AVATAR : "Triumph of the Will" for the NWO Green Nazis

[ekimdrachir]

I enjoyed this movie, but it left me with some uneasy feelings. Basically its Ferngully 2.0
with a strong environmental message-- Return to the Forest, &  humans are evil.

It took quite a bit from other places, though for the 12 years of effort put into this, it came out well.
The film still resonates the whole "mother earth" gaia nature soul, who chooses what survives.

At one point they even said something like "everyone gets a second birth" and that second birth
is when they become an accepted part of their tribal community... the humans mocked "deity".

And at the end, the main character was even reborn into this new world, as a new
"super-human" type being, with a super-body, and obviously advanced nature powers.

No it was really good, it just gave me mixed feelings because of how the environmental thing is,
we want real environmentalism, not maniacal anti-humanists pretending to be environmental.

Much much much better than 2012, but not nearly as good as The Matrix.
Check it out if you want to, its interesting. Id like to hear others thoughts though too

[ekimdrachir]

o I almost forgot
after the scientist DOESNT GET CHOSEN to live in her avatar body anew, and dies
the main guy Jake makes a call to all the blue people all around the planet Pandora
to unite, like they did in old times before the sky walkers came, again now to fight
this new evil threat, the human aliens, coming to steal their planet from them
and they did, and when all the blue people were falling, Gaia came to the rescue
when all the creatures united in service to the blue people, and the planet soul
and with their numbers overwhelmed the invaders and sent them home,
except for a few humans ( the good guys of the story ) who stayed

yeah right wait for earth to send some mini nukes on the next round with some real cavalry instead of helicopter planes hardly suited to the extraterrestrial environment

[Dig]

i have not seen it all but from what i saw and from you are saying, it looks like another complete doublespeak conditioning with thousands of flickers of death, destruction, explosions, etc. all to be climaxed by a transhuman messiah who tells us the common man is the cause of all suffering (not the masters of war and the social architects that designed the problem/reaction/solution) and that following this messiah's new message, the warped theosophian earth message, will allow a human to survive in more limited and controlled dystopia.

this is "Triumph of the Will" for the NWO Green Nazis

[ekimdrachir]

pretty much

[Dig]

Look at the fancy posters:


---------------------------------------

Look at the awesome behind the scenes fanfare, hype, and cute moments:

[Dig]

[Matthew]

I enjoyed this movie, but it left me with some uneasy feelings. Basically its Ferngully 2.0
with a strong environmental message-- Return to the Forest, &  humans are evil.

It took quite a bit from other places, though for the 12 years of effort put into this, it came out well.
The film still resonates the whole "mother earth" gaia nature soul, who chooses what survives.

At one point they even said something like "everyone gets a second birth" and that second birth
is when they become an accepted part of their tribal community... the humans mocked "deity".

And at the end, the main character was even reborn into this new world, as a new
"super-human" type being, with a super-body, and obviously advanced nature powers.

No it was really good, it just gave me mixed feelings because of how the environmental thing is,
we want real environmentalism, not maniacal anti-humanists pretending to be environmental.

Much much much better than 2012, but not nearly as good as The Matrix.
Check it out if you want to, its interesting. Id like to hear others thoughts though too

Well, thanks for the ending. Maybe a warning next time. I still haven't seen it.

[ekimdrachir]

[ekimdrachir]

Well, thanks for the ending. Maybe a warning next time. I still haven't seen it.

Its not that much of a spoiler.. I saw it all coming.. its the same old story reinvented.

[Dig]

Triumph of the Will
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will

Triumph of the Will (German: Triumph des Willens) is a propaganda film made by Leni Riefenstahl. It chronicles the 1934 Nazi Party Congress in Nuremberg. The film contains excerpts from speeches given by various Nazi leaders at the Congress, including portions of speeches by Adolf Hitler, interspersed with footage of massed party members. Hitler commissioned the film and served as an unofficial executive producer; his name appears in the opening titles. The overriding theme of the film is the return of Germany as a great power, with Hitler as the True German Leader who will bring glory to the nation.

Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and rapidly became one of the best-known examples of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl's techniques, such as moving cameras, the use of telephoto lenses to create a distorted perspective, aerial photography, and revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography, have earned Triumph recognition as one of the greatest films in history.[1] Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich[2] and elsewhere, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day.[3]


'Day 1': The film opens with shots of the clouds above the city, and then moves through the clouds to float above the assembling masses below, with the intention of portraying beauty and majesty of the scene. The cruciform shadow of Hitler's plane is visible as it passes over the tiny figures marching below,[3] accompanied by music from Richard Wagner's Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, which slowly turns into the Horst-Wessel-Lied. Upon arriving at the Nuremberg airport, Hitler emerges from his plane to thunderous applause and a cheering crowd. He is then driven into Nuremberg, through equally enthusiastic people, to his hotel where a night rally is later held.

'Day 2': The second day begins with a montage of the attendees getting ready for the opening of the Reich Party Congress, and then footage of the top Nazi officials arriving at the Luitpold Arena. The film then cuts to the opening ceremony, where Rudolf Hess announces the start of the Congress. The camera then introduces much of the Nazi hierarchy and covers their opening speeches, including Joseph Goebbels, Alfred Rosenberg, Hans Frank, Fritz Todt, Robert Ley, and Julius Streicher. Then the film cuts to an outdoor rally for the Reichsarbeitsdienst (Labor Service), which is primarily a series of pseudo-military drills by men carrying shovels. This is also where Hitler gives his first speech on the merits of the Labor Service and praising them for their work in rebuilding Germany. The day then ends with a torchlight SA parade.

'Day 3': The third day starts with a Hitler Youth rally on the parade ground. Again the camera covers the Nazi dignitaries arriving and the introduction of Hitler by Baldur von Schirach. Hitler then addresses the Youth, describing in militaristic terms how they must harden themselves and prepare for sacrifice. Everyone present then assembles for a military pass and review, featuring Wehrmacht cavalry and various armored vehicles. That night Hitler delivers another speech to low-ranking party officials by torchlight, commemorating the first year since the Nazis took power and declaring that the party and state are one entity.

'Day 4': The fourth day is the climax of the film, where the most memorable of the imagery is presented. As the soundtrack plays themes from Wagner's Götterdämmerung, Hitler, flanked by Heinrich Himmler and Viktor Lutze, walks through a long wide expanse with over 150,000 SA and SS troops standing at attention, to lay a wreath at a World War I Memorial. Hitler then reviews the parading SA and SS men, following which Hitler and Lutze deliver a speech where they discuss the Night of the Long Knives purge of the SA several months prior. Lutze reaffirms the SA's loyalty to the regime, and Hitler absolves the SA of any crimes committed by Ernst Röhm. New party flags are consecrated by touching them to the "blood banner" (the same cloth flag said to have been carried by the fallen Nazis during the Beer Hall Putsch) and, following a final parade in front of the Nuremberg Frauenkirche, Hitler delivers his closing speech. In it he reaffirms the primacy of the Nazi Party in Germany, declaring, "All loyal Germans will become National Socialists. Only the best National Socialists are party comrades!" Hess then leads the assembled crowd in a final Sieg Heil salute for Hitler, marking the close of the party congress. The entire crowd sings the "Horst-Wessel-Lied" as the camera focuses on the giant Swastika banner, which fades into a line of silhouetted men in Nazi party uniforms, marching in formation.

Origins
Shortly after he came to power Hitler called me to see him and explained that he wanted a film about a Party Congress, and wanted me to make it. My first reaction was to say that I did not know anything about the way such a thing worked or the organization of the Party, so that I would obviously photograph all the wrong things and please nobody — even supposing that I could make a documentary, which I had never yet done. Hitler said that this was exactly why he wanted me to do it: because anyone who knew all about the relative importance of the various people and groups and so on might make a film that would be pedantically accurate, but this was not what he wanted. He wanted a film showing the Congress through a non-expert eye, selecting just what was most artistically satisfying — in terms of spectacle, I suppose you might say. He wanted a film which would move, appeal to, impress an audience which was not necessarily interested in politics. — Leni Riefenstahl[4]

Riefenstahl, a popular German actress, had directed her first movie called Das Blaue Licht (The Blue Light) in 1932. Around the same time she first heard Hitler speak at a Nazi rally and, by her own admission, was impressed. She later began a correspondence with him that would last for years. Hitler, by turn, was equally impressed with Das Blaue Licht, and in 1933 asked her to direct a film about the Nazi's annual Nuremberg Rally. The Nazis had only recently taken power amid a period of political instability (Hitler was the fourth Chancellor of Germany in less than a year) and were considered an unknown quantity by many Germans, to say nothing of the world.

