The Politics of Avatar and Hurt Locker - Hype or Real?

One of the major plotlines of this Oscar season has revolved around the politics or lack thereof in The Hurt Locker.  As with most war films it’s difficult not to read some political subtext into Kathryn Bigelow’s masterful film.  Unlike her ex-husband’s film Avatar, Bigelow doesn’t bludgeon her audience with her message.  Whether Bigelow was successful in her attempt to show the dehumanizing aspects of war is debatable, what she does shows is that for even the most modest of people war can change them fundamentally.  Now that the film has reached frontrunner status, it has earned detractors.  Much of this has been highlighted by the recent news that one of the film’s producers has been sending emails asking voters for vote for the film.  Yet, many of these negative voices how come from veterans of our conflict in Iraq.  This only serves to heighten the political nature of the film.

Many of these negative voices have been raised about the realism of what is depicted, despite the so-called “independent” nature of the film; it presents a Hollywood version of war.  Regardless of intentions, the film is still profiting of a conflict in which we are still engaged.  Bigelow can make the point of how her film has anti-war message, the film works because it so exhilarating.  I’m as guilty as anyone for being caught up in the thrill ride; after all it is very well made.  Any political intentions are secondary to the audience identifying with these characters.      

Another point of controversy to arise over the last month is regarding Bigelow’s gender.  Many of the detractors have said she winning her awards based on her gender, rather than her work as a director.  To be sure Bigelow is not one of the top directors working today, but neither is she a complete hack.  As much as her supporters would like to beg to differ, at some level the fact she is a woman is driving their desire to see her win.  Considering no female director has ever won has to play on us at even a subconscious level.  The fact she has made a really good film heightens this desire.  This holds true to both men and women, women who want a support of girl power and guys that some sexiness added to the proceedings.  To be clear I fully support her win, but the work of other directors in this field does not make her a clear favorite and a win by any of them would not be a travesty.

Avatar on the other hand wears its politics on James Cameron’s sleeve.   Cameron’s action films in the past have always relied on underlying social messages to propel them past your average action flick.  With Titanic he extended those messages to class distinction and the arrogance of the rich.  I’m not so sure he is aware of his own arrogance, but seeing as hubris has yet to catch up with him, I think he remains acutely blind to it.  With Avatar he comments further on environmentalism, but also our unifying humanity.  Many have praised its criticism of imperialism and capitalism, others point out that it’s another story of a white man saving a native culture.  These debates make Avatar more controversial while also keeping the spotlight on it, an aspect that should hinder its chances of winning.

We haven’t been treated to such political questions regarding the Best Picture race since 2005 when Crash stole Brokeback’s thunder.  Both liberal films to be sure and the Academy certainly felt like they were being noble in honoring a film about race.  However, the film presents a very simplistic view on race relations, we all have prejudice but can also do great good and for such a large ensemble the audience is never given a chance to connect with many of the characters.   The fact that they passed over the more liberal minded Brokeback Mountain remains a head scratcher.  I’ve never been entirely convinced that its tale of forbidden love is a timeless classic, but the film was still much stronger than the mediocre Crash.      

Wrapping things up, I should note that Avatar is very much a war film, so the political debates remain just as relevant for it as they do for Hurt Locker.  Yet, despite the position of some Hut Locker isn’t a complex art film.  The movie plays out more as pure entertainment than many of the other nominees.  District 9 while highly entertaining is also very political, same holds true for Inglourious Basterds.  Precious has also been the center of political backlash and its focus on an inner-city teen certainly puts a large focus on race and class.  Lastly, The Blind Side has been bashed by many as being a Republican movie.  Of course that it seems to represent a Hollywood understanding of Republicans is rarely discussed.  With just a week to go expect these discussions to increase, and continue after the victor is announced.  

1977 vs. 2009 - Does Avatar Go Down Like Star Wars?

In the wake of The Hurt Locker’s big wins at the producers’ guild and directors’ guild, much has been made regarding The Hurt Locker’s indie status and lack of box office compared to that of its main competition Avatar. However, if The Hurt Locker even had modest success at the box office like Crash or No Country For Old Men, I doubt we would be having this conversation. Whereas, come Tuesday evening Avatar will be the highest grossing domestic film not adjusted for inflation. However, how much does this box office draw help Avatar’s chances, and does the lack box office hinder The Hurt Locker’s?

Avatar has the broader appeal helping its cause, nor is it suffering from major critical backlash. Most reviews have been moderately favorable to raves. Meanwhile The Hurt Locker has massive critical support, yet suffered at the box office for being an Iraq War movie, grossing less in its total run than Avatar made this past Saturday alone (14 mil). Every Best Picture winner since 1970 has managed to gross more money then The Hurt Locker, a decided disadvantage even for a movie in a preferred Academy genre. Yet, Avatar’s gross is not the overwhelming advantage that many are claiming. Since 1970 only thirteen Best Picture winners had the highest gross in the nominee field, and only seven of those were the highest grossing movie of the year. Box office extravaganzas such as Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T. and The Sixth Sense lost out in the Best Picture race. Even The Dark Knight couldn’t manage a nomination last year, despite strong critical and commercial support. Quite simply being the box office story of the year will not always bring home Oscar gold like Forrest Gump or Titanic.

In 1977, George Lucas released Star Wars, bringing to life the biggest film series of all time and birthing a whole new geek culture. Meanwhile, Woody Allen had released Annie Hall to a moderately successful 38 million, a number good enough to earn the honor of the lowest grossing Academy winner since 1970. In terms of the awards circuit, the race certainly played out differently than the current race. Neither Annie Hall nor Star Wars won the Golden Globe. Annie Hall won with the New York Film Critics, while Star Wars took the prize in L.A. More importantly Woody Allen beat George Lucas at the DGA’s, cementing his film’s success at the Oscar’s. Star Wars enjoyed larger commercial support, yet it had to suffer from the Academy‘s Sci-Fi bias. Even 2001, was largely ignored at the time of its release and still gaining its reputation as the gold standard of the genre. Fast forward thirty years and we have another supposed breakthrough in the genre with Avatar, even if that breakthrough has more to do with the technology employed as opposed to a breakthrough in storytelling.

In contrast Annie Hall and The Hurt Locker are smaller films enjoying critical consensus, Annie Hall’s box office was more significant than Locker’s meager total. Both films also focus on a hand full of characters, exploring their relationship with each other; While both lacked large box office totals, neither could one accurately describe them as art house pedigree as well (though there are those who will tell you differently). Both movies are firmly planted as genre films themselves, romantic comedy and a hybrid action/war film. Both genres have experienced some success at the Oscars Patton, Platoon, Shakespeare in Love and It Happened One Night all winning Oscar’s top prize. Both also enjoyed great critical support, with Annie Hall cited among Woody Allen’s best and The Hurt Locker the best reviewed war film since Saving Private Ryan. If anything The Hurt Locker’s lack of box office success is a result of the public avoiding movies about Iraq, even one without the politics that have bogged recent titles such as Rendition, Stop-Loss and In the Valley of Elah.

Whether any of this translates to Oscar success for The Hurt Locker remains to be seen, but its lack of box office success should not be a hindrance. Like Annie Hall, The Hurt Locker has been noted as a paradigm of its genre. While Oscar does exhibit a tendency to eschew genre films, The Hurt Locker is in a favored genre, while Avatar finds itself in a genre typically shunned by voters. With the Academy’s growing propensity to award films with more perceived pedigree, The Hurt Locker should have the inside edge to Hollywood’s top prize. Of course come March 7th, the Academy might just have to show their undying love for the King of the World.