Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

    Is it just me, or is the new movie "Avatar" a barely disguised naturist movie? The belligerent Earthlings, wreaking havoc on nature to mine precious Unobtanium for greedy investors, are the only ones clothed. In contrast, the Na'vi people of the planet Pandora, living completely in harmony with nature via the gorgeous florescent tethers of Mother Nature Eyra, wear hardly more than paint and jewelry. Is James Cameron a stealth promoter of enviro-naturism? The Na'vi's "Hometree" community has all the makings of an upscale clothing-optional resort run by ecologist naturists. The newbie crossover Earthlings are even recognizable from the resident Na'vi by their superfluous polo shirts and safari shorts.

    Its hard to think of a more effective way for millions around the world to experience a couple hours of subliminal exposure to minimal clothing. I don't know about you, but, while the Hollywood machine is still churning out fervor for the Avatar fan base, I'm planning to paint myself powder blue and adopt Na'vi fashion around town!

  • #2
    Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

    Interesting.

    I haven't seen it yet (plan to go tomorrow), but I figured it was just more of the usual Hollywood scantily-clad titilation that we always get. Now if the Na'vi women were topless like the males, without any attention being drawn to it, then I'd be really impressed. But I assume they have tops on, which would imply that they are aware of breasts being viewed in a sexual manner.

    I wonder if CGI nudity would be judged the same way as real life nudity by the censors?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

      The Navi women are indeed topless, just the well placed leaves, hair, etc, covers their breasts. There is a funny scene when the Avatar is first nearly nude with the rest of the tribe. You'll get a kick out of it.

      I would not call it a clandestine support of nudity. Just the opposite. I feel Cameron wanted to point out the primitive nature of the Navi, sort of like tribes in Africa. No need for clothes, so they have none.

      We saw the movie in 3D and walked away with headaches. I'll be interested to hear if anyone had this experience. We'll never see another movie in 3D. I don't care for the technology where the primary subject is in focus and the background is 3D, but blurry.

      I liked the movie, but hate the 3D crap.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

        Originally posted by BinCo View Post
        We saw the movie in 3D and walked away with headaches. I'll be interested to hear if anyone had this experience. We'll never see another movie in 3D. I don't care for the technology where the primary subject is in focus and the background is 3D, but blurry.

        I liked the movie, but hate the 3D crap.
        Fortunately I didn't get a headache, I rather like the 3D, but agree with some reviewers who think it may detract from the beauty of the film. Or distract.

        It would probably be better if there was more blurriness of the background, this kind of 3D differs from natural 3D in that there are multiple planes of focus - nearly everything is in focus and it is up to the viewer to merge their attention on one layer and ignore the sharpness of the background. Real holographic 3D does not have this "multifocus" defect.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

          Originally posted by BinCo View Post
          The Navi women are indeed topless, just the well placed leaves, hair, etc, covers their breasts. There is a funny scene when the Avatar is first nearly nude with the rest of the tribe. You'll get a kick out of it.
          Well, that's interesting. I guess that even CGI nipples are not permitted. I actually find that those conveniently placed leaves, strands of hair, etc tend to be more distracting. But it is also interesting that there hasn't been a mention of this in any review I have seen. I am surprised that no critics have complained about so many topless women in a film. Dare I hope that we are maturing?

          I'd love it if they could show the characters bare-breasted, nipples and all, without anyone even taking note of it, because it is a non-issue and relevent to the story/ setting.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

            Look at "Blame it on Rio" and "The Emerald Forest"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

              Originally posted by Agde View Post
              The newbie crossover Earthlings are even recognizable from the resident Na'vi by their superfluous polo shirts and safari shorts.
              It seemed very noticable (at least to me) that Sigourney Weaver's Avatar ALWAYS wore shorts and polo while it seemed the other primary characters' Avatars took a more native approach to dress. There were several scenes and "photos" of Dr. Grace Augustine (Weaver) in which she is portrayed like an African missionary usually amongst the native Na'vi children where she is noticeably clothed and the others around her are not. You did see some clothed "natives" around the "military base" compound and presumably these were all people from the "company" getting comfortable with operating their Avatars. But it seemed to me that Sam Worthington and Joel Moore (Jake Sully and Norm Spellman in the film) generally took a more native dress approach with their Avatars and that other Avatars seemingly went more "native" when they left the compound. This was a stated objective of the Avatar program - to assimilate with the native population. However, as mentioned, it seemed that Dr. Augustine was often the only "outsider" who was very noticeably dressed amongst the native populations.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                I only skimmed your post, having not seen the movie yet. We're planning on going to Mall of GA IMAX to see it on Saturday. But from what I gather about the story it's inspired by the European conquerors who often did conquer more primitive peoples who were often naked in places like Africa, the Americas, Australia & God knows where else.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                  Saw it today with my son. I really, really enjoyed it, much more than I expected to.

                  On the naturist side of things, I am going to reiterate what I said earlier, that I am surprised there were no complaints. The Na'Vi really are unmistakably topless and they all-- male and female-- wear what I guess can only be called g-strings with a number of butt shots throughout the film. There are a number of times that bare breasts are shown from the side and at various points you really see everything but the nipple. Nobody said a word or seemed uncomfortable. Yay!

