Avatar Depression

[Xanadu84]

Ill bet this is blown out of proportion. You have a thread filled with people who think Avatar is beautiful: And it is.

Then, you have a bunch of people who exaggerate, saying that its so great, they wish they could die an be reborn there, or that they look around and find this world depressing in comparison. Hey, Ive described authors, actors etc as being god like before. I wasn't serious, I was just making a point. A lot of people are doing that here.

Then you have people who are cynical enough that saying how great Pandora is is just a criticism of this world.

Then you have people who loved Pandora and want to jump on the bandwagon, and probably a few people jumping on out of irony.

And at the very bottom, you have maybe 2 or 3 people who are actually a bit delusional, and are honestly depressed.

I really expect that however funny this is, it is not properly representative of the fan base. I'm more baffled by the idea that the main character saving the primitive aliens was racist. If anything, the human eventually wanting to become a Na'vi, rather then a poor and unconnected human, was slightly racist. Of course, its racist against humans, so...yeah.

 

[Cryofthewolf]

Ah, trust the insane fanboys to ruin everything, it really is just attention seeking I think.

Don't ruin Avatar for me goddammit!

I thought it was brilliant, best film of 2009 for me.

I agree. While the movie did make me pretty emotional (I teared up for a few moments during the film) I'm not going to go home and wish for the world to be real. It would be nice, no doubt, living the way the Na'vi do, but it isn't going to happen. I think people could look at the lesson the movie puts across and strive for that instead of wishing the film was real.

 

[tanithwolf]

Another problem with you train of thought is I can do this with it:

"And why not kill them off, they're a bunch of stupid paddys and they did not want us on Irish soil which is why they were attacking us English and the Irish were refusing to comply so"

Ireland was a backwards country and totally inferior to British might. I mean by your logic I shouldn't even bother talking to someone of your background. Fuck peace talks we should have just had a full out invasion once you had the audacity to rebel and if that failed, well its nuke time!

Do you agree with this?

The movie is full of loopholes, we should have easily.
Moving on to your Ireland and England reference:
From your point of view yes.
But as I met mentioned before it's an "us and them" outlook, the British wanted Ireland's resources, I can understand that but I would still be angry.
The main thing however is that it was Humans versus Humans in that case while in the movie it was Humans versus Aliens.
I care far less when it's us against another race, why should I care about another race?

I may not appreciate his example but Zac Dai is right in the way that "us and them" has been used to justify killing too many poeple just because their different from us. The "us and them" was part of the English occupation of Ireland, for them they believed that they had the right to control our land because of military superiority. Demented you have to appreciate that it wasn't that long ago that people thought of any culture that wasn't theirs was alien and should be destroyed.

"Surivial of the fittest"
and in this case it's a bunch of primitive aliens, why should we care whether they live or die or what we do to their land?

"Surivial of the fittest"
and in this case it's a bunch of primitive foreigners, why should we care whether they live or die or what we do to their land?

Yes, why should you?

Because the murder of innocents is wrong, but mostly because I don't want this as an argument for someone to take over Ireland again.

No-one is innocent and some people get in the way.

Ok no-one is innocent, but very few people deserve to die. Some people get in the way because they feel they must and some do by accident. Could you condemn them for those reasons.

No, they're defending themselves or trying to stop us....that don't mean I'm not going to continue and kill them anyway. afterall I'm not going to stop just because people disagree with me.

But my point is you wouldn't agree with killing other humans would you? and that's what that argument has been used for.

I was not talking about the Na'vi.
I was refering to a Human conflict.

So you would be ok with being invaded tomorrow, all your loved ones either killed or made to to work as slaves for the invaders to take every last resource and be left with nothing but a large rock.

Of course not because I'm the one being invaded.
I would understand the invaders but I would still fight for my country.

I just don't see how you can be ok with invasion when you know what it leads to.

Because my logic is cold and efficiant while yours is not.
My logic is illogical to you while your's is illogical to me.

(I really wish I had a picture of spock right now)
Invasion for the reasons I listed is illogical, it only leads to suffering and possible reprisal, which would lead to more suffering. It would be more efficiant to pursue other methods for getting what you want. Could you also rationalize an invasion of a country if people you knew and loved lived there, even if it was Ireland invading.

