. How does the wheel stack up as an invention? Do you notice that in nature there are no wheels? There are cycles, but no wheels. Is this because nature is stupid - or just primitive?

What good is a wheel in a forest? A man on foot can go places that a wheeled vehicle can never go. In fact the latest technology seeks to recreate the locomotive methods of two and four legged animals. Can a wheel go up stairs?

Wheels need roads.

The big invention is not the invention of the wheel, it is the invention of the road. The wheel was easy. Some guy in a cave probably came up with it and then chucked it out as impractical. The only thing that makes wheels practical are roads.

And how do you make a road? You make a road by destroying the natural landscape which is beautifully irregular and covered with living trees and grasses and flowers, and then replacing that with a flat, sterile surface composed of crushed dead materials.

And then you can take your car and drive around on that road. Just stick to the road. Because if you get off the road, you may find yourself stuck. Which means we need to build more roads, and more roads, and more roads...

A very dangerous technology

But I detect a flaw in Cameron's creation. And that flaw is embodied in the very title.

Avatar.

Cameron has taken this word and given it a meaning of its own. In the virtual world of the network an avatar has come to mean a virtual representation of yourself.

In the "real" physical world of Pandora the Avatar is a real physical body.

What disturbs me is the way this body was created in the story. It was created by combining human DNA with DNA from a Na'vi. This implies the use of highly advanced biotechnology. And it is this biotechnology which I'm referring to when I speak of "a very dangerous technology".

Look at the the way that mechanical technology is developed. It is created from inanimate objects. It is energized by burning dead fossil fuels. Its limited decision making capabilities come from inanimate silicon circuits.

And most importantly it's employed with the goal of conquering Life and submitting it to the service of man. In other words, it is a Death machine.

Now biotechnology is following along this same path. Do not be fooled by the 'bio' terminology. This is being employed as another technology to conquer Life. It is following along the same path as mechanical technology to become another part of the Death machine.

It is no doubt a deliberate decision on the part of Director Cameron to not employ biotechnology as a weapon against the Na'vi people. This would ruin his narrative of Life against Death. And rest assured that Cameron's intent is to create a sort of mythical tale, so the symbolism is paramount.

I would compare Cameron's storytelling to that of the Tall Tales of Paul Bunyan or John Henry. Only in those cases it is man against machine. Here we have alien against machine. And of course the end is diametrically opposite, because in Cameron's fairy tale Life wins. Yes it is a fairy tale; it is a legend; it is a parable.

But getting back to the biotechnology. Maybe in part deux we will see the humans come back with biotechnology weapons. Perhaps they will assemble an army of Avatars. No doubt.

No doubt because biotechnology is perhaps the most disruptive technology towards Life. Even without malicious intentions biotechnology is capable of destroying Life totally and utterly. Imagine a virus that can destroy all Life forms. Or a bio-engineered mutation that overwhelms the naturally existing species.

And the Avatars are just such a bio-engineered mutation. What will their offspring be like? Could they come to dominate the native population? Stay tuned for the next episode.

Real world vs. virtual world

One thing that struck me as I learned about the process of creating the movie, was that the process was not unlike the way that Jake entered into Pandora through his Avatar.

Cameron had to create a whole virtual world inside his computers in order to make the movie. He created something similar to a computer game. And inside that game he directed the action.

What's really interesting is that the way he controlled the action was through the actors. The actors movements were captured and transferred into the virtual reality of the computer to bring to life their virtual characters. Sound familiar? Yes it's similar to the way that Jake controls his Avatar.

In the process Cameron blurs the line between the real and the virtual. Cameron constantly mixes in elements of the real and the virtual. Even though Jake Sully's Avatar actually exists in the reality of Pandora, for Jake it might as well only exist in a virtual world.

I actually think that Cameron would have originally liked to make that movie where the Avatar is alive in a virtual world, but of course that movie was already made a few years back and called The Matrix.

There is a difference in the way that the Avatar is controlled which is that it is directly through the mind. Which give us an idea that Cameron is suggesting that eventually he would like to be able to control his virtual movie actors directly through his director's mind. For now he has to beat and cajole his actors to do the things that he envisions and then watch the results appear on a computer monitor.

