This was brilliant! It’s one of the clearest explorations of theme I’ve read. And also reader response theory!
I think the difference between the two movies is that the Avatar heroes get what they’ve wanted from the beginning (albeit with sacrifices) while Phil gets what he never knew he wanted when the day began. (That’s S.E.’s definitio…
This was brilliant! It’s one of the clearest explorations of theme I’ve read. And also reader response theory!
I think the difference between the two movies is that the Avatar heroes get what they’ve wanted from the beginning (albeit with sacrifices) while Phil gets what he never knew he wanted when the day began. (That’s S.E.’s definition of how theme arises, BTW. The first Avatar might be better because the main character has no idea of going over to the indigenous side at the beginning.)
Aha! I think my point about the characters getting exactly what they want only applies to the second one. I always thought of the first one as “Dances with Wolves - in Space!”
This was brilliant! It’s one of the clearest explorations of theme I’ve read. And also reader response theory!
I think the difference between the two movies is that the Avatar heroes get what they’ve wanted from the beginning (albeit with sacrifices) while Phil gets what he never knew he wanted when the day began. (That’s S.E.’s definition of how theme arises, BTW. The first Avatar might be better because the main character has no idea of going over to the indigenous side at the beginning.)
That expert’s concept seems too schematic.
Thank you! You’ve given me the confidence in the piece I needed.
Was he talking about the first or second Avatar? I was assuming the second one.
He was talking about the first one.
Aha! I think my point about the characters getting exactly what they want only applies to the second one. I always thought of the first one as “Dances with Wolves - in Space!”