Of course, the intention in these films is always to be anti-imperialist, but hackneyed implementation ends up trashing the whole message.

I don't mind telling the story from the perspective of the white guy, but I really wish they'd make him into a sidekick instead of a messiah.

as amusing as this is - I think the director James Cameron was trying to make a positive political statement for native peoples and for saving this earth from capitalism - even if he used easy familiar tropes to do so.

Please also watch Amy Goodman interview Cameron on Democracy Now....
» http://www.democracynow.org/2010/4/27/avatar_director_james_cameron_follows_box

I do and I don't agree with this. While yes, he is a white "savior" in that he was white and he saved them, he doesn't do so by teaching the Na'vi "his ways". He learns theirs and assimilates almost completely to their way of life. He was brave and didn't learn things easily. He was slowly taught and ended up loving their culture and disliking his own. To me it is less a story about him shoving himself into their culture, and because he was white he saved the day...but more about someone who learns to love another culture and decides he wants to join it (and just so happens to save the day because he wants to protect the culture he fell in love with). It would be similar to an American going to Africa to convince a town to move so Americans can harvest the oil below, falling in love with the culture, and then fighting against the Americans trying to destroy the village where he now lived. That is not too far-fetched.

It would be one thing if he was, I dunno, teaching them better ways to farm and hunt by showing them the "civilized white" way to do it. However, he, while being a white man, learns the values of their culture and rejects the values of his own. The only thing he does "whitely" was use automatic weapons during the final battle...and that was because you can't bring a bow and arrow to a gun fight and expect to win.

This "going native" was a common theme back when the newly arrived American settlers met with Native Americans, and a large reason why the eradication of their culture was so hostile by the newly formed US Government. Many settlers would leave the "white Christian civilized" way of life to assimilate completely with the native way (marrying in and becoming part of the tribe), and that made white leaders very frightened about losing more settlers to the "savage" way of life.

It was an alien version of Pocahontas. Most people figured that out while watching it. Amazing picture quality: Yes
Original plot line: No

I read this same basic story fifty-some times two years ago when it was still relevant. 

Nailed it.

This Avatar remix was also posted on The Sociological cinema (http://www.thesociologicalcinema.com/1/post/2010/11/avatar-remix-and-representations-of-the-other.html) and contains a brief analysis, as well as a suggestion for how sociology instructors could use the clip in the classroom

While I do agree with the overall thrust of the video, I don't think the inclusion of 'The New World' was fair. In that film, John Smith is anything but a savior to the natives. Instead, He's the harbinger of doom. Furthermore, as  the film wears on, it becomes clear it isn't about John Smith 'going native'(a concept he in the end rejects) and more about Pocahontas reluctantly 'going anglo'.  

To be clear, I don't think the movie is perfect in it's representation of native Americans or women(The pixie girl trope, for instance, is in full force). But "White man as Savior", it is not. 

Thanks, Captain Obvious. This site is just not very interesting anymore. You write Soc. like you haven't even declared your major yet.

Not to mention the characters were all one dimensional. Especially the villains. I get it, you want me to know that a person is "evil" cause so many people are like that right. They just wear their evil on their sleeve...

I think the director James Cameron was trying to make a positive political statement for native peoples and for saving this earth from capitalism

Uh yeah, cause he's such a non-benifiter from capitalism.

I don't actually know most of the films in there, except Lawrence of Arabia, which is a true story, and slightly more than a tired movie trope. 

Interesting point of view- though the first thing that I think is, well- compare it to 13th warrior, a modern mainstream well liked adaptation of Beowulf where a Muslim arrives in one of the most token uniquely European stories and essentially takes credit for a great deal of the most pivotal story lines of early Northern European cultural history including but not limited to- committing it to writing, which validated the story as written literature instead of oral tradition. I don't really think Western culture is necessarily so one dimensional... Especially taking into account your acknowledgement of the liberal leanings of Hollywood, I think it is more of an empathetic act of film makers trying to create a narrative Westerners can accept from the point of view of smaller native cultures rather than necessarily an attempt to endorse the domination of them. Like the last samurai for example, Tom Cruise wasn't really a Western-approved hero in that story- he was actually scripted as a virtuous soul with a conscience who was ravaged by the selfish human toll of Western greed, which was supposedly recognized by two smaller MORE empathetic virtuous cultures. He never truely shifted his point of view to theirs though he thought it was more noble and encouraged them to have it- and though they tolerated his presence he wasn't really one of them. The viewer wasn't necessarily meant to approve of his survival, it was almost placed in such a way as to acknowledge the hopelessness of the cause a smaller culture thrown under the machine of Western assimilation and remote resource importation... there were multiple scenes in the movie where it showed the Japanese culture essentially pimped out for profit. 

Loved that vid. I've watched every one of those movies and pretty much hate them for the reason the title of the video states. Touch annoying how most people ignore that or try to ignore that by going "La la la la acting is awesome la la la la cinematography is awesome la la la la I like ____ actor la la la"

Substance-void correction post: It's Dances with Wolves, not Dancing with Wolves. Carry on.

So you're problems with these movies isvthat they portray a white male as heroic? Yet you don't seem to have a problem that these movies stereotype white males as a whole as racist ethnocentric bloodthirsty barbarians? So it's ok to show white males in a negative light but not a positive light?

Well if you don't like movies that show the hero as being a white Guy, You have plenty of options. There are many non-white male actors these days who play the hero. In face Will Smith seems to save the world in everthing he's. In. If You want to make a genuine complaint about how Hollywood is white-washed, at least get it right. It is not male representation in the movies that is white washed, it is female representation. In fact it seems the only real diversity is different races if men. Where are all the black, hispanic and Asian womenn saving the world? All we get is Angelina Jolie and other white women. More diversity in female representation PLEASE!!!

Alright I forced myself to sit through this mashup. THIS is a commentary? Wow. 

Slavoj Zizek has a related piece on Avatar in which he contrasts it with a contemporary real-world insurrection, that of the Indian Naxalites, which may be of interest:

http://www.newstatesman.com/film/2010/03/avatar-reality-love-couple-sex

I'm glad I'm not the only one who recognized the tired trope.