In his New York Times Op-Ed Column, reviewer David Brooks slams the movie Avatar as being offensively stereotypical in its interpretation of what he calls the “White Messiah Fable.”  Specifically he derides James Cameron’s plot as resting on the following condescending stereotypes:

It rests on the stereotype that white people are rationalist and technocratic while colonial victims are spiritual and athletic. It rests on the assumption that nonwhites need the White Messiah to lead their crusades. It rests on the assumption that illiteracy is the path to grace. It also creates a sort of two-edged cultural imperialism. Natives can either have their history shaped by cruel imperialists or benevolent ones, but either way, they are going to be supporting actors in our journey to self-admiration.

Brooks also notes that the only reason Avatar is such a global hit is because world-wide audiences can get their jollies in seeing American troops get slaughtered.  He writes that the only other reason for the film’s record-shattering success is because its useful commercial hooks which allow large greedy corporations like McDonald's get behind the film with tie-in campaigns.  In short, this particular movie reviewer suggests that the film is little more than one big bloated mass-marketing vehicle and a gluttonous tribute to James’ Cameron’s blockbuster-sized ego.

I have to disagree.  First, I don’t care that Mr. Brooks can’t stomach the movie’s well-worn plot and that it offends him that James Cameron has a monster ego.  I can’t say that I am terribly bothered by the portrayal of the innocent Na’vi tribes and don’t agree with Mr. Brooks’ characterization of it as being condescending or racist.  It is clear that  Mr. Brooks really didn’t have fun at this movie and for that I feel a tad sorry for him. 

As an avid movie-goer, what I like and care about is that James Cameron delivered a film that is by any measure extraordinary big-screen entertainment.  Avatar is thrillingly exciting, stunningly beautiful and delivers an experience that is unparalleled by any other movie maker EVER.  It is an epic adventure story that more than lives up to the hype.  This film literally transforms movie-watching for all time – bringing its audiences into the movie experience as it unfolds and leaving them awe-struck and elated.  I, like millions of others, haven’t felt this way about any film since first seeing Star Wars as a small child.  At that tender time in my life, I remember feeling as though I had just watched something special - something no one had ever seen before.  I got that same startling feeling from Avatar. For that, James Cameron deserves all the accolades and ego-massaging he can handle.

Furthermore, Mr. Brook’s comment about Avatar’s “unoriginal” plot is hardly late-breaking news.  Cameron is unapologetic in borrowing from the stories of Pocahontas and Ferngully.  The film is indeed a blatant parable of the North American settlers and their oppression and exploitation of the Native Americans who lived there first.  And yet, does it matter?  Even though the story isn’t novel, Cameron more than compensates for a familiar plot through the skilled manner in which he tells it.  The film subtly introduces his audience to an incredible new world, taking its time to establish plot and character.  There is no rushing headlong into the action (as we would expect with a movie of this genre).  Instead, the audience is allowed to dwell carefully on each new amazing aspect of this startling place and its inhabitants, incrementally discovering each of its new wonders in slow degrees – just like the protagonist, Jake Sully.  Like adjusting our eyes in the darkness until we can finally see the light, the slow revelation of the depth and beauty of this fantastical world mirrors Jake Sully’s own growing awareness of the beauty of this strange land and its people.  We fall in love with the place and its creatures, just as Jake Sully does. 

Mr. Brooks was sadly also too hung up on his racist interpretation of the film to pause for a moment and appreciate the beautiful performances by many of the new actors in the film.  That is a shame for him and his readers.  Zoë Saldana is mesmerizing as the proud and beautiful warrior princess.  Sam Worthington is also captivating both in his human form as a disabled veteran and in his Na’vi form.  And Stephen Lang, who plays the sadistic military commander, has got to be one of the best film villains of the year.  And yet – it's all an added bonus.  Most of us didn’t go to Avatar for fine character acting or a thought-provoking plot.  We went for the special effects and boy did we get them!  I haven’t a clue how Cameron did it, but the 3D in this film was truly extraordinary – submerging us entirely into the film in a way that has never been done before.    

About half way through the film, I turned to my husband and remarked on how much I wished my seven year old son could have experienced this movie with us.  He is. of course. far too little right now to see it, but I know that he will do back flips when he is finally old enough to be taken.  I have no doubt this film will be around for the long haul and that we will have that opportunity to share that experience together.  In the meantime, I have a piece of motherly, movie-going advice for Mr. Brooks at the New York Times.  Lighten up, perhaps ease up on the popcorn and enjoy the show!