Riefenstahl was initially reluctant, not because of any moral qualms, but because she wanted to continue making feature films. Hitler persisted and Riefenstahl eventually agreed to make a film at the 1933 Nuremberg Rally called Der Sieg des Glaubens (Victory of Faith). However the film had numerous technical problems, including a lack of preparation (Riefenstahl reported having just a few days) and Hitler's apparent unease at being filmed. To make matters worse, Riefenstahl had to deal with infighting by party officials, in particular Joseph Goebbels who tried to have the film released by the Propaganda Ministry. Though Sieg apparently did well at the box office, it later became a serious embarrassment to the Nazis after SA Leader Ernst Röhm, who had a prominent role in the film, was executed during the Night of the Long Knives. All references to Röhm were ordered to be erased from German history, which included the destruction of all known copies of Der Sieg des Glaubens.

In 1934, Riefenstahl had no wish to repeat the fiasco of Sieg and initially recommended fellow director Walter Ruttmann. Ruttmann's film, which would have covered the rise of the Nazi Party from 1923 to 1934 and been more overtly propagandistic (the opening text of Triumph was his), did not appeal to Hitler. He again asked Riefenstahl, who finally relented (there is still debate over how willing she was) after Hitler guaranteed his personal support and promised to keep other Nazi organizations, specifically the Propaganda Ministry, from meddling with her film.

Filmmaking

The film follows a similar script as Der Sieg des Glaubens which is evident when one sees both films side by side, for example, the city of Nuremberg scenes—down to the shot of a cat that is included in the city driving sequence in both films. Furthermore, Herbert Windt reused much of his musical score for that film in Triumph des Willens which he also scored. But unlike Sieg, Riefenstahl shot Triumph with a large budget, extensive preparations, and vital help from high-ranking Nazis like Goebbels. As Susan Sontag observed, "The Rally was planned not only as a spectacular mass meeting, but as a spectacular propaganda film."[5] Albert Speer, Hitler's personal architect, designed the set in Nuremberg and did most of the coordination for the event.[3] Riefenstahl also used a film crew that was extravagant by the standards of the day. Her crew consisted of 172 people, including 10 technical staff, 36 cameramen and assistants (operating in 16 teams with 30 cameras), nine aerial photographers, 17 newsreel men, 12 newsreel crew, 17 lighting men, two photographers, 26 drivers, 37 security personnel, four labor service workers, and two office assistants. Many of her cameramen also dressed in SA uniforms so they could blend into the crowds.[6]

The New York Times has said it took almost two years to edit the final version from 400 kilometres (250 mi) of raw footage.[7] However, this time frame is obviously incorrect, as there were only 200 days between the rally in September 1934 and the premiere in March 1935. The New York Times is most likely referring to Olympia, Riefenstahl's documentary about the 1936 Berlin Olympic Games. In the documentary The Wonderful, Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl, the 400,000 metres (250 mi) of footage and the two years of editing are mentioned. In Triumph of the Will, however, Riefenstahl did have the difficult task of condensing an estimated 61 hours of film into two hours.[6] She labored to complete the film as fast as she could, going so far as to sleep in the editing room filled with hundreds of thousands of feet of film footage.[8]


Themes“   [Triumph of the Will is] the supreme visualisation in cinematic form of the Nazi political religion. Its artistry, reinforced by the grandeur and power of the Nuremberg decor, is designed to sweep us into empathetic identification with Hitler as a kind of human deity. The massive spectacle of regimentation, unity and loyalty to the Führer powerfully conveys the message that the Nazi movement was the living symbol of the reborn German nation.   ”
    — Professor Robert Wistrich[4]


Religion“   This morning's opening meeting… was more than a gorgeous show, it also had something of the mysticism and religious fervor of an Easter or Christmas Mass in a great Gothic cathedral.   ”
    — Reporter William Shirer[16]

Religion is a major theme in Triumph. The film opens with a Point Of View coming godlike out of the skies to alight on twin cathedral spires. It contains many scenes of church bells ringing, and individuals in a state of near-religious fervor, as well as a prominent shot of Reich Bishop Ludwig Müller standing in his vestments among high-ranking Nazis. It is probably not a coincidence that the final parade of the film was held in front of the Nuremberg Frauenkirche. In his final speech in the film, Hitler also directly compares the Nazi party to a holy order, and the consecration of new party flags by having Hitler touch them to the "blood banner" has obvious religious overtones. Hitler himself is portrayed in a messianic manner, from the opening where he descends from the clouds in a plane, to his drive through Nuremberg where even a cat stops what it is doing to watch him, to the many scenes where the camera films from below and looks up at him,[5] as Hitler— standing on his podium — will issue a command to hundreds of thousands of followers. The audience happily complies in unison.[5] Frank P. Tomasulo comments that in Triumph, "Hitler is cast as a veritable German Messiah who will save the nation, if only the citizenry will put its destiny in his hands."[9]

The title of this film is a parody of Martin Luther's magnum opus The Bondage of the Will.[6]


Power“   It is our will that this state and this Reich shall endure through the coming millenia.   ”
    — Hitler

Germany had not seen images of military power and strength since the end of World War I, and the huge formations of men would remind the audience that Germany was becoming a great power once again. Though the Labor Service men carried shovels, they handled them as if they were rifles. The Eagles and Swastikas could be seen as a reference to the Roman Legions of antiquity.[17] The large mass of well-drilled party members could be seen in a more ominous light, as a warning to dissidents thinking of challenging the regime. Hitler's arrival in an airplane should also be viewed in this context. According to Kenneth Poferl, "Flying in an airplane was a luxury known only to a select few in the 1930s, but Hitler had made himself widely associated with the practice, having been the first politician to campaign via air travel. Victory reinforced this image and defined him as the top man in the movement, by showing him as the only one to arrive in a plane and receive an individual welcome from the crowd. Hitler's speech to the SA also contained an implied threat: if he could have Röhm — the commander of the hundreds of thousands of troops on the screen — shot, it was only logical to assume that Hitler could get away with having anyone executed."[3]


Unity“   The Party is Hitler - and Hitler is Germany just as Germany is Hitler!   ”
    — Hess


Triumph has many scenes that blur the distinction between the Nazi Party, the German state, and the German people. Germans in peasant farmers’ costumes and other traditional clothing greet Hitler in some scenes. The torchlight processions, though now associated by many with the Nazis, would remind the viewer of the medieval Karneval celebration. The old flag of Imperial Germany is also shown several times flying alongside the Swastika, and there is a ceremony where Hitler pays his respects to soldiers who died in World War I (as well as President Paul von Hindenburg who had died a month before the convention). There is also a scene where the Labor Servicemen individually call out which town or area in Germany they are from, reminding the viewers that the Nazi Party had expanded from its stronghold in Bavaria to become a pan-Germanic movement.


Hitler's speeches

Among the themes presented, the desire for pride in Germany and the purification of the German people is well exemplified through the speeches and ideals of the Third Reich in Triumph.

In every speech given and shown in Triumph, pride is one of the major focuses. Hitler advocates to the people that they should not be satisfied with their current state and they should not be satisfied with the descent from power and greatness Germany has endured since World War I. The German people should believe in themselves and the movement that is occurring in Germany. Hitler promotes pride in Germany through the unification of it. Unifying Germany would force the elimination of what does not amount to the standards of the Nazi regime.

