SCI-FI WAR MOVIE: Avatar (2009)

                “Avatar” is the sci-fi blockbuster baby of James Cameron (“Aliens”).  The film was years in conception and was inspired by sci-fi novels Cameron loved as a child and the adventure novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs (especially the John Carter series) and H. Rider Haggard.  Cameron has made no bones about his cribbing from many sources, including movies like “Dances With Wolves”.  He got the idea for the image of the Na’vi from a dream his mother had of a twelve-foot tall blue woman.  The Na’vi language was created by a linguist professor at USC.  He developed over 1,000 words.  Cameron wanted to make the movie years earlier, but the technology was not available to match his vision.  The cinematography ended up using cutting edge stereoscopic film-making.  40% of the movie is live action and the rest is CGI.  In spite of the success of “Titanic”, Cameron had a hard time selling 20^th Century Fox to make the picture.  It cost officially $237 million (although some sources put it in the $280-310 million range) plus a $150 million marketing budget.  The risk was worth it as the movie killed at the box office and grossed over $2.7 billion. The movie was nominated for Academy Awards for Best Picture (losing to “The Hurt Locker”), Director, Editing, Original Score, Sound Editing, and Sound Mixing.  It won for Art Direction, Cinematography, and Visual Effects (hopefully a unanimously).  It cleaned up at the Saturn Awards, of course.  Among other awards, it won Best Sci-Fi Film, Director, Actor (Sam Worthington), Actress (Zoe Saldana), Supporting Actor (Stephen Lang), and Supporting Actress (Sigourney Weaver).

                The movie takes place in the year 2154 on the planet Pandora.  An evil corporation is mining the futuristic equivalent of oil called Unobtanium.  (Before you scold Cameron for the silly name, it is a word used in the aerospace industry to refer to a substance that is too good to be true and/or is fabulously valuable.)  The corporation is raping the environment, but is having trouble with the natives.  The Na’vi are humanoids that live dependent on nature.  They are at a lower level of development in comparison to the technologically advanced humans.  This is especially true in weaponry where they are basically at the bow and arrow stage.  The corporation barely tolerates a scientific project to learn the culture of the Na’vi because they see it as gathering intelligence about their enemy.  The project head, Dr. Grace Augustine (Weaver), is an anthropologist but also sees the interaction with the Na’vi as an opening for diplomacy.  On the other hand, the head of corporation security, Col. Quaritch (Lang), believes diplomacy is for pussies and is looking for every opportunity to provoke a war that will facilitate the exploitation of the environment.  The scientific project involves using avatars (Na’vi/human hybrids “piloted” by human operators through a mind link). A disabled Marine named Jake Sully (Worthington) replaces his deceased twin brother in the project with the deal that the corporation will reable him if he acts as a spy in the Na’vi camp.  Jake infiltrates the tribe with the unwitting aid of a feisty female named Neytiri (Saldana).  She is the daughter of the chief.  This is where the “Dances With Wolves” part of the plot kicks in as Jake goes native.  If you have seen that movie (and “The Last Samurai”), you can guess where this is heading. 

                The plot of “Avatar” contains nothing you have not encountered in other movies.  It is not the script that is original, it’s the mind-blowing visuals.  Cliches abound, but you can overlook them by focusing on how the clichés are depicted. Cameron has a wonderful imagination that overcomes the tropes.   Let your eyes pop and turn your brain off for a while.  The eye-popping visuals will hopefully take your mind away from the average acting and trite dialogue. The movie will not challenge your intellect much.  It is simplistic and moralistic.  Cameron is a self-proclaimed “tree-hugger” and it shows.  This is a message movie and one clear message is respect for the environment.  Another message is respect for the indigenous people of an exploited area.  Cameron has stated that the movie is an allegory for the Iraq War (he even includes a reference to “shock and awe”).  Cameron insists the movie is not anti-war, but it is anti-jingoism. Actually, it is much more of a commentary on the treatment of Native Americans in the American West.  In some ways, the film is a modern Western.  You know the type – where the Indians are the good guys.  It’s a shame that most moviegoers did not make this connection.  Unless you are a Custer fan, the movie has a feel-good aspect to it. It ends with “Custer’s Last Stand”.  To be realistic, the sequels should set the planet back on the path to being "civilized".