And I have no doubt that Cameron as a director is a bastard. He would need to be to bend everyone to his will. Avatar was a huge project - not unlike a military campaign - and Cameron was the General in charge.

In the case of the movie Avatar, the making of the movie is as much a part of the story as what we see onscreen. And again, the reality and virtual reality are intertwined. Watch this documentary on the making of the film and I'm sure you'll get the idea of what I'm talking about.



Jake as Messiah

Is Jake Sully Jesus? Has Cameron created a sort of Na'vi second coming story? Yes. Isn't it obvious? But then I suppose all Hero stories could be compared in some way to the story of Jesus. Still let's look at some of the parallels.

We can start with the name. Both start with a 'J'. Not a coincidence in my book. And the full name Jake Sully contains all the letters in Jesus. Again, not a coincidence. Remember how Neytiri says his name, "Jake Sully". If I remember correctly she pronounces the 'u' more like 'oo' than 'uh', in the same way that we pronounce Jesus.

But that is trivial stuff. Let's look at the story for more clues.

Jake has an immaculate conception - or at least his Avatar does. He is 'born' in an artificial womb.

Jake's mother is a virgin. That is if you consider Dr. Grace Augustine - the Sigourney Weaver character - to be his mother. She is childless and while maybe not technically a virgin, she at least does not conceive Jake - but at the same time she does bring Jake to life through the Avatar.

Speaking of names, how about Dr. Grace Augustine. Grace is obvious. And Augustine alludes to St. Augustine - one of the Doctors of the Catholic Church. In fact St. Augustine is accredited with clarifying the principle of grace in Christian religion. It is through Christ's sacrifice of his life that souls are redeemed, and not through the good works of man. And it is through Dr. Grace Augustine's sacrifice of her life that the planet Pandora is ultimately saved.

And then I suppose there is the question of whether the Na'vi have committed the original sin of Adam and Eve. Everything about their innocent way of life implies that they have not. They even live in a Paradise. (I suppose that Cameron was tempted to have them running about naked, but was hampered by the Motion Pictures rating system. But notice that he only provides them with the absolute minimal amount of clothing.) Like Adam and Eve, the Na'vi are innocent and unashamed of their nakedness - in the same way that children are innocent. There is even a Tree of Souls which is reminiscent of the Tree of Life in Genesis. What more proof do you need that Pandora is intended to represent Eden?

And going back to Jake, notice that his last name is Sully. This sounds like a shortened version of Sullivan - a typical Irish Catholic last name. But note also that 'sullied' refers to something that has lost its purity. And in the beginning of the story Sully is just that. But through 'grace' (and no action of his own), he is able to regain his purity in a new body.

Jake gets lost on his first trip into the jungles of Pandora much as Jesus is lost on his first trip to Jerusalem. Jake ends up at the Hometree just as the young Jesus ends up at the Temple. Remember that even though Jake is an adult, his Avatar is only days old. So he could be considered to be a child at this point in the story.

Jake goes through a series of rituals in order to be accepted into Na'vi society. Perhaps these are similar to the sacraments of the Catholic Church.

Contemplating more on the name Jake, it is clear that this is a shortened form of Jacob. In the Bible, Jacob is famous for his dream of a ladder that goes from Earth to Heaven. Jake also has a dream. In his dream he is flying - perhaps flying up into Heaven. Pandora then is Heaven or Paradise. In Jacob's dream he sees Angel's ascending and descending the ladder, while on Pandora the Na'vi fly through the air like Angels on the backs of their Banshees.

Not only that, but in the Bible Jacob had a twin brother - just like Jake Sully. And also in the Bible, Jacob takes the place of his brother Esau in the sense that he becomes the family heir. Finally after wrestling with an Angel, Jacob becomes Israel and becomes the father of the Hebrew people. Perhaps this Angel is represented in the movie Avatar by the Toruk - the enormous flying creature that Jake 'wrestles' in order to tame it.

Jake dies and then is resurrected. This happens towards the end of the movie - before the final battle. When the evil Colonel pulls the plug on Jake he 'dies' in the arms of Neytiri. Later Jake manages to escape and get back into his Avatar thus completing the resurrection.