To unify Germany, Hitler believes purification would have to take place. This meant not only eliminating the citizens of Germany who are not of the Aryan race, but the sick, weak, handicapped, or any other citizens deemed unhealthy or impure. In Triumph, Hitler preaches to the people that Germany must take a look at itself and seek out which does not belong: “[T]he elements that have become bad, and therefore do not belong with us!” The elimination of the ‘inferior’ people of Germany would, in theory, return Germany to its once prideful and powerful former self. Julius Streicher stresses the importance of purification and the effects of what happens when purification does not take place. These standards and regulations of the Nazi Party would underline the racial injustices suffered throughout the rest of the Nazi reign in Germany.

Hitler preaches to the people in his speeches that they should believe in their country and themselves. The German people are better than what they have become because of the impurities in society. Hitler wants them to believe in him and believe what he wants to do for his people, and what he is doing is for the country's and people's benefit. Hess says in the last scene of Triumph, “Hail Hitler, hail victory, hail victory!” Everyone in attendance yells in support. This verbal sign represents their faith to their leader and his most trusted advisors that they believe in the Nazi cause. This is directly followed by Hitler yelling, “Long live the National Socialist Movement! Long live Germany!” and the crowd erupts with cheering and the fulfillment of pride for themselves and their political party.


Response

Triumph of the Will premiered on 28 March 1935 at the Berlin Ufa Palace Theater and was an instant success. Within two months the film had earned 815,000 Reichsmark, and the Ufa considered it one of the three most profitable films of that year.[3] Hitler praised the film as being an "incomparable glorification of the power and beauty of our Movement." For her efforts, Riefenstahl was rewarded with the German Film Prize (Deutscher Filmpreis), a gold medal at the 1935 Venice Biennale, and the Grand Prix at the 1937 World Exhibition in Paris.[9] However, there were few claims that the film would result in a mass influx of 'converts' to fascism and the Nazis apparently did not make a serious effort to promote the film outside of Germany. Film historian Richard Taylor also said that Triumph was not generally used for propaganda purposes inside the Third Reich,[10] although Roy Frumkes argued that, on the contrary, it was shown each year in every German theater until 1945.[8] The Independent wrote in 2003: "Triumph of the Will seduced many wise men and women, persuaded them to admire rather than to despise, and undoubtedly won the Nazis friends and allies all over the world."[7]

The reception in other countries was not always as enthusiastic. British documentarian Paul Rotha called it tedious, while others were repelled by its pro-Nazi sentiments.[3] During World War II, Frank Capra made a direct response called Why We Fight, a series of newsreels commissioned by the United States government that spliced in footage from Triumph of the Will, but recontextualized it so that it promoted the cause of the Allies instead. Capra later remarked that Triumph "fired no gun, dropped no bombs. But as a psychological weapon aimed at destroying the will to resist, it was just as lethal."[11] Clips from Triumph were also used in an Allied propaganda short called General Adolph Takes Over, set to the British dance tune "The Lambeth Walk." The legions of marching soldiers, as well as Hitler giving his Nazi salute, were made to look like wind-up dolls, dancing to the music. Also during World War II, the poet Dylan Thomas wrote a screenplay for and narrated These Are The Men, a propaganda piece using Triumph footage to discredit Nazi leadership.

One of the best ways to gauge the response to Triumph was the instant and lasting international fame it gave Riefenstahl. The Economist said it "sealed her reputation as the greatest female filmmaker of the 20th century."[12] For a director who made eight films, only two of which received significant coverage outside of Germany, Riefenstahl had unusually high name recognition for the remainder of her life, most of it stemming from Triumph. However, her career was also permanently damaged by this association. After the war, Riefenstahl was imprisoned by the Allies for four years for allegedly being a Nazi sympathizer and was permanently blacklisted by the film industry. When she died in 2003, 68 years after its premiere, her obituary received significant coverage in many major publications—including the Associated Press,[13] Wall Street Journal,[14] New York Times,[7] and The Guardian[15] -- most of which reaffirmed the importance of Triumph.

Though the actual effectiveness of the media film Triumph of the Will is hard to measure, in terms of numbers or statistics that actually state its effectiveness, its response from the people is well-documented with the amount of views and the popularity of the movie during the time period. One way to measure the effectiveness of German propaganda, like Triumph, was how the people treated the acts of the Nazis and their treatment and conduct towards the Jewish people. German citizen reactions to the methods used by the Nazis were merely to do nothing, and research proves that it was not well accepted. “…In the short run most of those who felt embarrassed learned to turn a blind eye and retreat into non-political privacy. It was much easier to conform than to swim against the stream”.[8]


Controversy

Like American filmmaker D. W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation, Triumph of the Will has been criticized as a use of spectacular filmmaking to promote a profoundly evil system. In Germany, this movie is classified as Nazi propaganda and its showing is restricted under post-war denazification laws, but it may be shown in an educational context. In her defense, Riefenstahl claimed that she was naïve about the Nazis when she made it and had no knowledge of Hitler's genocidal policies. She also pointed out that Triumph contains "not one single antisemitic word",[13] although it does contain a veiled comment by Julius Streicher that "A people that does not protect its racial purity will perish." However, Roger Ebert has observed that for some, "the very absence of antisemitism in Triumph of the Will looks like a calculation; excluding the central motif of almost all of Hitler's public speeches must have been a deliberate decision to make the film more efficient as propaganda."[1]

Riefenstahl also repeatedly defended herself against the charge that she was a Nazi propagandist, saying that Triumph focuses on images over ideas, and should therefore be viewed as a Gesamtkunstwerk (total work of art)[citation needed]. In 1964, she returned to this topic, saying:
"If you see this film again today you ascertain that it doesn't contain a single reconstructed scene. Everything in it is true. And it contains no tendentious commentary at all. It is history. A pure historical film… it is film-vérité. It reflects the truth that was then in 1934, history. It is therefore a documentary. Not a propaganda film. Oh! I know very well what propaganda is. That consists of recreating events in order to illustrate a thesis, or, in the face of certain events, to let one thing go in order to accentuate another. I found myself, me, at the heart of an event which was the reality of a certain time and a certain place. My film is composed of what stemmed from that."[5]

However, Riefenstahl was an active participant in the rally, though in later years she downplayed her influence significantly, claiming, "I just observed and tried to film it well. The idea that I helped to plan it is downright absurd." Film critic Roy Frumkes has called Triumph "the antithesis of an objective work" and suggested that because of the special accommodations Riefenstahl received (one scene featured aerial searchlights requisitioned from the Luftwaffe) and because "the film was altered by practically every in-the-camera and laboratory special effect then known" the film can be labeled anything except a documentary.[8] Ebert also disagreed, saying that Triumph is "by general consent [one] of the best documentaries ever made", but added that because it reflects the ideology of a movement regarded by many as evil, "[it poses] a classic question of the contest between art and morality: Is there such a thing as pure art, or does all art make a political statement?"[1] When reviewing the film for his "Great Movies" collection, Ebert reversed his opinion, characterizing his earlier conclusion as "the received opinion that the film is great but evil" and calling it "a terrible film, paralyzingly dull, simpleminded, overlong and not even 'manipulative,' because it is too clumsy to manipulate anyone but a true believer."[9]

Susan Sontag considered Triumph of the Will the "most successful, most purely propagandistic film ever made, whose very conception negates the possibility of the filmmaker's having an aesthetic or visual conception independent of propaganda."[10] Sontag points to Riefenstahl's involvement in the planning and design of the Nuremberg ceremonies as evidence that Riefenstahl was working, not as an artist in any sense of the word, but as propagandist. With some 30 cameras and a crew of 150, the marches, parades, speeches and processions were orchestrated like a movie set for Riefenstahl's film. Nor was this the first political film made by Riefenstahl for the Third Reich (there was Victory of Faith, 1933, and Day of Freedom, shot in 1933[citation needed] and released in 1935). Nor was it the last (Olympia, 1938). "Anyone who defends Riefenstahl's films as documentary", Sontag states, "if documentary is to be distinguished from propaganda, is being disingenuous. In Triumph of Will, the document (the image) is no longer simply the record of reality; 'reality' has been constructed to serve the image."[11]

Brian Winston's essay on the film in The Movies as History: Visions of the Twentieth Century, an anthology edited by David Ellwood, is largely a critique of Sontag's analysis, which he finds faulty. His ultimate point is that any filmmaker could have made the film look impressive because the Nazi's mise en scène was impressive, particularly when they were offering it for camera re-stagings. In form, the film alternates repetitively between marches and speeches. Winston asks the viewers to consider if such a film should be seen as anything more than a pedestrian effort. Like Rotha, he finds the film tedious, and believes anyone who takes the time to analyze its structure will quickly agree.


Wehrmacht objections

The first controversy over Triumph occurred even before its release, when several generals in the Wehrmacht protested over the minimal army presence in the film. Only one scene, the review of the German cavalry, actually involved the German military. The other formations were party organizations that were not part of the military. Hitler proposed his own "artistic" compromise where Triumph would open with a camera slowly tracking down a row of all the "overlooked" generals (and placate each general's ego). According to her own testimony, Riefenstahl refused his suggestion and insisted on keeping artistic control over Triumph of the Will. She did agree to return to the 1935 rally to make a film exclusively about the Wehrmacht, which became Tag der Freiheit: Unsere Wehrmacht.[18]


Influences and legacy

According to historian Philip Gavin, "The legacy of Triumph of the Will lives on today in the numerous TV documentaries concerning the Nazi era which replay portions of the film… [Its] most enduring and dangerous illusion is that Nazi Germany was a super-organized state, that, although evil in nature, was impressive nonetheless."[16] Gavin believes that the reality of Nazism as a disorganized and bureaucratic mess was obscured by Triumph of the Will's powerful images of a united Fascist movement. Nicholas Reeves concurs, adding that "many of the most enduring images of the Third Reich and Adolf Hitler derive from Riefenstahl's film."[3]

Extensive excerpts of the film were used in the Swedish box office hit Mein Kampf. This prompted Riefenstahl to sue the production company Minerva for copyright violation. Although her case against Minerva was unresolved, she won a temporary injunction against the German distributor. Subsequently in order to release the film, the German distributor agreed to pay Riefenstahl thirty thousand marks for Germany's release and a further five thousand marks for Austria's.[12]

In 1942, Charles A. Ridley of the British Ministry of Information made a short propaganda film, Lambeth Walk - Nazi Style, which edited footage of Hitler and German soldiers from the film to make it appear they were marching and dancing to the song "The Lambeth Walk". The film so enraged Joseph Goebbels that reportedly he ran out of the screening room kicking chairs and screaming profanities. The propaganda film was distributed uncredited to newsreel companies, who would supply their own narration.

[Dig]

THE AESTHETICS OF WAR
http://www.semioticstreet.com/war.html
Wagner: Gesamptkunstwerk and Götterdämmerung


True drama can be conceived only as resulting from the collective impulse of all the arts to communicate in the most immediate way with a collective public.
-Richard Wagner

Composer Richard Wagner was interested in dismantling the threshold between art and life to create a gesamptkunstwerk or “total art work.” He viewed this as a synthesis of the traditional languages of art (i.e. painting, sculpture, poetry, drama, and musical composition). Wagner felt that the medium to realize this aspiration was opera, but the idea was further explored in experimental theater by Oskar Schlemmer and in the work of Kurt Schwitters who created Merzbau, a functioning house that was also a work of art.

Wagner’s opera Götterdämmerung (The Twilight of the Gods) tells the story of the demise of the Gods, brought on by a cursed ring. The ring affords its wearer omnipotence, but renders him devoid of love and affection. Wagner’s opera is inhabited with heroes, villains, dragons, and Valkyrie warrior maidens who wisk fallen soldiers to their heavenly reward in Walhalla.




Wagner’s celebration of German myth and heroism on the battlefield was embraced by the Third Reich. Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will, a Nazi propaganda film, reflects a Wagnerian sense of pageantry and spectacle. Riefenstahl artfully depicted soldiers as warriors who surrender their lives with honor for a higher good and accept their heavenly reward. Similarly, the September 11 terrorists anticipated a joyous reception by 72 virgins in the Muslim paradise, which cannot be too far away from the world of Valkyries.

Marinetti on World War I

War is beautiful because it establishes man’s dominion over the subjugated machinery by means of gas masks, terrifying megaphones, flame throwers, and small tanks. War is beautiful because it initiates the dreamt-of metalization of the human body. War is beautiful because it enriches a flowering meadow with the fiery orchids of machine guns. War is beautiful because it combines the gunfire, the cannonades, the cease-fire, the scents, and the stench of putrefaction into a symphony.
-Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, 1912



War has been a favorite subject of artists since classical antiquity. What distinguishes the futurists is their fascination with the technology of modern warfare. World War I ushered in a host of new weapons including tanks, machine guns, flame-throwers and poison gases. On the battlefield these inventions presented a complex spectacle of color, sounds, and vibrations, captivating artists of largely rural Italy. There is a lurid beauty in newsreel footage of the time that is akin to coverage of the present day American bombings of Afghanistan. When seen from afar, bombs have the beauty of fireworks. Marinetti was able to abstract their mass destruction into “the world’s only hygiene,” and personally enlisted to fight in 1915. Futurists Umberto Boccioni and Antonio Sant’Elia ultimately died in conflict, but despite the loss of his compatriots, Marinetti continued to view war as an aesthetic gesture. Rich in sights, sounds, immediacy, and danger, war became a muse for Marinetti that accompanied him through two devastating upheavals that changed Europe and the world forever.

Stockhausen on the World Trade Center

"the greatest work of art imaginable. . . . Minds achieving something in an act that we couldn't even dream of in music, people rehearsing like mad for ten years, preparing fanatically for a concert, and then dying, just imagine what happened there. You have people who are that focused on a performance and then 5,000 people are dispatched into the afterlife, in a single moment. I couldn't do that. By comparison, we composers are nothing."
-Karlheinz Stockhausen, 2001

Composer Karlheinz Stockhausen’s remarks were scorned by the public at large and resulted in cancellations of his concert tours. What is most disturbing about them, however, is that they contain an element of truth. The burning buildings held a primordial fascination for those who experienced them. The twin towers were colossal monuments and their destruction had a mythic quality like the immolations of Wagner’s Götterdämmerung.




What I Saw

At 8:40 A.M. on September 11 I climbed to the roof of a lower east side building which houses my studio. Minutes before I heard news of the attack and listened to chaotic news reports on WBAI radio. Sirens screamed from Chrystie Street outside my window and I watched firetruck after firetruck race downtown. The sound of one siren faded seamlessly into another as the endless procession continued. I didn’t want to see the towers burning but I needed to join my fiancé in Tribeca. As I locked the studio door I noticed daylight falling on steps leading up to the roof and I involuntarily started to climb.

From the roof I saw the towers burning against the backdrop of a light sunny day. The north tower had a gaping round hole from which prodigious billows of black smoke were rising. Flames burned unlike any I had ever seen before. They were infernal and implacable, fed by twenty thousand gallons of diesel fuel. Two workmen stood beside me, mesmerized by the fire. I ran out of the building and into the street, crossing Bowery and Broadway where I was met with a human torrent of refugees from the financial district walking north. I heard that the Pentagon had been struck by a plane and I realized for the first time that perhaps my hour had come. Looking downtown on 6th Avenue and Hudson Street I saw a colossal plume of ash that had risen at the tip of Manhattan like Vesuvius must have loomed over Pompeii. On arriving home my fiancé told me that the first tower had imploded and we watched the second tower collapse out our front window in a flurry of ash.

I picked up a camera and rushed out to the West Side Highway. There I watched sobbing firemen embracing each other as they were rushed uptown in the open back of a police car. They were followed by a steady file of ash covered vehicles. Perhaps one or two of the trucks that I had seen rushing downtown on the east side were now somberly driving uptown on the west side. On the bicycle path, along the river, a Biblical exodus of refugees snaked its way north, no one so much as pausing to look back. Standing on the desolate southbound lanes of the highway were thousands of men and women who were simply staring downtown in amazement. The plume had tripled in size and continued to grow upward and outward.



