Comments on: Deconstructing Avatar – The Final Act

By: jerry locklee

jerry locklee — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:16:02 +0000

I thought Avatar boring and mediocre. I can’t see that it has any plot at all, just the most slender of story lines. All the characters are stock/stick figures going all the way back to the 1904 pulps–obviously Cameron never heard of Ezra Pound, or his dictum, Make It New. O, wait, the CGI’s were new. And what, really, do I know? I did not like Titanic either and, as you pointed out, it made a lot of money.

By: Sue

Sue — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 23:24:34 +0000

Thank you for doing these posts, Larry. As the other readers have commented, it’s very helpful to have concrete examples of these story-telling principles. I do have a question, though. In this post (Final Act) you mentioned that the “pull the trigger” bit was the second plot point. However, in the last post (Second Half of Act II) you identified it as the second pinch point, and Trudy’s rescue as the second plot point. Could you please clarify?

By: Debbie Burke

Debbie Burke — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:29:45 +0000

Wow, Larry, you outdid yourself with the Avatar deconstruction! A month ago, a writer friend talked me into seeing Avatar (not my type of movie and I went reluctantly). We both follow your blog. She had already seen the movie twice and asked me to watch for plot points, pinch points, etc. b/c she was not sure where they were. Instead of spending 3 1/2 hours fidgeting in my seat, my mind was busy trying to pick the story apart, based on your principles. Afterward, my friend and I spent two hours in a coffee shop debating which was the first plot point (out of 4 or 5 suspected possibilities) and couldn’t come to a sure conclusion. Plus, we discussed your other terms of story structure vis a vis the movie. It was a fascinating exercise, but we couldn’t come to hard-and-fast conclusions.

She then wrote to you suggesting the deconstruction, which you answered with this terrific series. It was a graduate course in plot and structure, crammed into four meaty posts. I cannot tell you how much it helped me to have CONCRETE examples of plot points, pinch points, midpoint, etc. These formerly abstract terms became real and meaningful to me. THANK YOU!!!

Avatar is still not my type of movie, but after reading your deconstruction, I’m tempted to see it again, armed with your authoritative notes in one hand and a penlight in the other. Even if one doesn’t like the movie, a serious writer needs to pay attention b/c of its outrageous success. Cameron is an egotistical ham–I recall he proclaimed himself “king of the world” after Titanic; after the upcoming Oscars, he’ll undoubtedly dub himself “king of the universe”–gag! He’s also ham-handed with his agenda, but he does know how to grab audiences by their throats and ram his message down.

But…a hungry student can always learn, whether or not they swallow the author’s propaganda.

Thanks again, Larry.

By: nancy

nancy — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:22:29 +0000

This series was so insightful. Thank you.
You point about Grace was brief, but the issue you raise manifests your whole argument for me.
You make quite a case for how “the obvious” is often a necessary part of story structure, and now I get it. It was not obvious for Grace to end up with the tribe. We weren’t prepared for it along the way, and when it happens it is not only surprising but annoying. When the pieces of the story do not lead to a natural (obvious) ending, this is a flaw.

Now I’m thinking about buying your book on character when I get home from Rome!

By: Monica

Monica — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 01:30:49 +0000

Thanks for a great series, Larry. The education will now pay off well as I start revising my latest story. Having an example laid out like this makes everything super clear.

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:13:25 +0000

Thank you, Larry.
An excellent lesson regarding structure and the power of a well told story. I’m rewriting and going back to the basics – outlining all over again. This series has been a great reminder as to how to do it right, none of that “seat of the pants” stuff.
jane

By: Luisa Perkins

Luisa Perkins — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 18:36:51 +0000

Bravo, Larry! This is wonderful. My favorite bit: “to saturate them with the tension that the character experiences, even though we know the outcome”–this is something I’d love to see you explore further.

By: Trish

Trish — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 18:59:02 +0000

Another great series. Thanks for breaking it down for us. Very useful information, as always.

By: Trudy

Trudy — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 16:09:11 +0000

thank you for the screenwriting education. excellent evaluation of what occurred in this story line. As a viewer, I enjoyed the story, but felt the ending was a disappointment. because i believe after all the investment in this production and most especially with all Cameron’s lecturing themes and symbolism, he could have come up with a more compelling ending. specifically, it just ends up as a war, with one side beating the other. there was no enlightenment, no new ideas, no better way. it was barbaric. and if i have to sit through almost 3 hrs of a lecture on the evils of manifest destiny, then i want new ideas. like, how can you win without utter destruction?
i could be cynical, of course, and just accept that Avatar is a multi movie franchise, and that the ending was written so it would be easy to write endless sequels. but if i have to sit through another movie where they destroy the most beautiful tree ever created, I NEED MORE from these scriptWRITERS! Ultimately, what was great about this movie was NOT the writing, and maybe I’m wrong, but i expect more from the writer.

By: Martijn Groeneveld

Martijn Groeneveld — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:23:41 +0000

Hi Larry,

maybe a far fetched thought, but it appeared to me that after the sex scene, Jake en Neytiri symbolically represent one person. The same goes for Neo and Trinity. After their sex scene, whatever happens to Neo also happens to Trinity. So it’s Jake-Neytiri saving … itself? And mr. Cameron isn’t breaking any rules at all

greetings,
Martijn