Why was Spider and Quaritch’s screen time really cut? — From Sheep to Wolf theory:
.
We know by now, from interviews with James Cameron, that aside from the runtime, the major reason as to why he noticeably cut down Spider and Quaritch’s on-screen presence is because he had concerns as to how the audience would end up perceive the franchise’s antagonist. According to the producer, he was worried that the audience wouldn’t interpret Miles as a villain, or that they’d end up sympathising with him to too big of an extent. Why is that?
Shows, games and movies that set the villain as its main character or member of the core cast are nothing new. Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, even Bojack horseman to an extent, are all examples of media where an objectively immoral person takes some sort of centre stage. Seeing them on screen a lot sure doesn’t make them into good guys in the eyes of the audience. If anything, getting to follow them closely and see the full extent of their horrible actions, or their descend into darkness, just gives us further reasons to despise them, even if we as viewers understand what led them to that situation in the first place. More screen time does not equal a more likeable character — a villain that is written as a villain, will be perceived as such when done well.
Secondly, we have access to costume concept artworks for Avatar 2, and one of the most striking pieces in that collection is undoubtedly the "Na’vi Quaritch" one, where we see him in handmade jewellery, decorated and painted. It’s important to note that concepts for other recombinants also exist within this collection, and yet none of them follow the same theme as concepts for Recombinant Miles. They’re just variations of camouflage and armour.
Now, putting all of those clues together and using logic, here is my theory/possible explanation for the near total absence of Quaritch-Spider scenes in The way of water;
Recombinant Quaritch, in the cut out scenes, was shown in such a positive and humanising light, that it made JC worried the audience would misunderstand his intentions with said scenes; worried that the viewers would interpret the writing in Quaritch’s favor when in reality, it was part of a deeper betrayal arc. We see echoes of it in both the concept art and the ikran taming scene.
The concept art shows Miles embracing the Na’vi way unlike the rest of the squad, which heavily implies that he goes out of his way to follow Spider’s lead, listen to him, take in his teachings and is a very engaged student of his, while the rest of the squad remains largely uninterested and unchanged. It signals that the two of them developed a duo type bond.
The ikran taming scene, as said earlier, is in this theory, an echo of the bonding montage. Just like in other cut out scenes where Miles works diligently to "become Na’vi" and secretly impress Spider, he easily bites Socorro’s bait about the ikran and tames one without a banshee-catcher; a rare and brave thing to do for a Na’vi hunter. That scene ends with Spider shaking his head and grinning at him, which plays into the theoritcal arc where Miles, bit by bit, action by action, lures Spider into a sense of security by making him believe that he can be changed.
That’s right. This is where the betrayal part comes in.
Spider is shown teaching Quaritch how to speak Na’vi in the scene where Lyle notifies them that a resistance aircraft has been noticed by RDA radars. The energy of the scene changes, becomes sinister, and then we have the first village raid, where Socorro is in very obvious shock at the violence he witnesses. He clearly didn’t expect Quaritch to actually order someone to fire a gun at an innocent animal, and his panic signals that he sure as hell didn’t anticipate that there’d be an execution.
He feels betrayed, because until now? Miles was nothing short of "good" to him. He tamed ikran the Na’vi way, he listened to all Spider had to say, he caught his own game, he painted himself, he even made himself a necklace with viperwolf teeth. How could this cold and calculated monster POSSIBLY be the same man as the one he’d just been teaching “Oel Ngati Kameie”?
This is where I believe James Cameron’s worries come in. Since we see Miles from Spider’s perspective, and in his company, never separate since the moment they set foot in the jungle, we as viewers see whatever Quaritch wants Spider to see. Remember; the commander has many reasons to put on a nice act for the boy, be it manipulation, personal feelings, or a mix of both, which is what it ends up being. The bonding montage shows Miles in a sympathise-able and humanising light because we get to see him try his best to appeal to his captive son, and as result, both Spider and the audience are, once again, lured into a false sense of safety. "This guy seems to have a good side!…maybe…maybe I can change him." Is likely how Spider sees it by the time they have the “I see you” scene.
Only to be brought back to reality. Miles was never good but he tried, he was everything Spider was told he was but he wanted to be different for him, he was a snake all along he really wanted Spider to like him.
In the theoretical non-cut edition of Avatar 2, this is a heartbreaking arc that builds up a found family bond between a protagonist and an antagonist, only to tear it into shreds, breaking the hearts of both the protagonist and the onlooking audience, but that is also where the problem of the audience comes in.
Even with all the scenes cut clean out, we have a considerable amount of people within the fandom unironically defending Miles’s actions and staging him to be some kind of "misunderstood anti-hero". Taking that into account, it’s understandable that Cameron was worried the audience wouldn’t understand that Miles in avatar 2 is perceived almost entirely through Spider’s lens; a character Quaritch has many incentives to lie to. Hence the Sheep to Wolf motif. Miles starts out as a "sheep", bending backwards for Spider’s approval and making him believe that they could actually be a family, only to then shed his wool and become the "wolf", showing us and Socorro his worst traits, and only hinting that his feelings were real when he obeys Spider’s request to abstain from killing any Na’vi, showing how much their bond actually matters to him.
Does this theory remotely make sense? Let me know.
Porque James Cameron prefería poner más escenas de ballenas jajaja. Ya hablando en serio, si la intencion de James Cameron fue esta, no fue muy inteligente de su parte ya que termino por arrastrar a Spider tambien. Además, al eliminar estas escenas hace que el desarrollo de su relacion y la desición final de Spider se viera apresurado y fuera de lugar. Incluso si hubiera puesto todas las escenas de su desarrollo, el impacto habria sido igual con la escena donde quema las aldeas (igual de nada le sirvio porque siempre van a existir pendejos que malinterpreten todo). Si tanto queria James un villano na'vi simplemente hubieran usado a cualquier otro pendejo sin la necesidad de usar los recoms (que no miento, me parece un concepto interesante) y de igual manera, Spider hubiera formado un vinculo ya que carecia de una figura paterna decente.
Mi teoria es que James cameron tenia otras prioridades en la historia y pensó que con unas cuantas escenas el publico entenderia a sus personajes. Luego se dio cuenta que no fue asi y ahora tiene que arreglar su cagada.