The Limits of Abstraction

The World Trade Center, first engulfed in flames and later crumbling into ash, had a beauty which produced uncomfortable ambivalence in many who saw it. Beauty in uglieness is a paradox often present in art. It carries viewers outside of traditional comfort zones to experience the tension between form and substance. Beauty in the September 11 conflagration cannot be separated from destruction, or the building from the thousands of people within it. The glass walls of the World Trade Center concealed unimaginable suffering.

After the bombing, the walls of the Canal Street Post Office were covered with children’s drawings made in response to the attack. One image, by a Hispanic child, showed the rubble of the twin towers atop a hill covered with gravestones. In the sky, the virgin Mary held the towers one in each hand, embracing the souls of men and women who died and the buildings themselves with their other-worldly Platonic geometry. Another drawing depicted the silhouette of the towers framing hundreds of crying faces. Such drawings relate to a tradition of activism in modern and contemporary art that is characterized by the work of Francisco Goya, Otto Dix, Georg Grosz, and Leon Golub.

Strangely a sense of tragedy, embodied in the work of Goya can coexist with an aesthetic fascination with destruction, as expressed in the writings of Filippo Tommaso Marinetti and paintings of Umberto Boccioni. However troubling it may be, this current of abstraction that allows us to see beauty in carnage exists within us all. Like a subterranean current in the human psyche it reveals itself in moments like the destruction of the World Trade Center, but is rarely acknowledged and almost never embraced.

[Dig]

[SpeakUpFightBack]

In arguments after the movie, I said its the marriage of corporations and governments that make humans evil. We, the commoners, the soldiers, the farmers, the workers, are just like the blue people or the Native Americans or the Afghans, its the marriage we have allowed that has destroyed us and our planet (DU, etc, not CO2). We can change by first admitting we were wrong, then by taking action. Without humbling our egos, and sacrificing our egos, we usher in the green Nazis by default.


http://tinypic.com/r/jffcp5/4


http://tinypic.com/r/2ennhol/6

[kushfiend]

I'm sorry to anyone that likes these kinds of movies, (or AVATAR in general), but this has to be one of the most garbage, over-hyped, over-produced, NWO suck fests that I have ever heard of.  Just from the previews and reading about the general plot, I was absolutely disgusted. 

How they can even hype this garbage as "one of the best movies ever" is beyond me.  Wow, it took 7 years to create blue panther people?  This whole story is retarded.  So humans have mastered space travel and actually discover another sentient race and what do they do?  Enslave them to steal some rock from their planet?

So typical.  You know, there was another movie just like this, what was it called?  Oh yeah, INDEPENDENCE DAY!  Movies are just clones from other movies.  Instead of having the aliens be the evil invaders looking to annihilate all natural life for resources, they made it humans invading and the aliens the peaceful natural citizens.

apart from the obvious plot holes and general stupidity of the over all story, I just can't believe how stupid the actual AVATAR blue panther people look.  I mean they look so stupid to me, some kind of mix between Rastafarian, the color blue, and panthers.

S-T-U-P-I-D!!! Why not have just 1 (ONE) Alex Jones film debut on the big screen in movie theaters?  I'm so tired of NWO garbage. 

[Monkeypox]

The story is a rip-off of Dances With Wolves.

[Jackson Holly]

Sane, can we combine this thread to:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=146189.0

~~~~~



~~~> I bet 37 is gonna be all over this piece of crap Illuminati 'entertainment'.

[Satyagraha]

Matthew: SPOILER.. DON'T READ:

i have not seen it all but from what i saw and from you are saying, it looks like another complete doublespeak conditioning with thousands of flickers of death, destruction, explosions, etc. all to be climaxed by a transhuman messiah who tells us the common man is the cause of all suffering (not the masters of war and the social architects that designed the problem/reaction/solution) and that following this messiah's new message, the warped theosophian earth message, will allow a human to survive in more limited and controlled dystopia.

this is "Triumph of the Will" for the NWO Green Nazis

Well, for not having seen it, you have described it pretty well. However, I saw a couple of things differently - perhaps the 'doublespeak' you refer to:

* Bad guys: Military and Govt. contractors seek to genocide native peoples (living in trees instead of caves) for their natural resources (unobtainium instead of oil)

* Good guys: Native peoples (aliens instead of Africans, or Afghanis/Iraqis/Pakistanis/Iranians)

* Good guys win.. temporarily (we KNOW the bad guys will be back).  Bad guy becomes one with good guys - see: Dances with Wolves (nod to Monkeypox) - and then decides not to betray them. His line (as best I can remember) was, "I came here to for peace and we are at war; then I woke up". That seemed very anti-NWO to me...  but the transhuman aspect - Avatar becomes alien gaia worshiper - was NWO agenda. So the doublespeak is definitely present.

* As the bad guys file back onto their spaceship in the end, the good guys are carrying the bad guys' weapons. They defeated the bad guys with arrows and flying beasts and by being unified as a force, however they needed a leader (the avatar) to show them the way - and this is contrary to what we need in a leaderless resistance. The fact that they held the weapons in the end, in spite of the fact that the battle was won without them, was notable.

* Mixed messages throughout.. I kept wavering between the two separate perspectives. In all of Cameron's movies there is a hero/leader.. and in this case, the hero was an avatar of a guy who'd lost his legs in battle.. and when offered the chance to return to earth and get new legs, he declined in order to stay with the alien people. (Which, of course, made him the self-sacrificing hero).

* Grizzly I know you hated this movie, but I enjoyed it.. LOL.. loved the special effects, enjoyed the love story of the Avatar and his native sweetie, and I loved the fact that the natives defeated the nasty g-men/contractors to save their way of life. I expect Cameron will do a sequel, and it will be interesting to see how he handles the return of the bad guys to the planet. Wonder if they come back with more firepower, UAVs, remote sensing, and set up camps for prisoners, do extraordinary renditions to black sites for interrogations, have meet-and-greets with the natives to win hearts and minds, then blast them with DU weapons? That would be in keeping with the NWO agenda.

[ekimdrachir]

maybe, but that thread is full of pre-avatar perspectives, id like to hear from people who have just seen it

[Jackson Holly]

^^^

Yeah, me too .... definitely want to hear from the initiated ones.

[Devotional Soul]

'Avatar' means an incarnation of God in Sanskrit.  To use that name for this movie is blasphemy to a Vaisnava.

[ekimdrachir]

Well it was about an alien creating a hybrid body and then interfacing with it, to pilot it among the species of the community
its a metaphor of that exact concept, can you accuse it for being what it is? im not saying i agree with it, just that it is a story
about a very deep spiritual subject, and thats what i forgot to mention in my post...
while watching the movie, all i could think is BAM and a new religion is formed.

this movie is essentially an initiation into the green environmentalist religion, though the story
you might not think is saying it, it has all the components, including the defeat of humanity by aliens. and we deserved it! we cant be trusted because we are wild and out of control and destroy everything we touch, and only a few rebellious ones are good.

[larsonstdoc]

Well it was about an alien creating a hybrid body and then interfacing with it, to pilot it among the species of the community
its a metaphor of that exact concept, can you accuse it for being what it is? im not saying i agree with it, just that it is a story
about a very deep spiritual subject, and thats what i forgot to mention in my post...
while watching the movie, all i could think is BAM and a new religion is formed.

this movie is essentially an initiation into the green environmentalist religion, though the story
you might not think is saying it, it has all the components, including the defeat of humanity by aliens. and we deserved it! we cant be trusted because we are wild and out of control and destroy everything we touch, and only a few rebellious ones are good.

Thanks for the reviews.  I will skip it.  Those blue creatures are butt-ugly.  Especially their noses.  I hate the Green Movement.

[Dig]

Thanks for the reviews.  I will skip it.  Those blue creatures are butt-ugly.  Especially their noses.  I hate the Green Movement.

