comScore

Michael Moore Would Have Had Avatar Win Over Hurt Locker


Just because the Academy Awards happened two weeks ago doesn’t mean that it’s too late for Michael Moore to say his piece. Mainly, that Kathryn Bigelow‘s The Hurt Locker was a piece of crap because it was “lazy” and that James Cameron‘s Avatar was amazing because of its portrayal of how we “privatized war” and treated the planet.

Says Moore:

“I did not like ‘The Hurt Locker.’ It’s a lazy way to make a movie, frankly. I could put you on the edge of your seat quite easily, and have you feel the tension for 2 hours, if every other scene practically is, ‘Should we cut the red wire or the green wire?’ And if he cuts the wrong wire, he gets blown to smithereens, and you never know who’s going to get blown up in any given second. That doesn’t take a whole lot of skill to get big emotion out of this if you’re in the audience. And there’s a pornographic element to it that’s a little disturbing because you can’t take your eyes off it. But what’s it saying? What’s the substance of this? I think ‘Avatar’ was really trying to say something about the planet, about indigenous people, and about how we construct war now, how we privatize it. And I think these are really powerful things to say in this time, and I give James Cameron a lot of credit.”

It’s pretty obvious why Moore didn’t like HL: Because Bigelow didn’t jam down your throat any easy messages about the war in the Middle East. There were no simple solutions, nor a portrayal of black and white “evil” – whether that be the terrorists or the American government that took us in there, or even in the troops themselves. Avatar on the other hand, wasn’t really James Cameron’s story about the planet, or indigenous people, unless you consider ripping off Pocahontas to be “really powerful.”

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Filed Under:

Follow Mediaite: