Chad Brand says Avatar is Anti-Custer

Chad Brand says that Avatar is “anti-military, anti-non-green, anti-American (at least Bush and Reagan’s America), and anti-Custer.” This is a clever, short movie review from a theology professor at Boyce College and Southern Seminary. His conclusion: “I liked the film. I will probably watch it again. But I am not going to drink the Koolaid.” Read the rest here.

12 Responses to Chad Brand says Avatar is Anti-Custer

  1. Scott January 2, 2010 at 12:54 pm #

    “Anti-custer” – you absolutely have to be kidding me!

  2. john January 2, 2010 at 1:44 pm #

    Hey…as a Southerner I am anti custer too! Guess I need to go see the movie.

  3. John Holmberg January 2, 2010 at 1:49 pm #

    Who cares if it’s all of the above? Does that make it “bad” & “wrong”? Do you think we treated the Native Americans properly, Denny? I’ve come to expect this sort of thing from you, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

  4. Scott January 2, 2010 at 1:56 pm #

    Is there something wrong with being “pro-green?”

    Listening to most evangelicals, you would think that caring about the environment is a cardinal sin. I don’t get it.

  5. Ryan K January 2, 2010 at 3:39 pm #

    “Listening to most evangelicals, you would think that caring about the environment is a cardinal sin. I don’t get it.”

    Just curious Scott, who are these evangelicals? I fail to meet them in masses that are frequently described by some.

    This really seems like a straw man criticism more than anything else. Though I am open to new information.

  6. Michael Templin January 2, 2010 at 3:43 pm #

    @ scott:

    I agree. so many evangelicals have such a problem with any sort of ‘green’ programs. The problem is many green programs are rooted in bad science and are propaganda at best (ie environmentalism which is a religion), yet there is good in being a steward of the earth God gave us dominion over.

  7. russware January 2, 2010 at 6:00 pm #



  8. Denny Burk January 2, 2010 at 9:22 pm #

    Ditto russware. I just thought the Custer comment was funny.

  9. russware January 3, 2010 at 4:55 pm #

    So, I’ve now had a chance to go read the review, and I appreciate it. The only significantly negative reviews of the movie I had read all seemed to be right-wingers who couldn’t stop being defensive long enough to actually evaluate the movie on any other basis. I appreciate that Brand is able to enjoy the movie (and even go see it again) in spite of the political messages with which he might not agree. I resonate with those messages more than Brand does, to be sure. But I also completely agree with his critique of the Colonel and Parker characters. Good review… but the ‘anti-Custer’ comment still makes me laugh.

  10. Matthew Staton January 3, 2010 at 8:23 pm #

    Haven’t seen the movie and I haven’t read Chad Brand before but I really like his review. The monochromatic vs. polychromatic criticism has the ring of truth (to mix an audio metaphor with a visual one).

  11. D.J. Williams January 4, 2010 at 10:23 am #

    Good review from one of my favorite profs. One-note villians have long been one of the shortcomings of Cameron’s films – watch Billy Zane in Titanic or Michael Biehn in The Abyss and you get the same thing.

  12. Donald Johnson January 19, 2010 at 4:44 pm #

    China censors are pulling the film from 2D theaters as it is TOO popular.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes