After our class discussion on Thursday about “What is animation” I realized it could easily be tied into the movie “Avatar” in regards to the necessity of drawing, film and story. The drawing aspect (character design, expression, etc) has obviously been painstakingly gone over. The native people, the Na’vi, are similar enough to indicate they are a species, but diverse enough to have personalities, expressions and the variations expected in a person’s face. The film was also highly technical and was hailed as great piece of CGI and motion capture. As the professor pointed out, there is an issue with a foot at some point during the movie, and while I would expect a highly anticipated and promoted film to not have such errors, one error in a technological undertaking such as “Avatar” does not mar the film as a whole.
Where “Avatar” fails is in the final necessity of animation: story. Avatar ripped its story from “FernGully” and “Pocahontas” (or, historically, the treatment of the Native Americans when Europe started settling North America). The basic plot of “FernGully” is a race of faeries who are facing difficulties with the big bad humans who want to tear down their trees. A lone man from the big bad humans is shrunk down to their size and learns of their hardships and thus changes his stance from tree removal to tree hugging.
Hrm. Doesn’t that sound familiar? Indigenous people with obvious differences from the invading humans. Check. Special trees. Check. Making an invading human live like the indigenous . Check. Invading human begins to trust the indigenous more than his own people. Check.
Onto Pocahontas/American history. The film “Pocahontas” is clearly not historically correct in regards to John Smith and Pocahontas’ relationship with him, but the idea of foreigners invading and declaring the land theirs with limited patience for the indigenous and their peculiar habits is fairly historical. This theme is also carried into “Avatar”. “Avatar” also directly rips the idea of the Grandmother Willow from “Pocahontas”–big tree with a soul, or, in “Avatar’s” case, many souls which they call the “Tree of Voices”. Perhaps James Cameron (the director, producer and writer of “Avatar”) thought pretty pictures and techniques would prevent his audience from noticing the completely unoriginal plot. Unfortunately movies necessitate a creative plot and James Cameron has distinctly forgotten to include one. As Joe Neumier of the New York Daily News succinctly states, “”Avatar” clears the hurdle in terms of being optical candy. Its story, though, is pure cheese.”
ETA: I commented on Myca Taylor’s blog and Hayleigh Allingham’s blog. I apologize for the tardiness on the second comment, but my computer was annihilated by a worm and is in the process of being restored.

10 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 23, 2010 at 4:42 am
bonbonhistory
I have to completely agree with you! “I see you” is not exactly stimulating conversation but the 3D imagery made up for it. I feel sorry for anyone who did not see the movie in 3D. Although the imagery was very creative and I liked it alot, the writing of the script left much to be desired. Also the last song almost ruined the whole movie because it sounded exactly like “My Heart Will Go On,” from “Titanic”. Not exactly original. I think any movie with the amazing 3D imagery of “Avatar” could have done just as well. Overall though, the animation was creative, realistic, and imaginative which is why the movie is on the road to receiving many awards. I hope in the future the same technology can be put to use in a better story than the “Pocahantas”/”Ferngully” mix. If not, I would still love to see Batty do another rap. (Crazy bat from Ferngully).
January 23, 2010 at 5:48 pm
mtaylo7
I can agree with you that Avatar had some mind-blowing animation. To an un-trained eye, like my 4 year old cousin’s, the Na’vi people looked real. The forest was colorful and enchanting and the Hallelujah mountains were just as their name entails; worth shouting hallelujah for.
But when it comes to the story being a cheesy rip-off, I disagree. Yes, the “Pocahontas” and “Ferngully” have very similar plots. But don’t most movies take their plot from something in the past? No one complains about how most Disney movies are a re-used plots or that constantly throughout Hollywood they are doing re-makes. (though I would blame that on the fact that most people nowadays don’t know that an original exists.) Even if you watch a Romantic Comedy, the plot is re-used. Boy meets girl, at first boy hates girl and girl hates boy, but soon boy likes girl and girl likes boy, they have fun times, one of them does something bad that you knew was going to happen since the beginning, they break it off, and then they get back together over something they share: love. That plot is used in most all romantic comedies but what makes each one individual to us is that we differentiate back-story to front-story.
In Avatar, the back-story is like Pocahontas and Ferngully, but the front-story is about an alien race taking over another people’s race for what they hold underneath them. Two people are forced to set aside years of conditioning to understand and help one another. So, to me, Avatar isn’t about spicing up an old plot with amazing graphics, its taking a great plot, re-shaping it and making it into an entertaining and eye-opening experience.
January 23, 2010 at 6:52 pm
cinnamellon
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree:
“In Avatar, the back-story is like Pocahontas and Ferngully, but the front-story is about an alien race taking over another people’s race for what they hold underneath them. Two people are forced to set aside years of conditioning to understand and help one another.”
That, right there, is Pocahontas and FernGully. One race taking over another race for their land (or as you word it, “what they hold underneath them”), just like in Pocahontas–Europeans trying to take the Indian’s land. Then, two people from each race are “forced to set aside years of condition to understand and help one and other”, just like in FernGully–Zak (the main male character) works with Crysta (main female character) to help protect the forest even though originally he was all for destroying it.
The only discernible difference is the ending–the super sappy everything works out and we live happily ever after ending in Avatar. In Pocahontas and FernGully the main male characters go back to their own kind where as in Avatar, we get the romantic ending.
In response to the Disney comment: Disney does not declare its motion pictures to be the next best thing since sliced bread. They have a formula that works and they know it. It is marketed to little kids who will watch the same show over and over again without tiring so why not release new movies showing the same thing for the sake of profit? James Cameron bragged of “changing cinema forever” and originality. Borrowing the plot of other movies and such gems as “unobtainium” as the name for a hard to obtain rock do not strike me as originality.
January 23, 2010 at 7:18 pm
mtaylo7
I will agree with you that the ending was very Hollywood with its romantic undertaking. I wish half the movies we see nowadays would end with something a bit more realistic than that. I would have probably ended it with the extinction of the Na’vi people because that is exactly what would of happened in real life. But its Hollywood, everything is sappy and re-used.
And you are exactly right, “so why not release new movies showing the same thing for the sake of profit?” Its what Disney did, its what James Cameron did. No matter whether he bragged of originality or not. I’m sure he knows just like the rest of us that almost nothing is original anymore that makes money in the box office. And whether either of us likes it or not, he has changed cinema forever with this movie. I will agree that it is not the story he did it with; you are not wrong on that point at all. And furthermore you are not wrong on the re-use of the plot. But I still stand to agree that he changed up the story enough for me to feel it was fresh enough to stand alone in today’s Hollywood standings. And even though I may enjoy originality in movies immensely, there is nothing quite as entertaining as a good Hollywood movie.
Still, I would of preferred everyone died in the end.
January 24, 2010 at 7:53 pm
cfdemarco
I have to both agree and disagree on certain points. Yes, “Avatar” draws distinct resemblance to a specific Disney movie, even though I personally saw “Avatar” as a far better version of Kevin Costner’s “Dances with Wolves.” But I also believe that a lot of movies are just “remixed” versions of other movies, at least in Disney’s case. Apparently Hollywood finds it difficult to come up with original scripts these days. I had touched on something briefly in my blog post that you also mentioned here. You had mentioned that the visual effects were so great that the audience essentially forgot about the plot, which I think everyone who had seen this movie would agree with. This is true, but I also thought the plot worked perfectly and was pretty entertaining.
You seem to focus on the whole “one race taking over another race” part of this movie and the other mentioned movies in your post. I ask this question: haven’t we learned throughout history about one more dominant race taking over another race, like with the British, the Spanish, and the United States forcing the Native Americans out of North and South America along with other various instances? It is a part of history, so Hollywood finds new ways to put that story into different contexts. Although the story might be somewhat unoriginal, it is still an excellent movie, but like I had started off, we both agree in terms of the use of the animation but disagree when it came to the plot.
January 26, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Blog Post #1: Because I Love Religious Studies… Veggie Tales! « Animated
[...] I commented on: Katherine Danoy’s Blog and Samantha Francis’s Blog. Published [...]
January 27, 2010 at 1:58 am
moviedude311
I agree that Avatar had some beautiful animation. I also agree that the story of the movie wasn’t original at all. Everyone has mentioned Pocahontas, Ferngully, and Dances with Wolves. Even though everyone pretty much agrees the animation was realistic, I would have to agree and disagree to this comment. The animation looked “realistic,” however it didn’t look the same as if it were a human being. Also, you have to look at the budget of the film. If any Director had 300 to 500 million dollars to make a film, then they could have done the same thing. Movies today have large budgets, but not that large. Of course James Cameron is gonna be able to achieve this animation, but for a large cost. Also, in my opinion, I believe the animation in District 9 was just as realistic as Avatar, if not, better. That is saying a lot considering District 9 was made on a budget of 30 million compared to Cameron’s film cost. Overall, I feel the entire movie was nothing special and did fail, but I can’t show evidence of this considering the movie just beat Titanic to become the largest grossing film worldwide (which is a shame because Titanic was better). Take this opinion for what you will, but overall the points you make are understandable.
January 27, 2010 at 6:49 pm
kyluna
James Cameran actually said in an interview that it was like Dances with Wolves in space. He liked the story and its a classic thats why it survives. We obviously can relate to the story no matter the year we are in so I say more power to him for using such a classic tail and making it flow with modern technology.
February 8, 2010 at 10:40 am
Blog Post #1: Geri’s Game (1997) « Moviedude311's Blog
[...] ETA: I commented on the Blogs of Erica LoMonaco and Samantha Francis. [...]
March 15, 2010 at 9:16 pm
Blog Specimens « Cinnamellon's Blog
[...] 15, 2010 in Uncategorized For the blog specimen I have selected Blog 1 and Blog 7. [...]