On CNN there was a female "newscaster" interviewing some pro-NWO movies shill who said "this is a really exciting movie" and she said, "yeah but it looks creepy too."

Then hee said, "no it is not creepy at all, it is entertaining and fun."

She said "well i thought it was creepy from what i have seen so far, but let's roll a clip"

then this disgusting green demon horse with slimy shit pouring from every highly disturbing orifice moved one of its tentacles over to the arm of another blue slimy creature in a copulating moment with pulsating slime exuding everywhere.

then she said "ewwww, see that is what I mean by creepy"

I almost pissed my pants. I am sure cameron will  have his theosophian trolls send her some cease and desist order saying that new hate law legislation forbids the negative commenting on his fantastical portrayals of wildly ficticious and disturbing interstellar copulation scenes.

[Devotional Soul]

Lol, not interested in slimy alien copulation.

I don't have time to go too far into it, and I won't be seeing this movie, but from what I can tell, it is taking a lot of digs at Vaisnavism (Vaisnavism).  Vaisnava teachings are that the soul is eternal and passes through different material bodies in the cycle of karma and birth and death (reincarnation) until the soul gets to God's eternal abode.  Krishna was tall and blue colored like a rain cloud and was from the Lunar Dynasty. 

The problem is that they replace the role of God with slimy aliens, and have someone who is not God being an avatar.  Vaisnavism teaches that we are all servants of God, never equal to God. 

[Mooch]

The release of this movie is very timely seeing as this whole gaia worship movement is on its way to the mainstream seems like a very subtle way of familiarizing people with the idea of nature before man.

In James Lovelock's 2006 book, The Revenge of Gaia, he argues that the lack of respect humans have had for Gaia, through the damage done to rainforests and the reduction in planetary biodiversity, is testing Gaia's capacity to minimize the effects of the addition of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This eliminates the planet's negative feedbacks and increases the likelihood of homeostatic positive feedback potential associated with runaway global warming. Similarly the warming of the oceans is extending the oceanic thermocline layer of tropical oceans into the Arctic and Antarctic waters, preventing the rise of oceanic nutrients into the surface waters and eliminating the algal blooms of phytoplankton on which oceanic foodchains depend. As phytoplankton and forests are the main ways in which Gaia draws down greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, taking it out of the atmosphere, the elimination of this environmental buffering will see, according to Lovelock, most of the earth becoming uninhabitable for humans and other life-forms by the middle of this century, with a massive extension of tropical deserts.

Gaia's self-regulation will likely prevent any extraordinary runaway effects that wipe out life itself, but that humans will survive and be "culled and, I hope, refined."

[Jackson Holly]

I read James Lovelock's The Revenge of Gaia when it first hit ... I was still on the fence at that time about the over-abundance of CO2 having a significant effect on weather. I liked (and still do) the warm and fuzzy notion of Earth as Organism ... Momma Earth don't ya know.

And his scary scenarios of only remnants of the species huddled at the polls in beastly subsistence, trying to 'beat the heat' ... and coming down in a few decades, FREAKED ME OUT!

But in the book he mentions his work with ROYAL DUTCH SHELL (Queen Bitch) ... and his constant pushing of NUKE POWER ... and his working with and for VICTOR ROTHSCHILD ... and NASA ... and Jet Propulsion Lab ... the ROYAL SOCIETY ... and in the end it was his book that tipped me over to the other side.

Now I can see thru the GREEN NAZI agenda clear as a bell. And people should not see this movie or other of their hi-tech, mind-twisting propaganda ~ you can't undrink the KoolAid.



 

[xereau]

I just finished watching the recent remake of the movie "The Day the Earth Stood Still".

It was pure unadulterated NWO filth, with the message:  Humans are a cancer and need to be exterminated.

Not at all an uncommon theme these days....

[ekimdrachir]

I just finished watching the recent remake of the movie "The Day the Earth Stood Still".

It was pure unadulterated NWO filth, with the message:  Humans are a cancer and need to be exterminated.

Not at all an uncommon theme these days....

That movie was essentially what EBE said, but what if, I was thinking today...
humans were told in the 50s/60s that there would be a human extinction event after 2000
but it wasnt overpopulation that was the threat, it was actually the fools who think culling is the solution!
bam, humans extinct. its one of those temporal distortion time loops

i really dont think underground bunkers are gonna save you when the earths crust melts

[chrisfromchi]

Its the same as this movie. Battle for Terra

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plyRYrqa_4g

but with smurfs.

and half the cast of aliens except michael biehn

[_CREATIONIST_]

I saw Avatar in 3D tonight and it was spectacular. I'll be honest, seeing it in 3D really makes it serious Eye Candy and It really was a good movie but chalked full of NWO messages. It is similar to the Day after Tomorrow except instead of pampering to the global warming fraud, it pampers to the Gaia Green Movement fraud and the move seeps the message that all humans are evil

[ekimdrachir]

'Avatar' raises the bar in so many ways
Commentary: Movie is an upbeat ending to a downbeat year

By Elizabeth Guider

Dec 17, 2009, 10:00 PM ET


The word is enveloped. That's what the movie did to me, however long it was into it, when those little jellyfish-like creatures came floating down. I was in the seventh row at Grauman's and automatically turned my head to brush one of them off my shoulder. I'm sure "Avatar" will do similarly for millions and millions of others -- this is, if it need be said at all, the weekend of its opening -- and not just for 14-year-old males.

Fox can almost certainly breathe an initial sigh of relief as Jim Cameron's movie essentially recalibrates filmmaking, without, I'm going to hazard, breaking the bank. So obviously has the creative bar been raised that I heard one young writer-director at the premiere say to his friends, "What do we do now?"

The 3D thing has been taken to a new level and will surely quicken the embrace of the technology. But more important, Cameron's mastery of it was almost completely at the service of the storytelling -- call it emotion-capture: I was taken out of myself (which I suspect is the whole point of having an avatar) and entered that collective experience of seeing a movie in a darkened room and of reconnecting to that collective unconscious we all share. Think Wordsworth or Rousseau, but without any overt reference or any pretentiousness, the pic taps into the longing for innocence in all of us and riffs on that enduring noble savage ideal.

Although ignored or relegated to the sidelines in so many contemporary movies, women are front and center in this saga, from the cigarette-smoking scientist Sigourney Weaver, to the fierce but fragile Neferti, to the plucky pilot played by Michelle Rodriguez.

And yes, there is a love story: To my mind, just a twitch of a Na'vi ear was as evocative as a sex act in countless other pics.

Downsides? A tad too long? Perhaps. Its political messages too simplistic? In some quarters (like say News Corp.'s own Fox News?)they could be interpreted as anti-American, certainly anti-corporate establishment. On the other hand, foreign viewers will likely relish seeing the manaical colonel get his come-uppance from a bow and arrow. Objections enough to shun the movie? Please.

As is obvious, I'm no film reviewer, but what else I took away from the evening was just how beautifully timed this movie is. To embellish on another metaphor from the film, it's been, like the hero in the movie, a crippled, stymied year in so many ways -- the sluggish economy, the layoffs, the stridency of our politics and, more pertinently to us here in Hollywood, presumably broken business models.

Somehow through it all, though, brashly commercial and bravely artistic movies have come out of the gate, with "Avatar" capping one of the best and most varied of recent film cycles -- from "Precious" and "Up in the Air" to "The Hurt Locker" and "Sherlock Holmes." Our own boxoffice specialist here at the paper tells me 2009 will close out at a record tally, nudging the $10 billion mark for the first time. Internationally, too, American movies are doing gangbusters, from the "Ice Age" sequel and "Up" to "2012" and the latest "Transformers" flick.

The day-and-date openings around the globe for "Avatar" will seal the deal. And no doubt the second weekend will be the telling one for "Avatar" as the percentage drop-off will be dissected to the nth degree by News Corp. bean counters and financial analysts to project the long-term value of the movie. DVD sales and their impact on the studio's bottom line are the tricky part.

