Avatar: Threat or menace?
Numerous voices are united in criticism of James Cameron's Avatar. American neo-cons decry its seeming condemnation of capitalism and use of the military against an indigenous people. An anti-smoking group finds cigarette use in the movie highly offensive. The Vatican objects to the glowing portrayal of animism as a religious force, and even the Chinese pulled the film from theaters, thinking it's a polemic about their treatment of the Tibetans.
I have a serious ideological issue with Cameron's movie as well. It doesn't have a single bicycle in it.
Oh, sure, there are various transportation devices, all of them machines. And Pandora's natives, the Na'vi, have domesticated flying whatchamacallits. We all know the huge energy requirements of air and land machines, but any society with large animals devotes enormous resources to feeding and maintaining those animals. So even the big, green Na'vi aren't really so....green. They could do much better by adopting wiser land use policies, switching to Na'vi-powered locomotion, and giving up their oppressive domination of the flying whatevers.
There isn't a single mention of sharing the road, sustainable transportation, or vehicular cycling in the whole movie! Was this an oversight on Cameron's part or was it a deliberate slight? We may never learn the truth, but it's just another example of Hollywood's underhanded attempt to malign bicycle culture and promote machines and even subjugated animals in preference to our obviously superior transportation mode.