"Star Wars" and "Avatar"

This post is partially in response to Charlie's. but it was too long for the limiting comment boxes to display it easily. The Seabrook article had me thinking about "Avatar," and particularly the so-called "Pandora Effect."

I liked Seabrook's analysis of the Lucasfilm employees he met, that they are happy because "feeling successful in their jobs for "Star Wars" helped prove that the lessons of "Star Wars" do come true. The narrative of the film and the power of its brand becomes so ingrained in the consciousness of its fans that it has (for Seabrook, who certainly takes some speculative liberties in his otherwise journalistic analysis) a measurable impact on their quality of life. It is important to remember that Lucas was basically taking an American master narrative--one that he felt a particularly strong connection to--and re-branding it as something new and appealing to a technologically-obsessed generation. There is nothing particularly original about "Star Wars" as a story--and even the visuals are culled from numerous other sources--but the way it was sold was part of the key to its success.

I wonder if the obsession with Pandora in Cameron's film--which is based rather blatantly on the fictional European/American post-colonial narrative about infiltrating and sublimating the "other"--appeals to an inherent desire to become another. Just as Seabrook applies Lucas' biography to "Star Wars," I would apply Cameron's noted obsession with deep sea diving to his newest blockbuster. Certainly the "Pandora Effect," a psychological malaise that occurs after realizing that the in-theater world isn't real, reflects the power of the narrative mixed with the technology. I think that's what's so smart about the way that Cameron and his PR experts branded his new form of 3-D and motion capture technology. People were convinced going into "Avatar" that it would be an experience of experiencing another world first hand. It was sold almost as a 2.5 hour vacation, and it's only natural that people who bought into the 3-D and the adventure narrative it supports would have difficulty coming back to reality.

I don't think that "Avatar" will enjoy quite the same merchandising success as "Star Wars"--partially because the narrative isn't quite as ripe for expansion as Lucas' universe, but more importantly because the brand that has made it such a popular film is so reliant on the technological aspect of the experience. In some ways Cameron's film is closer than Lucas' to an unadulterated cinematic experience--it seems almost self-contained, a world that cannot be expanded upon because the technology is so essential to the brand's impact on the psyche. Just days after the film premiered, I began seeing new ads for old Second Life-style social MMOs that emphasized the ability to become and play as a Na'vi. Whereas, as Seabrook's article discussed, "Star Wars" was a perfect bridge between cinematic narrative and real life, giving a grandiose meaning to the lives of its fans, "Avatar" doesn't seem to make that connection. The desires created by its narrative and the technological brand--most importantly becoming the other"--cannot be applied to or satisfied by "normal life" as a whole. "Avatar" is "Star Wars" for a virtual reality age--if someone could develop an MMORPG based on the game for 20th Century they would be a billionaire.