The final battle scene is reminiscent of a Book of Revelations style Apocalypse where Good triumphs over Evil. I'm no expert on Revelations and I'm not about to go and research this, but I think the parallel fits in this case.

And at the very end of the tale, Jake "ascends into heaven" when he gives up his earthly body and fully adopts the body of his 'half human - half Na'vi' Avatar body. There he becomes a King just as Christ would be in Heaven.

Isn't it odd that Cameron would insert so much Christian symbology into his story? I assume that Cameron was raised as a Christian. (I couldn't find any information online about his early religious experience, but it is a safe bet.) It's interesting to me that in a story so infused with elements of Pantheism, that there are also elements of Christianity. No doubt that Cameron is hearkening back to his upbringing.

And if Jake is Jesus, what does that make Cameron?

The final verdict

There are many other aspects of the movie that I could go into, but these have been covered very well in other places. With regard to the 'political' aspects of the story, some have suggested that Avatar is a sort of full-length 3D Rorschach test. I have to agree.

But where do I think this movie sits in the history of movie making? I think this is a ground breaking movie for its use of virtual characters and its ability to incorporate them into a whole world created on film - or perhaps more appropriately, inside a supercomputer.

[By the way, I've searched online and haven't been able to find any information on what kind of computer hardware the Avatar movie was made on. If anyone comes across this information, please leave a comment. Curiously enough, no one seems to even be asking the question.]

The movie has been described as "this generation's Star Wars". I am completely in agreement with that. Star Wars was released in 1977 - about 30 years ago. At the time it was a tremendous breakthrough in Sci-Fi on film. But if you watch it today, it will seem rather lame.

What I wonder is, how we will perceive Avatar in ten, twenty or thirty years. My impression is that this sort of virtual actor technology will evolve so quickly, that Avatar will seem rather technologically primitive in ten to twenty years.

And then the only thing left to prop up the film will be the story, the characters and the fictional world of Pandora where the story takes place. My feeling is that without multiple sequels, there is not enough of a story to achieve a prominent place in 21st century culture.

An example of a movie that was able to achieve cultural status almost immediately was The Matrix. But I don't think that Avatar has any elements in its story that are unique enough to grab a hold of the cultural consciousness in that way. Perhaps the strongest element is the world of Pandora itself. But to me there is no one characteristic of Pandora that is strong enough to stand out.

But with two or more sequels, that could change. I would tend to expect a trilogy, which would require two sequels. And while expectations were not that high for Avatar, expectations will be through the roof for any sequels. Which means of course that if expectations are not met, then people will be disappointed. But if anyone can meet and even exceed expectations, it is James Cameron. After all he was the one that brought us the original Terminator, and then blew the lid off with Terminator 2 - or simply T2.

Predictions for Avatar 2 - or simply A2

Call these predictions or mere speculations. Here is what I am expecting from A2.

Did you notice there were no Na'vi children on Pandora? This implies to me that the Na'vi children take on a different form and then go through a metamorphosis before becoming adults. I am guessing that they start off life as some sort of sea creature like a fish. Or perhaps more like a tadpole which loses its tail and grows limbs to become a frog.

At any rate it will be interesting to see what the child of Jake and Neytiri looks like. Don't forget that they had some sort of sexual experience and presumably Neytiri is now pregnant with Jake's child. And also don't forget that Jake's DNA is composed of a combination of Human and Na'vi DNA.

Which also brings up an interesting subject. The fact that Na'vi have DNA means that they are closely related to life on Earth somehow. That opens up a possible subject for a future sequel, but I wouldn't expect this to be explored very far in A2. This seems like a subject for the concluding chapter in A3.

One more thought about the offspring of Jake and Neytiri. Don't be too surprised if Neytiri lays an egg instead of giving live birth. Again I would expect the birth to happen underwater. Of course Cameron would want an excuse to explore an underwater world where he could practice his craft of creating underwater animation. And also don't be too surprised if Neytiri gives birth to a litter of children instead of just one child. Remember that Jake is Jacob the father of the Hebrew tribes. Which means that each of his children will end up heading up a separate tribe. Or maybe Neytiri will give birth to twins, after all we know that Jake was a twin.

