But throughout the movie kept feeling that it wasnt all fantasy. That the reel wasnt too far away from the real.
The first half of the movie was a web of metaphors for a lot of things that have been the bread and butter of my being for the last decade and more.
First of all, there is the quite obvious 'colonialism' aspect to the plot. Its easy to draw parallels to not only history and trace the thinking that resulted in a few nations colonising more than half the world. But its relatively modern too. Nations first drawn to raw materials needed for their industrial purposes, have been in modern times replaced my Multi-National Corporations seeking profits. The 'humane' aspect isnt amiss too. While on the one hand the MNCs seek their own prosperity whatever the cost, on the other they also claim to 'want to look after' the affected population. [Note the economic-hand-speak!] The contemporary trend of Nation States moving in on the developing nations mostly in South Asia and the African Continent in the name of securing the future of their citizens although not clearly depicted, is only an extention of thought.
It is the definition of what constitutes 'looking out for the affected population' where another theme gets folded into the narrative. The story of development aid! This gets totally higlighted in my opinion when Parker Selfridge voices his frustration over the problem the Na'vi present. I cannot quote but the essence of Parker's problem was - the RDA corporation and the human race they represent have offered the Na'vi rehabilitation, offered to school their children [in English!!], and are willing to negotiate over what ever they want to facilitate their 'moving out' from over the source of the mineral the RDA wants to mine but the indigineous just do not seem to appreciate the generous offers and move over. The avatar program is also an extension of this generosity because it is ultimately aimed to understand what it will take for the Na'vi to give up and enable peaceful mining. This generosity is apparent in the attempt the corporation is making in trying to assimilate and connect with the inhabitants instead of an all out and forceful eviction.
This thread of frustration is absolutely reminiscent of the development aid argument. In that the aid donor nations not only presume to know what constitutes best alternatives but also languish in the pathos they see in the natives not realising the opportunity they are offered to 'bettter their lives'. This vexation is not only felt by aid donors but sometimes equally by goverments offering their citizens alternatives to development.
It is posiible to view the avatar program of the RDA as an equivalent to the paradigms of 'partnership' and 'ownership' within the aid world while at the same time remaining within the ambit of 'conditionality'. And the ultimate orders by Selfridge of destruction or forceful eviction of the Na'vi by Colonel Quaritch's army after concluding that peaceful negotiations are not going to work and all avenues of persuasion have been exhausted, as a familiar phase in most development projects [irrespective of who finances them] that involve displacement over the project area.
I must point out that the school of thought I speak of here may not be the only and most current paradigm in development studies. Although this critcism has withstood decades.