Tag Archives: avatar

"Avatar" director James Cameron had some nasty words for Glenn Beck and global warming "deniers" yesterday.

Cameron said at a news conference that he would like to shoot "those boneheads," referring to skeptics of anthropogenic global warming. "Anybody that is a global warming denier at this point in time has got their head so deeply up their a** I'm not sure they could hear me," Cameron added.

As for Beck, "he's a f****** a**hole," the 2010 Oscar nominee so eloquently put it. He backtracked a bit, but still maintained that the FNC host is "dangerous because his ideas are poisonous," echoing a statement by NPR's Cokie Roberts yesterday. "Of course he wound up on Fox News, which is where he belongs, I guess."

The Hollywood Reporter reported today:

Asked what he thought about Beck during a junket appearance in support of the "Avatar" home video release, Cameron said: "Glenn Beck is a f****** a**hole. I've met him. He called me the anti-Christ, and not about 'Avatar.' He hadn't even seen 'Avatar' yet. I don't know if he has seen it."

Cameron was apparently referring to Beck's reaction to his 2007 documentary, "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," which casts doubt on the resurrection of Jesus Christ and makes the case that the ancient "Tomb of the Ten Ossuaries" belonged to Jesus' family.

After blasting Beck, Cameron, surrounded by journalists inside a West Hollywood hillside mansion, seemed to reconsider: "I think, you know what, he may or may not be an a**hole, but he certainly is dangerous, and I'd love to have a dialogue with him."...

"He's dangerous because his ideas are poisonous," Cameron answered. "I couldn't believe when he was on CNN. I thought, what happened to CNN? Who is this guy? Who is this madman? And then of course he wound up on Fox News, which is where he belongs, I guess."...

The "Avatar" director was equally unsparing in his comments about those who don't accept global warming as fact.

"That's right," Cameron said. "I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads."

Turning more serious, he added: "Anybody that is a global warming denier at this point in time has got their head so deeply up their a** I'm not sure they could hear me."

Stay classy, Jim. And good job avoiding a "mindless entertainment film."

Two years ago, Time critic Richard Corliss wrote an article that clearly must have resonated at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. The Oscar telecast was sinking in the ratings, he wrote, because the nominees were largely unwatched by the masses. It used to be that the Best Picture prize went to mainstream box-office hits. "Now when the nominations come out, people try to catch up with the finalists, but it's almost like homework."

The 2010 Oscar nominations clearly signal that Hollywood is trying to return to a broader vision of the Oscars, as something more than an insular critics’ circle that likes only the self-consciously arty and obscure. That signal came most obviously with the announcement that there would be ten nominees for Best Picture. That list hadn’t seen 10 nominations since 1943, when the winner was "Casablanca."

Arty films that almost nobody has seen are still there – like "An Education." But arty blockbusters are there as well, like "Avatar" – current box office gross: $601 million -- and the animated film "Up," with $293 million. (By contrast, two years ago, the Best Picture box office leader was "Juno" – at $85 million when the nominations came out.)

The biggest surprise for many Oscar watchers this year was "The Blind Side," which has grossed $238 million. When it came out, the snooty critics hated it. It was "utterly conventional," and even worse for critics, it was a "feel-good" movie. When the finalists were announced and "The Blind Side" was on the list, the attacks started all over again.

Hours later, National Public Radio critic Bob Mondello couldn’t resist sneering at Sandra Bullock, who was also nominated for Best Actress for the film. "I would not have guessed that you could get an Oscar nomination for being annoying for two hours."

NPR’s Linda Holmes followed that insult minutes later by relating the outrage of what she called the "defenders of cultural quality.... It takes Best Picture, they worry, from a showcase for serious movies about self-discovery to a swamp of mass-produced, populist dreck." But "The Blind Side" is about self-discovery. It’s about a large black teenager who discovers he can be a football star. What in the world is wrong with that?

It’s because this too-quiet black character was loved and housed by white Christian people – and critics hated that. Take Melissa Anderson of the Village Voice, who scowled that this movie "peddles the most insidious kind of racism, one in which whiteys are virtuous saviors, coming to the rescue of African-Americans who become superfluous in narratives that are supposed to be about them."

On NPR’s talk show "Tell Me More," host Michel Martin suggested "This is yet another black child who needs white people to save him or her." Boston Globe critic Wesley Morris complained, "Yeah, I mean, it's ‘Diff'rent Strokes,’ it's ‘Webster.’" But when Martin noted the racial roles were reversed in the 2008 movie "The Secret Life of Bees" – black beekeeper sisters save an abused white girl – Morris thought that was a work of underappreciated genius.