                  But as I suspected, the leaves, hair, jewelry, etc distract a bit. It was pretty clear that they are glued in place, because they never moved at all.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                    Yeah, I would have liked if the jewelry etc. moved in a realistic manner. No, it still feels a bit like censoring.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                      Originally posted by GORDON2BARE View Post
                      Look at "Blame it on Rio" and "The Emerald Forest"
                      My only objection to 'the Emerald Forest' was the last 20-30 minutes was pushing the theme 'psychoactive drugs are the key to unlocking your potential.' Reflecting the mindset of a lot of Hollywood types at the time.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                        I really didn't take Avatar as making a statement on nudity. Someone else mentioned, and I agree, that the concept of a more primitive society living in harmony with nature - where it is warm - wouldn't need clothes as all so it makes sense that they would only wear what they might think to be necessary. Notice that the tribal leaders wore more clothes as a symbol of importance just like I have to wear a suit at the bank to present as more important. So, anyway, nothing big about nudism there. Still a great movie though. I want to see it on a regular screen instead of IMAX.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                          As much as we (earthlings) speculate and fear Aliens comming to earth to distroy our planet and mine it for some precious natural resource. It seems nearly every time we find a planet with life on it we do the same thing.
                          I thought the movie was pretty cool, but the story was pretty much more of the same.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                            Originally posted by Arnabas View Post
                            Interesting.

                            I haven't seen it yet (plan to go tomorrow), but I figured it was just more of the usual Hollywood scantily-clad titilation that we always get. Now if the Na'vi women were topless like the males, without any attention being drawn to it, then I'd be really impressed. But I assume they have tops on, which would imply that they are aware of breasts being viewed in a sexual manner.

                            I wonder if CGI nudity would be judged the same way as real life nudity by the censors?
                            I'm sure that it would. If they had given the Na'vi natives some blue nipples, rather than "Austin Powers" style wear that doesn't move, the film would be R-rated. And God forbid that they show a penis or vaginal slit and it would be NC-17, which essentially means banned in the big corporate theaters that can show 3-D digital movies.

                            Originally posted by NBD View Post
                            It seemed very noticable (at least to me) that Sigourney Weaver's Avatar ALWAYS wore shorts and polo while it seemed the other primary characters' Avatars took a more native approach to dress. There were several scenes and "photos" of Dr. Grace Augustine (Weaver) in which she is portrayed like an African missionary usually amongst the native Na'vi children where she is noticeably clothed and the others around her are not. You did see some clothed "natives" around the "military base" compound and presumably these were all people from the "company" getting comfortable with operating their Avatars. But it seemed to me that Sam Worthington and Joel Moore (Jake Sully and Norm Spellman in the film) generally took a more native dress approach with their Avatars and that other Avatars seemingly went more "native" when they left the compound. This was a stated objective of the Avatar program - to assimilate with the native population. However, as mentioned, it seemed that Dr. Augustine was often the only "outsider" who was very noticeably dressed amongst the native populations.
                            For sure. She defiantly had a Christian missionary/National Geographic photographer look about her when interacting with the almost naked natives.

                            Originally posted by nudeboggy View Post
                            Yeah, I would have liked if the jewelry etc. moved in a realistic manner. No, it still feels a bit like censoring.
                            To a degree it was censoring. Technically it was "self-censoring" but really it was reacting to the censorship of the MPAA; which makes it de facto censorship. Technically the MPAA's rating system is voluntary but James Cameron was contractually obligated to deliver a PG-13 film to the studio that financed the project. That studio spent something like $250 million so they wanted a PG-13 film that more people could see. Technically they could have released the film unrated but than the big corporate theaters who have all of the Real-D (Digital 3D) and IMAX auditoriums would refuse to show it and nobody would get to see it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is "Avatar" a naturist movie?

                              Originally posted by Fitz1980 View Post
                              To a degree it was censoring. Technically it was "self-censoring" but really it was reacting to the censorship of the MPAA; which makes it de facto censorship. Technically the MPAA's rating system is voluntary but James Cameron was contractually obligated to deliver a PG-13 film to the studio that financed the project. That studio spent something like $250 million so they wanted a PG-13 film that more people could see. Technically they could have released the film unrated but than the big corporate theaters who have all of the Real-D (Digital 3D) and IMAX auditoriums would refuse to show it and nobody would get to see it.
                              Totally it was censoring. But Beowulf was PG-13, and showed Angelina's character totally nude, except for mud "strategically" covering the nipples. Dr Manhattan's (Watchmen) penis was clearly visible throughout the movie, and was rated R. So they could have simply erased the nipples and maintained a PG-13 rating. In pre-production, the Na'vi were designed nude; and I can only guess who decided to go with the "glued-in-place" jewelry to ensure a PG-13 rating. I found it terribly distracting and unnatural, as I've read many viewers complain of the same. Good movie, but they dropped the ball in that particular aspect.
                              Attached Files

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X