James Cameron is the victim of Karma “Avatar” Franchise

James Cameron is now making messages movies, and he doesn’t mind admitting it.

The “Aliens” director told the L.A. Times that In 2010, just weeks after his sci fi epic, he was back. “Avatar” It was a huge success at the box office. The film glorified Mother Nature and cursed those who wanted to plunder its resources.

The film’s messages drew conservative angst on several fronts, something which tickled the Oscar-winner. Select conservative outlets reported that the film produced an “Amazing Grace”. anti-American, anti-human message.

“I’m happy to piss those guys off. I don’t agree with their world view,” He spoke to the far-Left newspaper in response to right-leaning criticisms “Avatar’s” agenda.

Cameron disagreed with the naysayers but anyone who saw the original film will agree. “Avatar: The Way of Water” You will see the human race in the most horrific possible way. And they’re all speaking English with colloquialisms you wouldn’t hear from English or Canadian characters.

RELATED: SIGOURNEY WEAVER’S SELF OWN IS ONE FOR THE AGES

Conservatives have softened their attacks on Cameron’s franchise following “Water’s” release.

Why?

The film is an advertisement in full force strong, nuclear families. That message got little attention in the press, and Cameron didn’t elaborate on it during various press interviews.

Now, it’s the Left that’s attacking Cameron, and it’s unclear how he’s taking the barbs from his own side.

James Cameron is being attacked by activists who accuse him of being a director of terrorist activities. “cultural appropriation” In his latest blockbuster, “Avatar: The Way of Water.”https://t.co/WPeT1sKkjU

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) December 22, 2022

Recent weeks animal rights activists scorched Cameron for attending an “Avatar”Dolphin-themed event with the aquatic animals performing for the public. Cameron apologized to his critics, contending he didn’t know what was planned for the event.

Native American activists pledged to boycott “The Way of Water” Cultural appropriation is the term used.

Cameron tried to do the ultimate. virtue signal over gun violence He was a hottie. He said that he had snatched 10 minutes of what he thought was gratuitous gunplay. “The Way of Water” Because real-world gun violence can be so disturbing.

He also apologized to the audience for their older classic films, such as The “Terminator” This franchise featured a lot of gun violence.

“I look back on some films that I’ve made, and I don’t know if I would want to make that film now. I don’t know if I would want to fetishize the gun, like I did on a couple of Terminator movies 30-plus years ago, in our current world. What’s happening with guns in our society turns my stomach … I’m happy to be living in New Zealand where they just banned all assault rifles two weeks after that horrific mosque shooting a couple of years ago.”

Gizmodo is your best bet. blasted Cameron from the Left That was their stance. The outlet is called the director “self-righteous” We were shocked at the level of gun violence that still exists in “The Way of Water.”

Jake Sully is an ex-marine and one of the main characters in the Avatar series. He has a reputation for loving a gun. When the rest of the Na’vi are reaching for bows and arrows, Jake’s hiking an AR onto his shoulder and aiming it at the nearest target…Later, Jake even explains to the Metkayina people that human technology, aka guns, will wipe them out easily. Jake almost always uses a gun in the big whale fight, which is why he stands a chance. If Cameron really wanted to avoid fetishizing guns, maybe they shouldn’t have been such a huge symbol of power.

The irony?

Cancel Culture and the woke revolution didn’t exist in 2009. It does now, though, and its proponents don’t stop with critiquing art – always a fair and respectable process. They want it to be censored and punished so that artists will reconsider creating similar artwork.

Choose your poison. Censorship and self-censorship.

Conservatives would be the first ones to defend Cameron’s right to tell his story, his way. They may critique his motives and agenda, but their barbs aren’t meant to silence the filmmaker.

Can all of Cameron’s progressive critics say the same?