Revisiting Avatar

The range of reactions to Avatar has been instructive, including racism, feminism, disabilities, religion, economics, technology, and a variety of environmental issues.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/willheaven/100020706/avatar-james-cameron-deserves-the-worst-lefty-award-2009/

I'll comment on a few of the more prevalent that I kind of have answers for.
Regardless of white savior syndrome, the planet and the native culture are part of their own technologically superior bio-computer that ultimately appropriates the white imperialists for its own protection. An attractive take from an environmental perspective, although why bio-technological superiority would tolerate interference in the first place is a little perplexing. Maybe Wounded Knee and ultimate supremacy, through casino construction, were all part of the Indian (Native American) spiritual bio-computer plan.

If you don't like the racial and imperialist tones, don't watch it. Well, maybe you have to watch it once to have some idea of whether the arguments apply, besides which, it's worth watching anyway as a visual experience. The problem there is the nature of art as Trojan virus, a seductive vampire that sucks out your brain, or as stealth delivery vehicle for bad ideas. If you aren't aware of the argument, you may be affected indirectly, so you should at least consider the less obvious messages. Otherwise, a science fiction fantasy that “barely” qualifies for an R rating (based I suppose on the hint of unconcealed alien female breasts and a couple of carefully staged expletives), suggests little concern for offensive content in the way that X-rated material or something from a source that regularly provokes controversy might. To make the don't-watch-it argument valid, you need some kind of reliable cause for both anticipating offensive content and accepting the classification, like complaining that The Simpson's makes fun of religion, duh (or d'oh).

Likewise, the argument that "It's just a movie. Get over it," depends on the same kind of myopia. Just a movie that may pull in an audience of half the country. Accepting destructive messages because they come in artful packages serves the purpose of propaganda, regardless of intent. Spending 300 million dollars could conceivably produce something spectacular whether or not political messages were meant to be included. Essentially we need to at least discuss that. (Consider Caligula.)

Here's Thinking for You
Iffy