I never said war was the only valid option.
Suffering is a part of life, it happens.
Making an arguement personal is an invalid method.
If I say yes: "omg you don't care about your loved ones!"
If I say no: "Ha! See! She wouldn't do it then would she!"

Suffering may be a part of life but needless fighting generally only makes it worse. It doesn't invalidate an argument like this one, we are actually talking about our personal opinions. Enjoy my little trap.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

Well.. fuck. Thank you fanboys/girls whom so make this movie much more controversial than it needs to be! (Not to mention twi-girls as well, but that's another dead horse topic)

Also, along the lines of the Na'vi vs. Human conflict.. Sure. Suffering and death are both viable parts of life, but so are caring and protecting that which suffering and death would try to take hold of. I find it somewhat hypocritical that people would completely accept themselves going in to invade another country for the sole purpose of wealth and raw material, however.. would get extremely pissed off and outrage over it if it were done to themselves. HELLO?

I felt like a complete asshole watching the humans carpet bomb the great tree.. and it wasn't even as much of that, as they wanted and enjoyed it to a sociopathic medium of watching the Na'vi suffer and lose everything dear to them. That is what erked me the wrong way.

 

[Valiance]

"Nagrand in HD" would probably make me feel bad about not living in places with floating waterfalls and such, but I'm seeing the movie tonight or tomorrow, so we'll see if I kill myself because I live in New York.

 

[tanithwolf]

But my point is you wouldn't agree with killing other humans would you? and that's what that argument has been used for.

I hate to butt in the middle of your conversation but in countless movies I've seen - that have been well received - have all been about Humans being killed, hell in Avatar both Sully and Colonel Quaritch are ex-marines where it was their FREAKING JOB to kill other humans... for their country of course. Though as Avatar explicitly states they are now doing it just for the money... and not killing humans (most of the time) but aliens.

But I don't think anyone who had a problem with the humans being killed in Avatar was concerned because they were humans being killed... I mean who watches an action movie and gasps in horror when the evil bad guy gets killed with an "oh no, a member of my species has been killed". No when Hans Gruber got dropped of the building in Die Hard we were all cheering and countless other examples.

No, the difference here is WHO are killing the humans, the aliens, that seems to get to people on levels that wouldn't happen if it was humans killing humans. To be honest movies often exploit that effect of the innate rooting for "team human" (or could it be rooting for team "same-race as me"?).

I think Avatar is inevitably going to go down better with gamers than non-gamers as there is a long history of anti-establishment enemies.

From fighting the Police in GTA, to playing an Alien or Predator hunting Human Marines in the Aliens vs Predator games or even in Half Life where one of the main bad guys is the much revered US Marine Corps! In the Legacy of Kain series and many other vampire games you are a real blood drinking vampire yet in most movies and TV shows any vampire protagonist is either "vegetarian" or only drinks non-human blood (Blade, Angel, Twilight, Day-breakers, etc).

In online multiplayer games half the time you are not playing the "heroes" of the SAS or US Marines but playing the "Villains" as th Spetznaz, the Terrorists, or even a Nazis SS-trooper, but just like a playground game of cops and robbers, you have to learn to play the bad guy as well as the good guy.

Hell with video games we are used to "playing the monster" or should I say playing an outsider or alien and learning to enjoy it. To enjoy the otherness.

That's the approach I took going into see Avatar, Half the time I did want to root for Quaritch's Team of badass mechs and he did play the Villain absolutely perfectly but more so I was rooting Team Sully for his underdog perseverance and conviction.

I don't know about other people, but I am able to distinguish between fantasy and reality. In reality I think murder is generaly wrong, I do believe there can be exceptions, for example I agree that everyone has the right to defend themselves. But when it comes to fantasy I don't have such beliefs. When it is make believe I don't see what harm there is.

 

[GeneralGrant]

I hope these people don't start playing WoW.

It's interesting how many people want to escape their lives to enter fantasy worlds though.

 

[Optimus Hagrid]

When I read the title I thought you were talking about This

<-----------------------------------------------

Aye.

Also, I wouldn't ming seeing Onnet in real life. Failing that, I'll settle for 3-D.

 

[tanithwolf]

Another problem with you train of thought is I can do this with it:

"And why not kill them off, they're a bunch of stupid paddys and they did not want us on Irish soil which is why they were attacking us English and the Irish were refusing to comply so"

Ireland was a backwards country and totally inferior to British might. I mean by your logic I shouldn't even bother talking to someone of your background. Fuck peace talks we should have just had a full out invasion once you had the audacity to rebel and if that failed, well its nuke time!

Do you agree with this?

The movie is full of loopholes, we should have easily.
Moving on to your Ireland and England reference:
From your point of view yes.
But as I met mentioned before it's an "us and them" outlook, the British wanted Ireland's resources, I can understand that but I would still be angry.
The main thing however is that it was Humans versus Humans in that case while in the movie it was Humans versus Aliens.
I care far less when it's us against another race, why should I care about another race?

I may not appreciate his example but Zac Dai is right in the way that "us and them" has been used to justify killing too many poeple just because their different from us. The "us and them" was part of the English occupation of Ireland, for them they believed that they had the right to control our land because of military superiority. Demented you have to appreciate that it wasn't that long ago that people thought of any culture that wasn't theirs was alien and should be destroyed.

"Surivial of the fittest"
and in this case it's a bunch of primitive aliens, why should we care whether they live or die or what we do to their land?

"Surivial of the fittest"
and in this case it's a bunch of primitive foreigners, why should we care whether they live or die or what we do to their land?

Yes, why should you?

Because the murder of innocents is wrong, but mostly because I don't want this as an argument for someone to take over Ireland again.

No-one is innocent and some people get in the way.

Ok no-one is innocent, but very few people deserve to die. Some people get in the way because they feel they must and some do by accident. Could you condemn them for those reasons.

No, they're defending themselves or trying to stop us....that don't mean I'm not going to continue and kill them anyway. afterall I'm not going to stop just because people disagree with me.

But my point is you wouldn't agree with killing other humans would you? and that's what that argument has been used for.

I was not talking about the Na'vi.
I was refering to a Human conflict.

So you would be ok with being invaded tomorrow, all your loved ones either killed or made to to work as slaves for the invaders to take every last resource and be left with nothing but a large rock.

Of course not because I'm the one being invaded.
I would understand the invaders but I would still fight for my country.

I just don't see how you can be ok with invasion when you know what it leads to.

Because my logic is cold and efficiant while yours is not.
My logic is illogical to you while your's is illogical to me.

(I really wish I had a picture of spock right now)
Invasion for the reasons I listed is illogical, it only leads to suffering and possible reprisal, which would lead to more suffering. It would be more efficiant to pursue other methods for getting what you want. Could you also rationalize an invasion of a country if people you knew and loved lived there, even if it was Ireland invading.

I never said war was the only valid option.
Suffering is a part of life, it happens.
Making an arguement personal is an invalid method.
If I say yes: "omg you don't care about your loved ones!"
If I say no: "Ha! See! She wouldn't do it then would she!"

Suffering may be a part of life but needless fighting generally only makes it worse. It doesn't invalidate an argument like this one, we are actually talking about our personal opinions. Enjoy my little trap.

Well if I was invading a country it would obviously be for a reason so I would have to forasake those I hold dear there.

Impressively cunning, using belief of something right as an excuse to agree to something you normally wouldn't. What do you do to your friend then when you find them (noting you are in a squad when you do, they are heartless and hate these people):
A: A quick and clean death at your hand, you owe them that much.
B: A life of unending suffering as a slave.
C: Merely watch as someone else executes them.
D: Other. (Bonus points if you can do something that doesn't involve some miraculous escape)

 

[FieryButterfly]

Ah, trust the insane fanboys to ruin everything, it really is just attention seeking I think.

Don't ruin Avatar for me goddammit!

I thought it was brilliant, best film of 2009 for me.

I agree it was the most amazing movie that I have ever seen before

 

[tanithwolf]

Another problem with you train of thought is I can do this with it:

"And why not kill them off, they're a bunch of stupid paddys and they did not want us on Irish soil which is why they were attacking us English and the Irish were refusing to comply so"

Ireland was a backwards country and totally inferior to British might. I mean by your logic I shouldn't even bother talking to someone of your background. Fuck peace talks we should have just had a full out invasion once you had the audacity to rebel and if that failed, well its nuke time!

Do you agree with this?