                Is it a war movie?  There certainly is a war between the corporation and the Na’vi, so you can say it is a colonial war movie.  Think “Zulu”, or better yet, “Zulu Dawn”.  The epic battle seals it.  It is lengthy and exhilarating.  However, it smacks a bit of the final battle in “Return of the Jedi” with the Na’vi as the Ewoks.  That is not a good look.  As in both those cases, the superior and much better armed lose.  They have cool AMP suits (armored exoskeletons) that sport 30mm cannons.  These versus bows and arrows.  But, this being a sci-fi movie, the vastly inferior natives win against superior natives by luck, finding a weak spot, or having germ allies (in this case, it is the whole animal kingdom). The villains are overcome by the pluckiness of the aggrieved natives along with the crucial help of rebels.

                In conclusion, “Avatar” is one of the greatest movies ever made.  You can criticize Cameron for “borrowing” from many different sources, but I prefer to commend him for blending proven plot devices.  He updates the “Dances With Wolves” template with astounding visuals and imagination.  It is less outstanding as a war movie than as a sci-fi movie.  It’s easier to suspend disbelief if you treat it as science fiction.

GRADE  =  B 

STAR WARS (2) vs. AVATAR (6)

VS.

SETS AND SOUNDS:  “Star Wars” is set mostly on the Millennium Falcon and the Death Star.  Both seem generic now, but at the time both fleshed out the spacecraft and space station templates.  Tatooine is straight out of a John Ford Western.  The one standout set is the bar in Mos Eisley.  In that case, it is more the denizens than the outlay.  The sound effects were groundbreaking.  The movie invented “pew-pew” for shots and the sound of the light sabers became iconic.  But it is the score by John Williams that stands alone.  It is one of the greatest scores ever.  AFI ranked it the best score of all time.  Williams’ use of leitmotif’s is nothing short of brilliant.  GRADE  =  A

“Avatar” is dazzling because of the visuals.  Pandora is an eye-popping set.  In fact, the sets overcome the unoriginal plot.  In some ways, the movie is “Dances With Wolves” on an exotic planet.  Floating mountains!  It won the Academy Award for Art Direction and the Saturn Award for Production Design.  The sound effects are good, too.  Most notable are the creature noises.  The score is by James Horner.  An ethnomusicologist was consulted to create the Na’vi music.  Horner divided the score into macho mercenary music and new age native music.  The soundtrack is unremarkable.  GRADE  =  C

DIALOGUE:  For a sci-fi movie, some effort was put into the dialogue in “Star Wars”.  Much of it is snappy, especially between Laia and Han.  C3PO gets to play stuffy British twit.  Obi Wan has the iconic line:  “May the Force be with you.”  It was voted #8 on AFIs list of greatest quotes.  The movie has a total of 141 quotes on IMDB.  GRADE = B

“Avatar” is not going to be remembered for its dialogue.  If you based the movie just on the script, you might not go see it.  There is not a single standout line.  In fact, much of the dialogue is trite, especially when Jake is narrating.  Equally cringe-inducing is the macho bull shit coming out of Col. Quaritch’s mouth.  I feel he might be overcompensating for something.  Most of the attempts at humor fall flat.  I do have to extend some props for inventing the Na’vi language.  Too bad it was subtitled.  The movie has 109 entries in IMDB.  GRADE  =  C   

CHARACTERS:  It could be argued that “Star Wars” has the best set of main characters of any sci-fi movie.  Each has left a mark on popular culture.  Han Solo is #14 on AFI’s heroes list and Obi Wan comes in at #37.  Luke Skywalker belongs on that list. Laia became a feminist icon.  C3PO and R2D2 are a great comedy team.  And then we have Darth Vader.  He is #3 on AFI’s list of villains.  There are no Jar Jar Binks in this film.  GRADE  =  A+

If you’ve seen “Dances With Wolves”, you’re familiar with most of the characters in “Avatar”.  “Avatar” adds the stereotypical corporate amoralist and his evil security chief.  Michelle Rodriguez plays the now required feisty female Chacon.  None of these characters are memorable.  GRADE  =  C

CLICHES:  For such a key movie in the sci-fi canon, “Star Wars” is refreshingly free of clichés.  The Empire is superior to the rebellion, but not vastly superior like the aliens in most of the movies in this tournament.  The movie does have a key figure (Luke Skywalker) who is crucial to the success of the rebellion.  The Death Star has a weak spot, otherwise it is invulnerable.  3 out of 10  GRADE  =  A

Considering how unoriginal the plot of “Avatar” is, it is not infested with sci-fi war movie clichés.  The RDA’s security forces have vastly superior weaponry and the invaders are more “civilized’ than the natives.  The Na’vi could not have won without Jake.  All the attacks are frontal, including by the hammerhead titanotheres and viperwolfs.  The Na’vi win even though their weapons are primitive.  They use bows and arrows.  4 out of 10  GRADE  =  B

ANALYSIS:  Both movies were groundbreaking, but for different reasons.  “Star Wars” reinvented the space epic and started the greatest sci-fi franchise in history.  “Avatar” revived 3-D movies.  It is visually stunning and has some strengths as a war movie, but it is more style than substance.  In every way. it is inferior to “Star Wars”.  It has become trendy to overlook the brilliance of the first Star Wars movie.  To remind yourself of its greatness, just look at the other entries after “The Empire Strikes Back”.  (Empire may be the best of the eight, but it is not a war movie.)   32 years after its release, it is still able to defeat the all-time box office champ.

STAR WARS  =  36

AVATAR  =  29  

WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES (3) vs. AVATAR (6)

VS.

ACTING -  It’s hard to evaluate a movie where half of the cast is apes.  The apes were created through motion capture and CGI technology.  Some question whether this involves acting, but the trend is to accept the performances as acting.  This has been mainly because of the work of Adam Serkis.  He plays Ceasar in the series and was nominated for numerous awards including the Saturn Awards.  Sadly, the stodgier Academy has yet to acknowledge this type of acting.  The apes are incredibly life-like and that is due to the technology.  However, some credit must be given to the actors.  Aside from the ape actors, the only other significant acting is done by Woody Harrelson as The Colonel.  He’s a stock character, but Harrelson is fine.  GRADE  =  B

“Avatar” is similar to “Planet” in that half of the actors are motion capture / CGI created.  In this case, the actors did not have to move around like apes, so “Planet” must have been more challenging.  “Avatar” swept the acting awards at the Saturn Awards:  Sam Worthington for Best Actor, Zoe Saldana for Best Actress, Stephen Lang for Best Supporting Actor, and Sigourney Weaver for Best Supporting Actress.  Lang stands out in a role similar to Harrelson’s.  His Colonel is more menacing and hiss-worthy than “Planet’s”.  The actors get more of a chance to emote and there is not a false note in the film.  GRADE  =  A

ENTERTAINMENT -  As a war movie, “Planet” comes up short.  There is only one big battle scene and it is not humans versus apes.  The apes are amazing to watch and the characters are appealing, but the movie is predictable and has some shaky plot developments.  It works better as a revenge flick with a prison escape thrown in.  The ending is ludicrous.  The main villain is cartoonish.  GRADE  =  C

“Avatar” is more of a Western than a war movie.  It has a simplistic plot and is riddled with clichés.  The characters are mostly stock.  It bludgeons you with its morality.  All this said, it is a very entertaining movie.  It is not the biggest money maker in history for nothing.  This was mainly due to the astounding visual effects.  The plot may be shallow, but it is crowd pleasing.  It has a decent romance, suspense, and a kick-ass battle scene to finish.  GRADE = B

 

COMBAT -  “Planet” starts strong with an assault on an ape outpost, but after that there is not a lot of action until the climactic battle.  Both combat scenes are generic and mostly rely on noise.  There are no special weapons.  The combat lacks quantity as well as quality.  GRADE  =  C

“Avatar” does not have a lot of combat until the end, but then it gets real.  The attack to destroy the Hometree has plenty of fireworks.  The RDA’s preemptive assault on the Tree of Souls cuts loose a load of violience.  While aerial combat ensues in the sky, there is a land battle going on between soldiers in amp suits and regular soldier expendables versus the natives plus the animal kingdom.  The kitchen sink is thrown in.  It culminates in a duel straight out of a gladiator movie. The whole scenario reminds of the ending battle in “Return of the Jedi”, but it is done with more competency and no Ewoks.  GRADE  =  B

ENEMY -  The enemy in “Planet” is the humans led by the Colonel.  They are your typical rogue unit of mercenaries.  The Colonel is similar to Col. Kurtz in “Apocalypse Now” or any other unhinged military leader who goes off the reservation.  Compared to most of the alien enemies in this tournament, this enemy is pretty lame.  GRADE  =  D

The enemies in “Avatar” are humans, too.  The RDA is a private army for the company that is raping Pandora for its resources.  There are two villains in this movie.  The company representative is all about the bottom line and the Na’vi are effecting it.  You’ve seen this amoral executive before.  The head of the RDA is Col. Quaritch and he makes Custer look like a Indian-lover.  He eats nuts and bolts for breakfast.  The RDA remind a little of the enemy in “Planets” but they have much more firepower and those cool amp suits.  GRADE  =  C

ANALYSIS:  “War for the Planet of the Apes” is not a bad movie, but it does not fit well in the tournament. It was lucky to face “Independence Day” in the opening round.  The categories in this round did not play to its strengths.  It is entertaining to watch the incredibly depicted apes in a standard sci-fi plot, but the war movie aspects are weak.  “Avatar” is clearly a war movie.  There are opposing sides fighting for dominance on a planet.  Although basically a revisionist Western set in the future on another planet, it does have a battle with strategy and tactics.  it is certainly a better sci-fi movie than a war movie, but it is clearly better than “Planet” in this competition.

AVATAR  =  32

PLANET  =  28

AVATAR (6) vs. STARSHIP TROOPERS (11)

VS.

PLOT - On the planet Pandora, humans (whites) are exploiting the planets resources at the expense of the natives (Indians). The scientists (liberals) have invented avatars which allow humans to make contact with the natives as natives. This causes the main character, a soldier, to develop empathy for the "enemy" and he goes native. Unfortunately for him, he has apparently picked the wrong side as the evil corporation's security force (the U.S. Army during the Indian Wars) is sent to wipe out the primitives. As you can see, the plot blends futuristic elements with a 1960s take on the conquest of the West. In spite of the heavy-handed preaching, the plot is entertaining and fulfilling. GRADE = B
"Starship Troopers" is based on the acclaimed Robert Heinlein novel. it is set on a future Earth which is a fascist state. A trio of teenage friends join the military and are engulfed in a conflict against primitive aliens called "Arachnids" or "Bugs". The Bugs retaliate against Earth colonizing efforts on their turf and war breaks out. The Mobile Infantry is tasked with taking the fight to the Bug planet. The movie follows two main character arcs: Rico is in the infantry and his girlfriend Carmen is a spaceship pilot in the fleet. There is a love quadrangle. The movie is interspersed with newsreel-like footage to emphasize the satirical theme of the movie. However, this theme is overwhelmed by the kick-ass battle scenes. The plot includes several war movie tropes, but it does not take itself seriously and is entertaining for the audience it was aimed at – males who don’t want to be intellectually challenged. GRADE = B

STRATEGY AND TACTICS - Considering the Na'vi are representing Native Americans (or any native people being exploited by a colonial power), there is a surprising lack of guerrilla tactics. They simply react to the RDA attacks. The strategy of the company is to feign interest in negotiating with the natives, but provoke an excuse to conquer. Pretty standard strategy for 19^th Century powers. The tactics the RDA use exemplify the overconfidence and scorn of the civilized army. Their assault omits surprise and is purely frontal relying on superior firepower. There is no attempt at flanking. Psychological warfare comes into play with the pre-emptive attack on the Tree of Souls. GRADE = C

ST follows your standard sci-fi war movie strategy protocol. The superior aliens can only be defeated by decapitating their "brain". In this case, the Arachnids actually have a "brain bug" that the Mobile Infantry are sent to capture. The Bugs use wave tactics. The Mobile Infantry respond similar to the way the American army responded to Chinese human wave attacks in Korea. The infantry offensive tactics are realistic, especially if you consider the Mobile Infantry to be the futuristic equivalent of the Marines. Both invasions are frontal affairs with little finesse or respect for the enemy. The enemy adjusts its tactics, but the Earthlings don't. For example, during the first invasion of the Bug Planet, the fleet is surprised by the enemy's sudden ability to bombard the fleet with plasma bursts. Incredibly, the exact same destruction occurs in the third invasion! The Mobile Infantry appear to have no reserves. There is only use of air support once, although it is very successful. The use of "nukes" is sporadic, even though they are a game-changer. Apparently, what we wanted to see was troopers blasting away at bugs with machine guns. GRADE = C

WEAPONS - The Na'vi use primitive weapons like bows and arrows. They would be totally outmatched without the help of the animal kingdom, especially a dragonesque predator. The RDA are armed with cool exoskeletons called AMP (amplified mobility platforms) equipped with 30 mm cannons. They also come with a three foot long ceramic knife. The standard firearm of their infantry is a machine gun similar to a M60. Some of the soldiers have GS-221 Bases Carbine units. There are a variety of assault aircraft. The RDA have helicopters similar to Black Hawks. They have gunships equipped with chain guns and rockets. The Dragon Assault Ship has every weapon but the kitchen sink. The infantry is assisted by land assault vehicles armed with four rotary autocannons. This is not a fair fight with the RDA having a much greater advantage than the frontier army had over the Indians in the West. Only in Hollywood could the result be reversed. The weaponry designers did a good job of futurizing current technology. GRADE = B

The Arachnids come in several varieties. Their infantry are called Warrior Bugs and are nasty suckers. Hard to kill, they use biting and stabbing as their primary weapons. The Plasma Bugs are the Bug artillery. They fire a plasma beam that can destroy even a large space warship. The Tanker Bugs are the equivalent of tanks. Their weapon is similar to a super flamethrower. The Mobile Infantry are mostly armed with the Morita Assault Rifle. Although this is supposed to be the 23^rd Century, it is not much of an improvement over current assault rifles. It fires a .303 caliber bullet and has a magazine capacity of 75. It needs it because it takes a lot of bullets to bring down one Warrior. Part of the reason is the inaccuracy of the weapon. Lacking sights, it is fired mainly from the hip. Some come with an effective shotgun add-on. No significant improvements are made to the weapon in the course of the war, even though it is not efficient in combat. The best weapon against the Bugs is the Tactical Oxygen Nuke. These nukes are low yield and give off no radiation. They can be fired from a bazooka-like launcher or tossed like a grenade. Although proven to be the best solution to the swarms of Warriors, they are used only occasionally for cinematic reasons. GRADE = C

SPECIAL EFFECTS - "Avatar" won Oscars for both Cinematography and Visual Effects. Visual Effects must have been a unanimous vote as the film is astonishing. Cameron used cutting-edge technology to create the avatars and the Na'vi. The CGI is seamless. A number of the techniques were used for the first time and the movie was responsible for the revival of 3D movies. GRADE = A+

ST was nominated for the Oscar for Special Effects (losing to "Titanic"). The film uses a combination of miniatures, animatronics, and CGI for the bugs. They are freaking amazing. The movie is more than 20 years old, but still has not been topped for depicting these type of creatures. Other than the Brain Bug, which was kind of lame. The space vehicles are standard Star Wars types. Nothing you haven't seen before. GRADE = A

ANALYSIS: Interestingly, the two movies have similar war plots. In both, Earthlings are attacking a primitive alien species on their own territory. In both cases, the losing side is actually much superior militarily. But then, this is often the case in sci-fi war movies. Neither is interested in the nuances of strategy and tactics, but since "Avatar" is intended to be a commentary on the Indian Wars, it is more realistic for its plot. "Starship Troopers" is not as deep as it tries to be snarky about fascism and militarism. This theme tends to make the military aspects of the film a bit cartoonish. It is a fun movie, if you like combat porn. However, as a war movie, "Avatar" is superior.

AVATAR = 33
STARSHIP = 31