The elitists never gave "The Blind Side" a break. What fascinates here is that this is not a work of fiction. It’s a true story about Michael Oher, now an offensive tackle for the Baltimore Ravens. NPR’s Mondello dismissed the film when it came out in November, and his review of this so-called "populist dreck" wasn’t even put on the radio. He called it a "feel-good fantasy for white liberals" that trafficked in racial stereotypes. A "fantasy"? Here’s his spin: its story is "contrived, storybook sweet, credulity-straining and -- um, true."

One reason the elitists are so upset is that they thought the makers of "The Blind Side" were only aiming for a "crowd-pleaser," not an Oscar contender. But obviously, many moviegoers are tired of the overt Oscar-mongering of holiday-season movies, which has become "utterly conventional" as well.

Why would anyone suggest, by default or design, that crowd-pleasing is the opposite of artistic? Why would the critics suggest that a movie that’s inspirational is clearly inferior to a movie that "dares" to be demoralizing and grotesque? Why would Hollywood only want to be known as a nightmare factory?

Those Oscar folks who suggest that the word "Best" should never be associated with a "feel-good" movie -- and that a movie loved by the masses can’t possibly be an artistic triumph as well – need to visit Planet Reality. "The Blind Side’ shows there is some common sense, however. Even if this were simply a ploy for ratings, Hollywood is sending a message that it doesn’t hate and dismiss its audience as the ignorant masses.

Finally, a movie where the Americans are the bad guys, and it's making a KILLING at the box office.

Yes, Time columnist Joe Klein is pumped about "Avatar."

It's not because he's a fan of special effects or blockbuster action flicks, but because the "timely" liberal message of the movie could "ripple" through the culture in a manner favorable to, wait for it, "enviro-theism" (emphasis mine):

[The 3-D presentation] wasn't the most amazing thing about the movie: the Americans were the bad guys. They were a mercenary army working for corporate villains who wanted to strip-mine a tribe of alien, cerulean nice-guy, enviro-theists. The dialogue was awful; the characterizations were crude...and I'm sure that conservatives will dismiss this as another excretion of the Hollywood left. But still, it was something for a mainstream--indeed, a blockbuster--motion picture to have you rooting for the blue dudes flying about on birds painted like Chinese fans...and rooting against the humans, none of whom had the requisite Eastern European or Arab villain accents.

The message that big trees are good and bulldozers are evil seems rather timely. The message that God is Green is fascinating stuff to be peddling in the shopping malls of middle America (I particularly liked the moment when the mercenaries chuckled about the fact that the primitives believed in a tree god). Movies are usually overrated as agents of social or political change--I remember when The Right Stuff was going to launch John Glenn into the presidency--but the zeitgeist is a subtle thing and the impact of Avatar is bound to ripple in all sorts of lovely, little enviro-theistic ways.

Note to budding enviro-theists, one green resolution for 2010 might be to cancel your dead-tree edition Time subscription. Sure, it's full of bulls***, but only in the metaphorical sense, and hence it won't serve as a useful organic fertilizer for your backyard garden plot.

MSNBC host David Shuster on Wednesday attacked conservatives who have a problem with the liberal agenda of the film Avatar, dismissing their arguments as "shameless and crazy." Shuster and New Live co-host Tamron Hall seemed bewildered by right-wing complaints about the environmentally-themed movie.

Talking with film critic Mike Taibbi, Shuster derided, "Could this be just about the political strategy of punching up? That the Weekly Standard, or whoever wants to criticize, they can get a little bit of attention for their point of view, as shameless and crazy as it may sound, by attaching themselves to a movie that's doing so well?"

Shuster appeared skeptical that anyone could have a problem with the movie, which features peace-loving blue aliens fighting evil capitalists and their mercenary military force. He dismissed, "You could say it’s like Pocahontas meets Platoon, meets Jurassic Park. I mean, all of them had subtle messages, some of them not so subtle."

However, back on the December 14 Today show, director James Cameron admitted the agenda of the movie. He asserted that the human characters in the movie "are doing the same thing on another pristine planet that we've done on Earth." He also added that greed and imperialism tend to "destroy the environment."

A transcript of the January 6 segment, which aired at 3:37pm EST, follows:

TAMRON HALL: In today's close-up, conservatives are outraged over the hit movie, the blockbuster film avatar.

DAVID SHUSTER: That's right. The blockbuster flick from Titanic director James Cameron is, if you read some of the conservative reviews, over the line. They argue it trashes military contractors promotes the environmental agenda and has a 1960s Kumbaya feeling to it. Confused? NBC’s Mike Taibbi, who has seen the movie, is here to explain. Mike?

MIKE TAIBBI: Well, you know, David, it does all of that but it does so much more. No, I was in London reporting when the movie premiered in London. And some of those earlier reviews were critical about the money. They were talking about spending three to five hundred million to make this. Some people wishing- some reviewers wishing that Cameron would fall off his ego perch at that point, because he spent so much and the movie would bomb. But, then the reviews that you’re talking about started coming up, all political in nature, and none of them have anything to do with the numbers.

HALL: Well, this is incredible, because we did this-

[Cuts to videotape package]

TAIBBI: Just about all the critics agree, Avatar's special effects are beyond dazzling. The conflict between human corporate raiders from Earth-

[clip from movie]

UNIDENTIFIED CHARACTER: You've got to obey the rules.

TAIBBI: -and the strange blue tinted race on the planet Pandora-

UNIDENTIFIED CHARACTER: We have an indigenous population of humanoids called the Na’vi.

TAIBBI: Is all relentlessly breathtaking, especially in 3D. Well, you don't sell a billion tickets this fast unless there's also story, even a story some early, negative reviews called simplistic, heavy-handed and boilerplate and one big cliche. Politically conservative critics have gone further. One reviewer calls the story of a human, undercover spy who sides with his new, blue brethren against the mercenary army that hired him a "big, dull, America-hating PC revenge fantasy. Others say, typical Hollywood.

UNIDENTIFIED CRITIC: Avatar is a movie that’s masquerading as a critique of capitalism. But, it also a movie that could never with have been made without our kind of a competitive capitalistic society.

TAIBBI: Before it’s release, Cameron himself, who as the director of Titanic, knows a bit about blockbusters, seemed unsure of exactly how Avatar would do. He said it did have a legitimate love story at the core and a message right for the times.

JAMES CAMERON: Once people start talking about this emotional reaction they are having to this movie and the word of mouth spreads, I think we won't fall as quickly as most films fall.

TAIBBI: An awful lot of film goers agree.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: The message worked as clear as day that- You know, it was amazing.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: I thought it was great because it was more, like, environmental. It was kind of like a love story. Also, it was action.

TAIBBI: Veteran film critic Jeffrey Lyons says the filmmaking draws you into an amazing story period, the message just one part.

JEFFREY LYONS: It works on every level. It’s almost a perfect movie.

TAIBBI: Whether it's perfect or not, or whether it’s the message or the movie making, as the saying goes, money talks. Avatar is now the fourth member of the billion dollar movie club, the fastest to get there and still flying high. How is that for a message? [Pre-packaged segment ends.] The fastest to have been-. You know, all movies are about good versus evil. Other movies where the evil is the American military, American police. Think of the Bourne movies. Think of the Die Hard, on and on and on. But this one because it casts the human race as bad guys and American military. Even though it’s not the military- they’re mercenaries in the service of capitalist corporation- has the conservative blogosphere going nuts about this.

HALL: This is the second big blockbuster we've seen. You know, GI JOE, there was conservatives came out and said it was anti-American because the GI Joe heroes weren't wearing the American flag. Their uniforms were black and did it represent America? But, obviously this hasn't hurt the money. And you say that’s what you say it boils down to.

TAIBBI: Not even in the red states, Tamron. In the red states, it’s doing just as well as the blue states. Nobody cares. You don't make a billion dollars if you have a lousy story.

SHUSTER: Could this be just about the political strategy of punching up? That the Weekly Standard, or whoever wants to criticize, they can get a little bit of attention for their point of view, as shameless and crazy as it may sound, by attaching themselves to a movie that’s doing so well?

TAIBBI: Hey, you're part of this whole political thing. So, everybody’s going to shoot that both ways. And, they are They are taking shots even if it's just to get attention, to get us talking about what they are saying.

SHUSTER: Plus, every movie has a message. You could describe this movie as- You could say it’s like Pocahontas meets Platoon, meets Jurassic Park. I mean, all of them had subtle messages, some of them not so subtle.