The movie is full of loopholes, we should have easily.
Moving on to your Ireland and England reference:
From your point of view yes.
But as I met mentioned before it's an "us and them" outlook, the British wanted Ireland's resources, I can understand that but I would still be angry.
The main thing however is that it was Humans versus Humans in that case while in the movie it was Humans versus Aliens.
I care far less when it's us against another race, why should I care about another race?

I may not appreciate his example but Zac Dai is right in the way that "us and them" has been used to justify killing too many poeple just because their different from us. The "us and them" was part of the English occupation of Ireland, for them they believed that they had the right to control our land because of military superiority. Demented you have to appreciate that it wasn't that long ago that people thought of any culture that wasn't theirs was alien and should be destroyed.

"Surivial of the fittest"
and in this case it's a bunch of primitive aliens, why should we care whether they live or die or what we do to their land?

"Surivial of the fittest"
and in this case it's a bunch of primitive foreigners, why should we care whether they live or die or what we do to their land?

Yes, why should you?

Because the murder of innocents is wrong, but mostly because I don't want this as an argument for someone to take over Ireland again.

No-one is innocent and some people get in the way.

Ok no-one is innocent, but very few people deserve to die. Some people get in the way because they feel they must and some do by accident. Could you condemn them for those reasons.

No, they're defending themselves or trying to stop us....that don't mean I'm not going to continue and kill them anyway. afterall I'm not going to stop just because people disagree with me.

But my point is you wouldn't agree with killing other humans would you? and that's what that argument has been used for.

I was not talking about the Na'vi.
I was refering to a Human conflict.

So you would be ok with being invaded tomorrow, all your loved ones either killed or made to to work as slaves for the invaders to take every last resource and be left with nothing but a large rock.

Of course not because I'm the one being invaded.
I would understand the invaders but I would still fight for my country.

I just don't see how you can be ok with invasion when you know what it leads to.

Because my logic is cold and efficiant while yours is not.
My logic is illogical to you while your's is illogical to me.

(I really wish I had a picture of spock right now)
Invasion for the reasons I listed is illogical, it only leads to suffering and possible reprisal, which would lead to more suffering. It would be more efficiant to pursue other methods for getting what you want. Could you also rationalize an invasion of a country if people you knew and loved lived there, even if it was Ireland invading.

I never said war was the only valid option.
Suffering is a part of life, it happens.
Making an arguement personal is an invalid method.
If I say yes: "omg you don't care about your loved ones!"
If I say no: "Ha! See! She wouldn't do it then would she!"

Suffering may be a part of life but needless fighting generally only makes it worse. It doesn't invalidate an argument like this one, we are actually talking about our personal opinions. Enjoy my little trap.

Well if I was invading a country it would obviously be for a reason so I would have to forasake those I hold dear there.

Impressively cunning, using belief of something right as an excuse to agree to something you normally wouldn't. What do you do to your friend then when you find them (noting you are in a squad when you do, they are heartless and hate these people):
A: A quick and clean death at your hand, you owe them that much.
B: A life of unending suffering as a slave.
C: Merely watch as someone else executes them.
D: Other. (Bonus points if you can do something that doesn't involve some miraculous escape)

A of course.

You'd kill your own friend, how could you, you heartless monster. And in doing so you saved them from all other kinds of torture, congratulations.

 

[Daniel Cygnus]

I'll admit, it is sort of depressing that you can't frolic about in a neon rain forest IRL, but damn these people are sad.

 

[Plurralbles]

"Cameron gets sued for emotional stress due to Avatar being so pretty"

Lame. Our society blows.

 

[uncle-ellis]

I liked the bit where the humans left.

Tacking there education and medicine with them

 

[ElephantGuts]

This news is simultaneously hilarious (that people are stupid enough to let an over-funded movie with a terribly cliched story effect them to the point of becoming suicidal), saddening ( that people are stupid enough to let an over-funded movie with a terrible story effect them to the point of becoming suicidal), and enraging (that people are too stupid to realize that our planet is still beautiful, it isn't the urban industrial wasteland the movie said it was (because it was a MOVIE!), and all you need to do is go outside your fucking house to see it; you don't need to kill yourself).

 

[lee1287]

harharhar. depressed for this?

i understand depression for watership down. but this?

get lost.