Expect to see Dr. Grace Augustine appear as some sort of spirit. Remember that Jake was able to hear the ancestors voices through the Tree of Voices. And even though that tree was destroyed, I would expect that there will be an alternate way to communicate with the souls of the dead. And what about Jake's twin deceased brother - will Jake find a way to communicate with his soul as well?

And I mentioned earlier that I expect that the Humans will be back to attack - this time as an army of Avatars. That will give them the agility that they lacked in their first battle with the Na'vi. They might also create their own animals for flying and riding. And of course they won't just be Na'vi style Avatars, but will be super versions of those with enhanced senses. But even though the Humans may out power the Na'vi, the Na'vi will always have the home field advantage.

Like any great Hero, Jake will have to wrestle with his own Pride or Hubris as he leads the Na'vi people. Pride is in many ways the original sin that leads to the fall from Grace. Indeed, it is considered to be the first and most serious of the Seven Deadly Sins. Will Jake's Pride cause the Na'vi to be ejected from their Pandoran Paradise?

There are many mysteries to be explored in the lush Pandoran world that Cameron has created. This provides ample material for a sequel. The most interesting for me are the seeds of the Tree of Souls. They have a jelly fish like appearance. This is in keeping with a sort of underwater theme in Pandora. Given that they are seeds, they must give birth some sort of new Life at some point. But don't just assume that a new Tree of Souls will emerge directly from the seeds. Take a look at this video of the lifecycle of a jellyfish to see just how complicated a reproductive cycle can be even in our Earth bound real life world. Those who ridicule the nerve endings emerging from the pony tail of the Na'vi have obviously not spent much time appreciating the diversity of Life on Earth.

Cameron's own imagination seems to have been fired up by his explorations of the Deep Ocean as part of his making of Titanic. It was Mark Twain who said that "Truth is stranger than fiction". The same could be said of Life. No matter what marvelous creations Cameron can create on the movie screen, it will never be as marvelous and mysterious as the creation of Life that exists right before our very eyes.

To James Cameron: If you need anyone to consult on the script for A2, I'm available.

[UPDATE - Jan 8 2010: I continue doing some editing to correct minor mistakes and to add bits of material. This post is sort of a work in progress. I may add some follow up posts. We'll see.]

My other movie reviews
Other related posts

14 comments:

nolocontendere said...

Nice read - I hadn't thought of the Jesus/Jake portrayal but it really does make sense because as you mentioned, all the savior myths are hero epics. And hints abound.
The movie most definately will have a sequal - the huge dollar return demands it.
My favorite part was the jellyfish seeds. It was remarksbly sweet and well done and I won't be ashamed that my eyes got a bit moist.

Frank Hope said...

@nolocontendere - The Jesus connection is even stronger wants you know that the original name for the Jake Sully character in the early version of the script was JOSH Sully. Josh is short for Joshua which is the English version of Jesus.

And "avatar" is a Hindu word which conveys roughly the idea of a god that is reincarnated, which again fits in nicely with the Jesus theme. Although I think that there might be an even stronger connection with Buddha.

What I don't think most critics realize is that Avatar is just Act I of a three act play. I expect that in the sequels the story line will be expanded. And by the time the curtain falls on Act III, all the reviewers that were dumping on James Cameron will be bowing in reverence before him.

I hope that Pandora will enter into the Global Consciousness as a vision of the Future and not the Past. We must radically change our vision of the Future from GM's Tommorow-Land which is devoid of nature.

Once we have a new vision, then we can start to develop the technologies that will get us there. For example, can we create modes of transportation that don't require highways which wipe out huge swaths of nature?

AbigailBG said...

Totally agree with the Catholic symbolism. I went to see Avatar with a Catholic Young Adult group. We talked about how if you substituted the Tree of Souls for the Eucharist it was a beautiful illustration of adoration/ worship and of the one body of Christ. Laying ourselves at the feet of Jesus just as they laid themselves at the foot of the tree. Being able to communicate to the souls of the departed through the "tree" God is similar to the Catholic belief of the communion of saints and being able to ask (through God) for the intercession of those that have gone before us. We also talked about the "I see you" phrase as being similar to "seeing" Christ's light in each other, or as to seeing each other as we truly are: Children of God. I really enjoyed your thoughts on Pandora as Eden, very interesting.

princepersia said...

