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.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes