MY THOUGHTS ON THE AVATAR FRANCHISE
MY MAIN ISSUE WITH THE FILM :
i’m woman of North African descent, i know about colonization and the impact of war. i love the Avatar films, but as I grew up, I realized how much some of the script choices bothered me. My biggest question after seeing Avatar 3 is: what message is James Cameron really trying to convey? What is his true interpretation of colonization? How does he perceive it? Can we really trust the elitist Hollywood industry? Are they legitimate to tell the story of how we, the oppressed people, were colonized? The Hollywood industry sells us an anti-military, anti-imperialist, and anti-colonial film while simultaneously creating empathy for a genocidal colonial character. Giving the Colonel's clone qualities of redemption is, to me, a political choice, a way to smooth over and numb the colonial crimes. Why should we see goodness, forgiveness, and acceptance in our enemies? The entire premise of the first film falls apart, creating empathy for the oppressed, but only through the lens of the white colonizer? It's a way of easing their guilty conscience, and it was an intentional choice. Jake Sully, for me, represents a complete lack of potential. We have a man (a former colonizer) who sold information about a people who accepted him as their own, who literally changes race, but not only that, Jake continues to subject the Na'vi to colonial pressure while simultaneously being someone who suffers human oppression and struggles for indigenous survival a total identity crisis. Unfortunately, this wasn't developed by James Cameron. Becoming Toruk Makto was a way to impress a people who had betrayed him, because it held value in their eyes. Jake Sully's position among the Na'vi has only benefited him. I sincerely believe that it's because he's in love with Neytiri that he "changed his mind" about the Na'vi and their culture. Choosing to make a former colonizer the chosen one of a native people isn't just the white savior syndrome; it's primarily a declaration that "you are kind and help the oppressed, but you are still better than them because you are braver and more capable of obtaining a leadership position within a group that isn't yours, a group you attempted to colonize two weeks prior." Being Toruk Makto is the key. A foreigner attaining a sacred role that no Na'vi ever earns on screen is a deliberate narrative choice. Knowing the enemy doesn't erase the colonial framework; it highlights it. Cameron didn't consider the impact this could have on the audience of colonized people, and that these specific, intentional choices seem designed to numb all the pain and crimes of imperialism, and also to pander to the white audience watching films. Every system of domination relies on its arsenal of seductive tactics. They will never be able to decolonize because they are unaware that they themselves are the source of humanity's disorder. Jake's attempts to unite the tribes echo real-world leaders who must contend with external threats while striving to preserve their culture, but his idealism underestimates the simmering trauma and anger among the Na'vi who have been constantly displaced and oppressed. Making the arbitrary choice to grant Kiri, the reincarnation of a white woman who imposed colonial schools on the Na'vi who wanted to establish vows on Pandora, a gift and privileged powers—even if she was empathetic and benevolent—remains passive colonialism. Kiri is an imposter, and in my opinion, it's illegitimate to have this connection that other Na'vi never had access to on their own planet. colonialism is also a poison that seeps through DNA. giving spider access to ancestral memories that aren't his, expecting loyalty when he doesn't necessarily have the right to be. Avatar is about remplacement, appropriation presented as a form of awakening. Jake isn't simply learning the culture; he's replacing someone who has never had the opportunity to lead.
FIRE AND ASH?
i have several troubling points to make about the narrative choices regarding the Ash People. First and foremost, the most glaring issue is that we're teased with a new people only to have them quickly erased after a few scenes of cruelty. They fade directly into the background after their alliance with Colonel Quaritch, becoming literally just a weapon for him. This was somewhat disappointing, and I don't know if it was intentional on James Cameron's part, but it makes sense in a way: submitting to an alliance, especially for those with pre-existing rivalries with other Na'vi, might lead them to see the colonizers as a means to gain power and conquer enemies, forgetting that the colonizers see them all the same and will inevitably turn against them, as we saw with how the humans treated the Ash People in front of Quaritch. I also think Cameron created a somewhat simplistic caricature of the Ash People, a group that has experienced tragedy and completely rejects any deity, but it's more than that. Varang embodies the rage of colonized peoples whose suffering is ignored and erased, it also represents centuries of survival under oppression!!! Their rage becomes rational when morality no longer guarantees their survival. James Cameron also underestimated his audience's understanding of fire. We don't all share a colonial perspective, and for me, fire isn't necessarily a symbol of chaos, it's part of an ecosystem's cycle. Some plants actually need fire to germinate properly. It's also a colonial perspective to have displaced imperialist violence onto a new people, portraying them as more violent!!! We haven't had enough time with them to even see through their eyes. But I imagine James Cameron prefers to spend his time humanizing the colonizers. What I would have really liked to see in A3 is precisely the two native peoples, their internal and interreligious conflicts, and the tragedies they dealt with and absorbed in different ways. The way they were impacted by colonialism in different ways...
THE ERASURE OF THE NA’VI PEOPLE
James Cameron gradually erases the Na'vi and their culture from the film. Perhaps this is intentional, as it reflects real life: after imperialist pressure, most oppressed peoples are completely erased from themselves, their culture and faith as well. In the film, they even have their identity and DNA stolen. Good intentions can't undo structural oppression. the Na'vi will never be the same from the moment they accept Jake Sully. The Na'vi (especially Neytiri) have sacrificed too much and ultimately lose their narrative to make room for other characters to focus on the transformation of their own culture, change, and replacement (Jake, Spider, Kiri). The film romanticizes the Na'vi's suffering to make it easier for the audience to digest. It has no problem freely killing dozens of Na'vi on screen while readily reviving the villains and Sky People, it’s politically incorrect. James Cameron needs to take the Na'vi seriously and be intentional in his choices to avoid stereotypes, especially when he's drawing inspiration from real people, like the natives who fight only to sell themselves to the Sky People. It could have been an interesting conversation, but it gets lost in everything else that happens in the film. It's about the infiltration and gentrification of an indigenous group, a human clone has powers no native possesses. It was doomed from the start when Jake scattered his human ideals and introduced them to war machines. I think the Na'vi deserve a better story that goes beyond this lens. The ending is centered on Spider, it's like Manifest Destiny. Pandora no longer belongs exclusively to the Na'vi anymore.
Please share your thoughts, love u