Sorry I realize it's a reallllly long post

I am sure that by now you've heard that Avatar has surpassed the gross income of the biggest movie ever directed in the world, Titanic by earning $1.84 billion worldwide (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2414728620100124). What was so special about the Titanic, why did the movie Avatar come out now, and what is the real purpose of this movie in the context of our future are some of the questions that I will be attempting to answer in this post.

First of all, let me start with my conclusion. I will then add to my argument as we proceed. My conclusion is the following:

Stanley Kubrick = James Cameron
-> meaning that Stanley Kubrick's job title is exactly the same as James Cameron's (director of many big movies including the Titanic, Avatar, etc)

I will need to define who each of these two people are first. A simple Google search might be able to help you come up with similarities but I will make it even easier for you by spelling the whole thing out here. As usual, you can and should do your own research if you do not believe in the things that I say.

What was Stanley Kubrick's most famous movie? Space Odyssey 2001
What was the movie basically about? It was about the "epic drama of adventure and exploration" of space. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_%28film%29
What year did it come out? April 6, 1968
What year did we "land on the moon" (many sources say it was faked to win the Cold war - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories)? July 20, 1969

What is the movie Avatar about in very basic terms (I haven't seen the movie and won't see it either btw)? In very basic terms the movie is about going to a different planet.
What year did it come out? December 10, 2009
What year are we going to attempt to go to a different planet or look for ET life in the universe? In the upcoming future, this new spaceship will be built by Russia, and the prototype will be completed by 2012. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Space/wireStory?id=8944861

So many of you may say at this point, so what and who cares? If you were to go to James Cameron's wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cameron) and if you could take a look at the second picture posted on there you will notice that the " NASA administrator Charles Bolden meets Cameron". Stanley Kubrick was also heavily involved with NASA and he had very close ties with the government as well.

Now, let's take a step back and try to wrap all of this up then. The purpose of showing Space Odyssey to the public in 1968 was to spark an idea that hadn't been on their minds before. The idea was that space exploration is fun, exciting, new and the next big thing. It is very important to realize that Russia and the US were in the midst of a cold war at the time. The "moon landing" was one of the major causes for losing the cold war.

So Space Odyssey's purpose was to change the public perception and to "make the public ready" for what will be coming up next. Now if the government had decided to dump billions of dollars into a space program BEFORE the Space Odyssey had come out, then the public would be a little skeptical about the way their money was being spent.

After such movies the public's perception changes towards favoring the funding of such large projects. In other words, this will now allow the government to fund their massive projects through using the public's tax money.

Furthermore, the amount of money spent on creating entertainment (movies, tv shows, reality shows, etc) is inversely proportional to the public confidence at the time. This means that when times are rough and when people are generally dissatisfied with the way things are going, massive entertainment is used to try to cover up the despair of "being unemployed and having no bright future to look forward to".

princepersia said...

However, Economists will refer to this term as "cheap entertainment". The Economists will say that people would rather spend money on going to the see movies rather than buy a TV. The logic makes sense, but these "mini-ambassadors" have cause and effect reversed. These sudden boosts or "shots" of entertainment are there only to keep the people happy and satisfied during rough times. And because these "shots of entertainment" are so great, the people go more often and NOT because it's the cheaper alternative.

It is no coincidence that a LOT of war movies came out just before 9/11. The war movies were needed to make the public ready for war. It is no coincidence that movies that bash the idea of anti-Semitism come out during a time when anti-Semitism is high (valkyrie - 2009, Inglorious Bastards - 2009, schindler's list, etc.) . High anti-Semitism reported here: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1263147969773&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull There are many more examples that I can list. Who wants to be a millionaire type TV shows make the ordinary man feel as if he can become rich and that it is possible to get one's hands on money. But we are not in control of producing our money, so how can we really get our hands on it? haha.