Already one hard-nosed Wall Streeter has had a change of heart: Pali Research analyst Richard Greenfield shifted his rating on News Corp. from sell to neutral based primarily on his own enjoyment and assessment of the movie. I can't remember the last time a single movie moved the needle at one of the Hollywood heavyweights in any way.

In an analyst's note Thursday, he said: "We can gripe about the unnecessary length of the film and a typical Hollywood ending, but the honest truth is that nobody in the world has ever seen a movie like 'Avatar.' Fox's potential to generate a profit on 'Avatar' remains unclear given its cost and whether a film so closely associated with 3D filmmaking will translate into (2D-only) DVD/Blu-ray sales during 2010. That being said, we do not walk away believing Fox is in danger of losing a massive amount of money on the film."

In short, Greenfield concludes, "the movie will not be a disaster profit-wise, with the Fox film slate set to notably outperform expectations this year."

Driving in to work Thursday, I heard the results on the radio of some poll suggesting that more than 50% of Americans believe that China will soon surpass the U.S. as the most powerful country in the world and the biggest exporter of goods. OK. I know they're fixing their roads and bridges much more quickly than we are, and they don't seem to have a national obesity problem like we do, so in certain respects their strides are notable and impressive. But creatively?

Aside from the handful of art films that trickle out and make it to international film festivals, and Zhang Yimou's admittedly spectacular choreography for the Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony, practically nothing from China (or anywhere else?) movie-wise resonates beyond borders the way Hollywood fare does. I'm betting "Avatar" will widen that gap in the short term and then hopefully inspire others, from wherever, to build on the achievement.

The film's producer Jon Landau talked a little Thursday about what he thinks a key effect of the movie will be, pointing to something that surprised me. So much has been written about how expensive the movie is, but he put the accent on how much cost-savings in technology were attained even in just the four-year span in which the picture was shot. If $1 million was spent per terabyte when "Titanic" was made, that price has been now brought down enormously, he explained.

His point? This should, he told me, crack open the door for filmmakers to be able to apply amazing technology to unlock stories in their heads that otherwise couldn't be realized.

Like Cameron, they'll also have to imbibe some of that thing called Eywa.

[ekimdrachir]

Worst line in the movie... Sigurney weaver, "EYWA IS REAL!! SHES REAL!!" and then she dies.
OOPS! Looks like you werent chosen by nature, too bad.

[ekimdrachir]

http://www.newsmeat.com/celebrity_political_donations/James_Cameron.php

wow hes a rahm emmanuel campaign supporter

[ekimdrachir]

Avatar: A Cinematic Event for the Spiritually and Critically Conscious

By Kevin Gosztola (about the author)     Page 1 of 2 page(s)
For OpEdNews: Kevin Gosztola - Writer

The immersive experience of Avatar would be enough on its own. That you are taken into a world where you essentially take part in the journey and evolution of a hero that deals with a supreme conflict just makes this film even more worth experiencing in an IMAX theatre.

The story follows Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), a paraplegic war veteran who is asked to participate in a high level program run by corporate and military strategists after his brother dies. Sully accepts and travels light years away to the planet of Pandora.

Humans cannot breathe the air on Pandora but through an Avatar Program they link to an avatar which is a hybrid of the indigenous people of Pandora that happen to have features of the individuals they are linked to.

Ultimately, Sully is offered the job because he is a genetic match for an expensive avatar that was designed for his brother. He signs up to help scientists learn about the indigenous people of Pandora, the Na'vi.

The scientists inform Sully that linking to his own avatar will give him the ability to walk again, an experience that becomes quite liberating.

Scientists carry out a mission designed to figure out why Na'vi/human relations are so tumultuous, a corporate-military management corporation ultimately oversees the scientific project.

The project exists, for the most part, because it may yield information that can help the Resources Development Organization gain access to the planet's natural resource, Unobtanium, which the corporation can use to save a dying planet Earth from its current energy crisis.

Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) epitomizes the corporation with his "ends justifies the means" approach to acquiring Pandora's resources for planet Earth. Selfridge is very much interested in finding a way to "wag the dog" so blowback against his corporate enterprise can be kept to a minimum and that's why he is willing to help supervise the mission of the scientists.

Col. Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang) exemplifies the military as a cold-blooded imperialist warmonger who will only be content when he successfully dominates the "savages" of Pandora. Quaritch cheerleads Sully's involvement in the Avatar Program under the assumption that Sully will force the"savages" to submit to their operation.

The combination of corporate and military forces puts on display a terror evocative of the current conflict over resources in the Middle East and the corporate/military aspect is a clear dystopian element in the film.

Eventually, Sully becomes separated from the scientists when attacked by a planetary creature called a Thanator. He later is faced with Viperwolves, and as he is about to be torn to pieces, a member of an indigenous tribe on Pandora known as the Omaticaya, rescues him.

Neytiri, his rescuer, takes him back to her people and from here on the central conflict of the film manifests itself: Can one of the "sky people" learn the ways of the indigenous people or will he betray and exploit the Omaticayan people as sky people have traditionally done since their first days on Pandora?

Avatar is very much a film that relies on the universal motif of adventure and transformation known as the Hero's Journey.

As Joseph Campbell might describe it, Sully's destiny summons him and transfers "his spiritual center of gravity from within the pale of society to a zone unknown." Destiny leads him to reconcile his role as an enabler of the exploitative colonialist corporate army whose supreme goal is to claim a natural resource beneath the Hometree that the Omaticayan people inhabit with Na'vi people's culture, spirituality, and their connection with the land and animals of Pandora.

Taken through a series of initiations, Sully acquires the skills, knowledge, and respect for the Omaticaya so he can become one of them.

Sully faces a "father figure," Col. Quaritch, who pushes him to learn the ways of the Omaticaya and help the corporate-military forces drive the indigenous people off of their land. He learns that he must defeat Col. Quaritch and distance himself from objectives and goals of the forces he is working for if he is to do right among the Omaticaya people.

And, quite literally, Sully becomes a master of two worlds. He resists the colonialist forces of corporate domination that he has been serving and empowers all life on Pandora at a critical moment when all must act to stave off the "sky people's" attempt at total domination through a massive shock and awe campaign.

As detailed in Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces:

"The individual, through prolonged psychological disciplines, gives up completely all attachment to his personal limitations, idiosyncrasies, hopes and fears, no longer resists the self-annihilation that is prerequisite to rebirth in the realization of truth, and so becomes ripe, at last, for the great at-one-ment. His personal ambitions being totally dissolved, he no longer tries to live but willingly relaxes to whatever may come to pass in him; he becomes, that is to say, an anonymity. The Law lives in him with his unreserved consent."

This is truer with the film Avatar than many of the films that seem to be modeled off the universal motif that is the Hero's Journey. For at the end of the film, there's a certain spiritual triumph to be felt.

Perhaps, here is where the immersive experience of IMAX makes the film so grand.

The story of a culture of indigenous people that seem to have a "seven generations ahead" approach to living life, that seem to understand their connection to nature and the world that they live on and within---

The story of this culture triumphing over the exploitative mercenary forces of planet Earth is inspirational and exhilarating.

A supreme mythological narrative about the people's right to self-determination versus the corporatist domination and suffocation of a people, their cultures, and the very planet they live on is a narrative that all people of this world should take in, enjoy, and reflect upon.

Cameron may not intend for this film to be anything more than entertainment, but certainly, the people of the world can interpret it as much more than entertainment if they so choose and I hope many who see it will.

If we could all link up to avatars and defeat the corporations and militaries hell-bent on destruction for maximum profit, millions would. I would. But, we don't have that technology. But that doesn't mean we cannot face corporate/military power with spirituality and zeal similar to that of the Na'vi.

While initially those who see this will ask the pop culture driven questions, "Does this live up to its hype?" and "Is it better than Star Wars? Is it as good as Lord of the Rings?", audiences who wish to explore more elements of the culture of the Na'vi and ask deeper philosophical questions about the film will eventually draw comparisons between the world of 2009 and the world of Pandora in 2154.

In the end, all that cutting edge technology James Cameron spent a decade developing really pays off. Everyone should have a chance to enter the world of Avatar and go on a spiritual journey along with the heroes of this film in a way that no other piece of cinema has ever allowed audiences to do, until now.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Avatar-A-Cinematic-Event-by-Kevin-Gosztola-091220-634.html

[Mike Philbin]

Na'Vi - yup, I think you're right in that he did intentionally use the Vaisnavism as one of his narrative elements.

But IT'S A FILM.

Otherwise, we'll have to stop watching all mainstream media product. Is that really where we've come, as a race?  Not able to enjoy our entertainment because it might be PROPAGANDA and BRAIN WASHING?

I mean, seriously, this might be the case, but why are we putting up with it? Why do we still allow these f**k-ups in our supposed Government? Is it because we KNOW NO BETTER?  I mean, look at the f**kwads in Copenhagen - they're STILL ALLOWING the rich nations to pollute and PAYING the non-rich nations to do so. And CARBON (i.e. breathing) is still their target, rather than all the f**king toxic shit from all their oh-so-clever Corporate Garbage they sell each other all the time.

What do we really want?

f**k GAIA and all invented Earth Personality Cults (all of 'em, all organised mind control) I wanna live on a free planet where all six billion people love each other, live in harmony and use technology to enrich their lives (yeah, I understand that there's still a WASTE DISPOSAL ISSUE from technology) .... sigh.

Mike

Lol, not interested in slimy alien copulation.

I don't have time to go too far into it, and I won't be seeing this movie, but from what I can tell, it is taking a lot of digs at Vaisnavism (Vaisnavism).  Vaisnava teachings are that the soul is eternal and passes through different material bodies in the cycle of karma and birth and death (reincarnation) until the soul gets to God's eternal abode.  Krishna was tall and blue colored like a rain cloud and was from the Lunar Dynasty.  

The problem is that they replace the role of God with slimy aliens, and have someone who is not God being an avatar.  Vaisnavism teaches that we are all servants of God, never equal to God.  

SLIMY ALIEN COPULATION? I've written loads of stories, collaborations and novels based on this insane shit - I personally can't get enough of it. LOL. I'm loved here, right? Let's thud our greased up chrome tentacles together, home boys!

[Mike Philbin]

Avatar moons may be science fact
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20091220/tsc-avatar-moons-may-be-science-fact-4b158bc.html

Habitable alien moons like the one depicted in the blockbuster movie Avatar may become science fact within the next few years, according to a leading astronomer.

Avatar moons may be science fact. In the 3D film, a race of 10ft blue-skinned giants inhabits an Earth-like moon called Pandora.

Their world orbits a gas giant planet similar to Jupiter that cannot support life.

US astronomer and planet-hunter Lisa Kaltenegger, from the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, believes there is every chance a real-life version of Pandora exists and will soon be found.

She has conducted research showing that a planned new space telescope will be able to identify nearby "exomoons" and discover if they are habitable.

The American space agency Nasa's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is due to be launched in 2014.

Dr Kaltenegger said: "If Pandora existed, we potentially could detect it and study its atmosphere in the next decade."

Astronomers have already spotted hundreds of Jupiter-sized gas giants orbiting stars, but none have conditions suitable for Earth-type life.

However a rocky moon orbiting a gas giant could harbour life if it was in the parent star's "habitable zone" - the region where temperatures are just right for liquid water.

"All of the gas giant planets in our solar system have rocky and icy moons," said Dr Kaltenegger. "That raises the possibility that alien Jupiters will also have moons. Some of those may be Earth-sized and able to hold onto an atmosphere."

[ekimdrachir]

Anunakis may live on a moon of planet x, if that is what this is alluding to.

[Mike Philbin]

Drachir,

you know I'm (justifiably) sneering at that comment, right?



Mike

Anunakis may live on a moon of planet x, if that is what this is alluding to.

[Dig]

Anunakis may live on a moon of planet x, if that is what this is alluding to.

what about Xenu? Oh man, there is more hype for this reptilian porno than there was for Triumph of the Willing.

With the marketing insanity, the costs will be over $500 Million (Half a $Billion).

The NWO expects a return on their investment.

this movie may be required viewing for elementary school children in the future.

[Anti_Illuminati]

Matthew: SPOILER.. DON'T READ:










Well, for not having seen it, you have described it pretty well. However, I saw a couple of things differently - perhaps the 'doublespeak' you refer to:

* Bad guys: Military and Govt. contractors seek to genocide native peoples (living in trees instead of caves) for their natural resources (unobtainium instead of oil)

* Good guys: Native peoples (aliens instead of Africans, or Afghanis/Iraqis/Pakistanis/Iranians)

* Good guys win.. temporarily (we KNOW the bad guys will be back).  Bad guy becomes one with good guys - see: Dances with Wolves (nod to Monkeypox) - and then decides not to betray them. His line (as best I can remember) was, "I came here to for peace and we are at war; then I woke up". That seemed very anti-NWO to me...  but the transhuman aspect - Avatar becomes alien gaia worshiper - was NWO agenda. So the doublespeak is definitely present.

* As the bad guys file back onto their spaceship in the end, the good guys are carrying the bad guys' weapons. They defeated the bad guys with arrows and flying beasts and by being unified as a force, however they needed a leader (the avatar) to show them the way - and this is contrary to what we need in a leaderless resistance. The fact that they held the weapons in the end, in spite of the fact that the battle was won without them, was notable.

* Mixed messages throughout.. I kept wavering between the two separate perspectives. In all of Cameron's movies there is a hero/leader.. and in this case, the hero was an avatar of a guy who'd lost his legs in battle.. and when offered the chance to return to earth and get new legs, he declined in order to stay with the alien people. (Which, of course, made him the self-sacrificing hero).

* Grizzly I know you hated this movie, but I enjoyed it.. LOL.. loved the special effects, enjoyed the love story of the Avatar and his native sweetie, and I loved the fact that the natives defeated the nasty g-men/contractors to save their way of life. I expect Cameron will do a sequel, and it will be interesting to see how he handles the return of the bad guys to the planet. Wonder if they come back with more firepower, UAVs, remote sensing, and set up camps for prisoners, do extraordinary renditions to black sites for interrogations, have meet-and-greets with the natives to win hearts and minds, then blast them with DU weapons? That would be in keeping with the NWO agenda.

I agree.  I will add my own observations:

The Navi's planet, with its indigenous populations ability to communicate with it was an ultimate example of of network science, net-centricity.  Kind of like if you took the AI from the movie Eagle Eye, and it expanded beyond its current constraints of existing within the digital realm, to one in which it fully merges with Bio-Cogno-Info-Nano--the goal of DARPA/NWO.  DARPA's self-healing networks, where the network is no longer just a tool, but is a weapon in and of itself, but now part of all life, and the very planet itself--to ensure permanent resilience, survivability, preservation of itself.  Again a major goal of the NWO.

So in this respect it is odd that this advantage, this net-centric environment was naturally woven into the core of the alien race and their entire planet, and that their enemy was portrayed in what we would currently recognize and regard as the NWO, did not have the same advantage of such a level of network centric characteristics (this part is a psyop, because the bad guys would in fact have all of this technology, not the other way around--that or at least both would be on a level playing field.

I honestly enjoyed the movie because I cannot be conditioned (or even if I am, no matter how subtly, I will later detect it and correct my perspective based on truth).  I was able to pull a lot from it, and the 3D effect was really pretty amazing and very immersing.  I perceived the NWO military juggernaut as weak throughout.  It is as though that the director almost wanted to show us how we would have to defeat the NWO, by us utilizing net centric warfare against our enemy to be able to defeat them.  The only way that net centric warfare can work is for everyone to be aligned with the truth.  It works for the NWO (for evil) because they are aligned with evil itself, and evil operates as a force of one mind.  The NWO does not need a leader, because the evils within human nature will make sure that enough "nodes" are always in place to continue forth with their agenda.  We only believe that we need a leader in the war against tyranny because we have been conditioned such.  

There is no one correct interpretation of this film, there are many facets to it, and many ways to look at the same aspects of it without necessarily being incorrect.