How The World Works Conservative backlash against “Avatar”
A right-wing nightmare: The free market has spoken — anti-American lefty green propaganda sells!
By Andrew Leonard

A still from “Avatar”A movie as big as “Avatar” deserves more than one blog post, and I’m afraid I just can’t resist poking at the hilarious spectacle of conservative movie critics launching into thermonuclear hissy fits at the anti-American, greenie pagan leftist propaganda embedded in the politics of James Cameron’s epic. The Los Angeles Times has a great story by Patrick Goldstein rounding up the outrage.

To say that the film has evoked a storm of ire on the right would be an understatement. Big Hollywood’s John Nolte, one of my favorite outspoken right-wing film essayists, blasted the film, calling it “a sanctimonious thud of a movie so infested with one-dimensional characters and PC cliches that not a single plot turn, large or small, surprises. . . . Think of ‘Avatar’ as ‘Death Wish’ for leftists, a simplistic, revisionist revenge fantasy where if you … hate the bad guys (America) you’re able to forgive the by-the-numbers predictability of it all.”

John Podhoretz, the Weekly Standard’s film critic, called the film “blitheringly stupid; indeed, it’s among the dumbest movies I’ve ever seen.” He goes on to say: “You’re going to hear a lot over the next couple of weeks about the movie’s politics — about how it’s a Green epic about despoiling the environment, and an attack on the war in Iraq… The conclusion does ask the audience to root for the defeat of American soldiers at the hands of an insurgency. So it is a deep expression of anti-Americanism — kind of. The thing is, one would be giving Jim Cameron too much credit to take ‘Avatar’ — with its … hatred of the military and American institutions and the notion that to be human is just way uncool — at all seriously as a political document. It’s more interesting as an example of how deeply rooted these standard issue counterculture cliches in Hollywood have become by now.”



Filed under Movie reviews, Playing Politics, Radical Rightwing groups, Uncategorized, WAR


  1. This is by far one of the best blogs about this movie ive read.(i have not seen it yet by the way, the line is still unbareable)

    I think the mind is a funny thing. Some see the mona lisa and see a lady with no eyebrows, some see a young boy, some see an incredible work of art. I think what comes out of our mouths says more about us then whatever it is were ranting about.

  2. Why can’t conservatives wrap their head around the idea that just because you don’t like a policy, a particular politician, a law, an ideology, etc. doesn’t mean you HATE a whole COUNTRY?

    I know it is because they have inferior minds, but it is so frustrating to have to deal with their simplicity. I know that God made them that way, so we should forgive and have pity, but it is so hard because they are just so damn irritating!

    Hollywood makes shoot em ups, glorifies war in war movies, and supports the status quo in a million ways every single day. But put a few movies out there with a different mindset and all of Hollywood turns pinko.

    • lillacluvr

      The one thing about the Iraq War that I could never get through any of the Righties’ heads is this – if the Iraqis came over to the US and dropped bombs and invaded us, would we not fight back? Would these same Righties then not applaud the Americans for fighting the ‘evil’ ones that came and invaded us for no reason?

      But self-serving, sanctimonius Righties will never be able to think outside of their own selfish boxes. After all, THEIR God told them it was okay and he was all for it.

      Bush and Cheney were wrong to go to war in Iraq and the facts keep coming out to prove just that.

      But facts, much like the Righties’ morals, can be overlooked when it does not meet their need and desire for hatred.

      • Their inability to grasp complex ideas and concepts is what makes it possible (and convenient) for them to believe whatever they want to hear. Which is why Rush Limbaugh is so popular among them; he tells them what they want to hear, keeps it simple, never waivers. Come to think of it, you can say the same for George Bush…

  3. Good post, Lilac. I read a review of Avatar where the natives were compared to Native Americans – as in Indians of this country.

    • lillacluvr

      Iggy….thanks for the book – I am learning to post, so if I mess up, please bear with me – LOL

      I have not seen the movie but I heard it was a love story. The only things I have seen of it are the previews and the toy in the Happy Meal that my grand-daughter eats.

      When I hear these ‘real’ Republicans ranting about how Christian this nation is, I think of how the Native Americans must feel when they hear such bunk.

      Again, why is that the people that call themselves the most religious are usually the most uncompassionate ones in the bunch?

      Where in the Bible does it give people the right to invade others’ land and take over? I just don’t get it.

      • BadAxe

        January 5, 2010 at 2:40 pm
        Where in the Bible does it give people the right to invade others’ land and take over? I just don’t get it.

        Lillacluvr, try a short read of the Old Testament. When the Children of Israel went to the Promised Land, God lead them to invade on a number of occasions.


        And the LORD said unto Joshua, Be not afraid because of them:
        for to morrow about this time will I deliver them up all slain
        before Israel: thou shalt hough their horses, and burn their
        chariots with fire.

      • Hi BadAxe. Welcome to Prairie P&Ps.

      • Lilac,

        You’re doing great! You jumped right in and met success! 🙂

      • BadAxe,

        When Jesus came to spread the Word of God he brought a New Testament from God to the people and the foundation of His teaching was to LOVE God and LOVE one another.

        Which part of love God and one another jibes with murdering people and taking their land?

        For Christians, The Old Testament is valuable as history, but the teachings that Jesus brought to the world are completely different. “An eye for an eye” became “turn the other cheek” and “stone him” became “he who is without sin cast the first stone.” You can’t pick and choose and mix and match teachings from the Old Testament and New Testament and still claim to be following the teachings of Christ. I mean, YOU CAN, but, technically, you would be WRONG.

  4. Yes. The old testament has some interesting stories.

  5. The Old Testament certainly does have some very interesting stories and I’ve met too many people who are very willing to hold one up as proof of something and ignore another all together when it doesn’t fit their need, their view…

    Then there are the many many interpretations. Of course everyone is positive theirs is the only correct one.

  6. lillacluvr

    Badaxe – the Bible also says Thou Shalt Not Steal.

    I assume this would mean taking land that does not belong to you also?

    The Bible is full of contradictions and I agree with fnord that people will pluck out one thing to justify their actions and then disregard those parts that tell them they were wrong for doing what they just did.

  7. lillacluvr

    Badaxe – I just had a thought – who says it was really God that led the Children of Israel to the Promised Land and told them to fight?

    Maybe Joshua just said that God was leading him to justify what he was doing – because of his own selfish desires?

    A lot of people use God as their justification for doing their own dirty deeds. God gets the blame for alot of crap that goes down – IMHO.

    • BadAxe

      Fnord, thank you for your kind welcome. This is kind of a different type of blog, eh?
      Lillacluvr, excellent points all. My point was that there are many instances of God directing the Children of Israel to do battle and take the land.

      ” Badaxe – the Bible also says Thou Shalt Not Steal.

      I assume this would mean taking land that does not belong to you also?”

      But who does the land belong to? By what right? The land was here before we were; who initially decided who owns what? Originally, ownership of land was decided by striength of arms.

      “Badaxe – I just had a thought – who says it was really God that led the Children of Israel to the Promised Land and told them to fight?

      Maybe Joshua just said that God was leading him to justify what he was doing – because of his own selfish desires?”

      Another good point. God only spoke to Joshua and before him, Moses. One of those things that makes you say “Hmmmmmm”.

      • lillacluvr

        We agree on the Hmmmmm part.

        And as for the validity of the Bible – again, that is up for debate. Many people view the Bible as the Holy Scriptures but yet there are just as many people who view the Bible as just a book.

        Who is correct? And the Bible has been translated many, many times. Again – which version is the accurate one?

        I’ve said this many times before – religion can be used for good or evil.

        Too many people use their religion for their own selfish agendas and that, to me, is where they are totally wrong – no matter which version of the Bible they profess to be following.

      • And then He spoke to bush the lesser, or so we were told.

      • Doesn’t He also speak to the C Street bunch?

  8. BadAxe

    “Who is correct? And the Bible has been translated many, many times. Again – which version is the accurate one?”

    Exactly! I’m amazed at how many of my Christian brothers and sisters have read the Bible, but have never looked at the footnotes. One footnote you see over and over is, “an exact translation of this passage does not exist”. Even among Biblical Scholars there’s no agreement about what the Bible really says.
    And what of the Scriptures and Gospel that didn’t make the final cut and weren’t included in the Bible?

    • BadAxe

      Paula Sayles, RE your 8:19 post,
      New and Old Testament wasn’t the point. I responded to the question, “Where in the Bible does it give people the right to invade others’ land and take over? I just don’t get it.”

      I just answered the question. Please don’t assume what my position is based on that answer.

    • lillacluvr

      Exactly, my point.

      I am a Christian but I do not believe in Bible thumping. I think that kind of behavior and conduct just turns people off.

      If you’re truly living a Christian life, then your actions will be showing the results. I believe there is a difference between sprirituality and being religious.

      Too often times, being religious only means they are church-going people. Very little of the Christian message gets through their self-absorbed minds but alot of nonsense gets through their mouths.

      • lillacluvr

        BTW – I also believe in spirituality in all religions. I chose the Christian life but that does not mean that I am superior to my non-Christian friends who have chosen a different religion.

        This is where I part ways with many of the Evangelical Christians – they are the ones that believe that their God, and only their God, is the true one and everyone else is doomed for Hell.

        Also, the Evangelical Christians are the ones who will usually start a big fight over the Bible being the ‘literal’ Word of God. That means they beleive every single word iwas written by God.

        Oh really, is that why the Bible has been translated so many times? I guess God has been busy these many years – huh?

        Another thing that makes me go Hmmmmmm..

      • BadAxe

        And lillacluvr goes right to the point of my disagreement with evangelicals. Why are they so hateful?

  9. Saw Avatar at the Old-Town Warren tonight. It was 3-D. My summary would be that movie was a high tech version of Dances with Wolves. Oh, and corporatism is bad, bad, very bad, in fact.

    • lillacluvr

      I read somewhere today that the movie Avatar is being sold out in China.

      And over there, the people see this movie as their current trend of developers coming in and taking people’s land – sometimes by force.

      Isn’t it interesting that one movie can be perceived in so many different ways by different people living in different cultures.

      I guess the human tragedy of takers coming in and arrogantly thinking they can just run over anybody at anytime they want to is universal.

      I guess I should try to go see it one of these days. I just hate to spend the money at a theatre if it will be coming to video within the next year. And I don’t plan to leave my house until the heat wave hits – LOL.

  10. It was worth going to. My kids enjoyed it more than me, so take some youngsters if you go…