I should also mention that entertainment is used as a form of distraction. So that people do not ask the right questions at the right time.

Now who comes up with the funding of these large movies, TV shows, series, etc? Space exploration is a governmental type of spending, but other forms of entertainment are not necessarily linked to the government. However to answer the question of who funds these forms of entertainment? The people who have the money. The people who have the money to invest in these large undertakings.
Why do these rich people want to invest in such large projects? To convince the world in what they want to do in the future, and to make them ready to accept these rich people's missions and goals.

What's my take on Avatar then?
The excitement and the buzz this movie has created, will make people more open to the idea of tackling a new era of space exploration. So now if you hear that the government will be taking your tax money to fund NASA or any other agency, most people will nod and say "yeah that's soooo cool, haven't you seen how beautifully awesome Avatar was?" haha.

Now here comes the funny part (well if you hadn't found anything up to this point funny yet). The reason why they are going to go to space is exactly for the same reason Avatar states, resources. We need to explore space, because we are running out of cheap energy (oil).

princepersia said...

The logic is the following: We the people will fund this project that they are going to undertake in the near future, but we do not get to reap the benefits of this new resource that they will attempt to mine. So we're basically paying for something that we won't be able to keep. Now once these rich people get their hands on this new resource they will be selling this new resource back to us! But wait? Didn't I just say that we funded it all along with our tax money? Yup. Shouldn't it be ours then? Nope. Why not? This is the definition of capitalism and enterprise corruption.

By the way if anybody is really curious on why we explore the moon then look up 'Helium-3'.

Would it have made sense to make the people stealing the resources as the "good people" and without consequence?

Of course not. So the movie is this in line with your beliefs and expectations? Yup.

Is this the same thing as the whole democrat vs republican debate? Yup.

Democrats pretend to care for the working class but they really don't.
Republicans don't care for the working class and flaunt it.

So this movie is about the "Democrat" side. It will make everybody join in and have the same sort of belief system with regards to the people who take resources. The people who are greedy and like to steal the resources are "bad", while the true working people are good.

But what you have to realize is that this whole argument is not about Democrat vs Republican, but it is about the fact that Democrat = Republican.

ow if times are bad, the happy go jolly movies that critique human greed and corruption rises. This will make the ordinary person on this planet feel more accomplished and well because the people feel like they understand the movie. They feel as if they are part of the experience. In a way it vents out the anger of a bad experience that occurred, whatever that experience maybe.

The stock market crashes and money stolen from the government through their stimulus plans have made people angry and sad. So what Hollywood and the entertainment industry does, is to create movies that "understands them" and are in line with them. They create movies where the movies shows to me and you that greed is bad, and it will lead to destruction, while they government is quietly stealing your hard earned cash. In a way, Hollywood is their psychologist. Get it?... See More

You are doing the classic misrepresentation of cause and effect. It happens to the best of us. But this is how they set up the system, that even the most intelligent people of the world fall into this trap. And this is also why you are and have been discrediting me for a long time.

Think of it this way. Imagine that entertainment has a scale from 0 - 100% (idea taken from civilization - haha I love that game).

If times are bad you will increase your entertainment bar, if times are good, you can decrease it.

The elite do this is to control the population. Make them feel welcomed, happy, working, not revolting and not focused on the right things in life. Right things in life would include asking questions such as why am I here, what is private property, why can't humans live in peace, etc.

princepersia said...

However, either way you can help put seeds into people's heads that will work in your favor in the future.

So who was involved with this movie?
The Vatican

November 10th, 2009 - One month before Avatar came out in theatres

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/messages/thread/18534777

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8804583... See More

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2009-11/vatican-hosts-conference-alien-life

http://www.examiner.com/x-2912-Seattle-Exopolitics-Examiner~y2010m1d3-Barack-Obama-not-disclosing-extraterrestrial-presence-is-top-ETUFO-story-of-2009

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/11/the-vatican-embracing-the-possibility-of-advanced-extraterrestrial-life.html

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-religion/2390506/posts

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=24&art_id=nw20091110221756337C796476

princepersia said...

What does that mean? Why is the Vatican significant?

http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/archive/iww-pyramid.gif

Who's the King? Rothchild.

Now put it all into the context of the movie.

The king needs his resources.
Vatican promotes this 5-day conference to change the public mind on this issue. Hollywood also starts working on these people. Voila. This is our whole economic, social, system for 2000 years today. Rome never fell, it was outsourced.

The King + the religious groups have moved throughout time to create this fictitious world that we live in today.

Wayne said...

Hello!
Your answer to what computer system they used for "Avatar" in a Weta Digital Linux system based in New Zealand.
Please go to the"Broadband DSLReports.com site to find all the information under
"Forums-Tech and Talk-OS and Software-All Things Unix-'Avatar'
Movie Made Possible With Linux
The first feedback is from
From Techie-Buzz
07th Jan 2010-
said by Chinmoy Kanjilal and other contributers below discussing the system in more detail.
Hopefully this we be of help to you.
Thank you,
Wayne Lenahan

Frank Hope said...

@Wayne

Thanks for replying. Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. I've been taking a sort of long break from my blog.

You're absolutely right about WETA doing most of the processing of Avatar. I did eventually find the information online. WETA used something like 30,000 Intel processors. That's a super-computer by anyone's definition.

I don't know what OS they were running. I'm guessing it was Linux and not Microsoft. I was actually hoping the hardware would be more like one of IBM's supercomputers with their Cell processors. I just don't like Intel.

Frank Hope said...

@princepersia

I would highly recommend that you get a blog and post your reply there with a summary and a link in the future. I just now got around to reading your reply because it was so-o-o long. (I know, I shouldn't complain since my post was very long as well.)

Anyway, on your main point that this is getting the public ready for space flight to another planet, I think you're close but missed the target. I agree about the propaganda nature of Hollywood movies. I also agree that they are pushing hidden agendas as you say. The War agenda is a common one with Hollywood, as is the pro-Zionist agenda.

My own conclusion after reading lots of reviews and thinking about this is that the real hidden agenda in Avatar is Transhumanism. (You really should see the movie to understand this.) Cameron does an amazing job of hiding this theme in plain sight. I was going to write a post about this, but somehow I just can't get it on paper.

Actually, someone else wrote about this which is where I got the idea from. You can read that review here:
http://secondtense.blogspot.com/2009/12/james-camerons-avatar-is-about.html

Transhumanism is a movement that wants to create a new sort of body for human beings. The amazing thing about the movie Avatar is that you just naturally root for Jake to abandon his human body and take up the Avatar body without realizing it. But in an ordinary situation, the idea of a human giving up his body for an alien body would seem gross and repugnant. All hail to the master propagandist Cameron to make us totally distort our natural human feelings about this!

I'm totally against the Transhumanist movement. In fact I'm against even small incremental steps in that direction. I'm specifically thinking about organ transplants. I think they are absolutely evil! And the next step is to manufacture organs from either human or animal tissue. This is of course even more evil. And then why not manufacture specially designed slave beings which are not quite human? At that point the Elite can just eliminate the rest of us. And don't think they won't do it!

This all fits in nicely with the anti-Human theme in Avatar which lots of people have commented on. It all starts to make huge amounts of sense when you look at Transhumanism as the central propaganda theme in the movie. The whole movie is designed to support this theme.

And you are right to suggest that the movie is preceding the actual technology. Just as 2001 supported funding for the Space Program, Avatar supports funding for the needed biotechnology research for the Elite to achieve their dream of being able to create new bodies for themselves and being able to live forever. It is a sort of high-tech Fountain of Youth. It is a quest for a Holy Grail.

And once the Elite have imbued themselves with immortality, they will have become the Gods that they imagine themselves to be. And if they treated the rest of us like peons before, how do you think they will treat us once they have achieved that ultimate goal? We will have become totally expendable, in fact we will become a burden. We will be viewed as just sucking up the precious resources that they need for their survival. (Sounds a lot like the Global Warming movement doesn't it?) And at that point the logical thing will be to exterminate the humans, leaving only the super-human Elite.

In Cameron's movie, the super-human Elite are the Avatars. So why are we rooting for them as they kill off the rest of us? It is the Avatars that have achieved the Nazi dream of a Super-Race of humans through the use of technology. And yet, how many people saw that as they watched the movie? You compare Cameron to Kubrick. Perhaps the correct comparison is to Goebbels.

transaustralopithecine said...

You are even against replacement organs? Talk about crazy. "why not manufacture specially designed slave beings which are not quite human?" - um, because we have a sense of fairness and compassion?

Computers were first only available to the "elite". Then prices fell and fell and PCs turned into a household staple. Genetic technology will be similar. Its development is very expensive, but once the techniques are established, the price of application starts to plummet far and deep. The rich couldn't bottle this up for long if they wanted - open source biohackers would thwart them.

I'm all for transhumanism. In fact, I had been for 15 years before I even knew what the word meant. It's the bio-Luddites who remind me of certain 20th century totalitarians in their demand that everyone must grovel to their static, human-racist view of humanity. If human values of freedom, happiness and curiosity are as worthy of being preserved as most of us think they are, they go beyond the boundaries of the human species. Avatar makes that clear enough, too.

Frank Hope said...

@AbigailBG - I was re-reading the comments to this post and just realized I never responded to you. I truly appreciate your comments. I certainly don't see why if Tolkien and C.S. Lewis can be interpreted as Christian allegories, then Avatar should not also be interpreted in a similar manner. (awkward wording)

Actually, I've been investigating the Hindu aspects of Avatar and there is perhaps an even stronger allegorical content there. It's very interesting to me that the story can be interpreted through the lens of different religions. This suggests a similarity between such disparate religions as Christianity and Hinduism. (more awkward wording)

Briefly, from a Hindu standpoint Jake's character could represent Krishna or Rama. There are 10 Avatars of Vishnu. Interestingly, the Buddha is one of them. The next Avatar to come is Kalki which has a sort of Apocalyptic element to it. The Avatars are earthly embodiments of Vishnu which appear at time of great need. (You can read more about this stuff on Wikipedia. Just lookup Avatar.)

Catholic theologians would doubtless argue about the differences between the Hindu concept of Avatars vs the incarnation of Christ. I'm more interested in the similarities. But certainly there is an element of heresy in the Avatar concept. Curiously, despite the undeserved reputation of the Catholic Church, I find that the Church has been more tolerant towards other religions in the past than the Protestants.

Frank Hope said...

@transaustralopithecine

You said in your reply, "we have a sense of fairness and compassion". In the ever more competitive world in which we live these qualities are less and less admired.

It took a huge mass of humanity to come up with the personal computer. But what if a true AI is created that is capable of advancing technology without human input. Assuming there are still some sort of transhuman forms of life around, whether bio or techno or a mixture of both. Then at that point the rest of us become expendable.

Society has always needed some people at the bottom to do the dirty work. Whether it is slaves, or serfs, or the working masses of capitalism. The people at the higher end of society tolerate us because they need us. Once that need is no longer there, we will be at their mercy.

I suppose there could be a happy ending. For example, we could all shrink to the size of ants and reduce our impact on the environment. But I can't help but think that given the history of technology, that a technology this powerful would be badly exploited with disastrous consequences.

In fact the history of technology is that technology rules! By this I mean that once a technology is discovered, it will be put to all possible uses - regardless of ethical questions. The ethics will adapt to the technology rather than the other way around. Just look at WMD for example - atomic weapons, bio weapons, chemical weapons.

And of course there will be weapons based on the new genetic sciences if they don't already exist. Look at GMO foods. We can't even properly test chemicals to determine whether they will have a detrimental effect on the environment and we expect to be able to determine in advance whether a GMO will be harmful?

Back in the good old days, technology served mankind. We dreamed of going to the moon and got there as a society. Do we dare dream of creating a transhuman like that depicted in Avatar? Will President Obama declare a government program to design the first transhuman that a human conscious can be transferred into?

I don't think something like this would ever be publicly announced anymore than the Manhattan Project was publicly announced. But eventually the military will want to develop a "soldier" based on this technology. Today drones, tomorrow Avatars.

And don't people today find the concept of drone warfare creepy? What about Avatar warfare?