To supplement and conclude the arguments raised in last weeks TV Watchtower column, the following are additional reasons why District 9 is a more Oscar-worthy film than the mega-hit Avatar.

As a recap, the issues previously discussed in last weeks column were (1) costs vs. profits, (2) realism vs. fantasy, and (3) micro-story vs. epic adventure. Continuing along there are six more issues that address why District 9 deserves the Best Picture Oscar more than Avatar.

Portrayal of Physical Disabilities

Another area which is incendiary, but pivotal, is the significant contrast in how people with disabilities are portrayed in each film. In District 9, Wikus found himself turning into a prawn, which was a horrific disability for him. It made him an outcast, potential medical experiment for his own kind, and an oddity amongst the prawns. He was unwelcome everywhere he turned.

There is no place for a half-human, half-prawn. He was even more discriminated against than the prawns, as they are at least minimally tolerated.

In Avatar, while Jake saw himself as less than a man without the use of his legs and being confined to a wheelchair, he was accepted as a valued member of the Marines and the science unit in order to complete the avatar mission. He was treated with equality and welcomed as a useful member. He was not simply tossed aside or hunted down because of his disabilities.

While both Jake and Wikus rejected their disabled status and sought to be free from it, in the end, Wikus accepted his disability and learned to live with it. Jake, in turn, fled his own human body to escape his disability. This sent a distinctly different and prejudicial message about those suffering from physical disabilities.

District 9 showed the horror, denial and then eventual acceptance of Wikus adapting to his new disabled state. Despite not being happy to be converted into one of the prawns, Wikus made the best of his changed-state and modified his life to fit in and adapt - even thought he clearly wanted to be human again, for he still loved his wife. But in the end, he did not reject his own kind in order to fit in with the prawns.

But Avatar showed only Jakes disgust and revulsion for his disabled status. He did not accept his human limitations in the end, and hastily forsook being human to escape his disability and embrace a new life as one of the Navi. Thus, District 9 portrayed a better depiction of living with, not escaping from a disability.

Big Name Stars vs. No Name Actors

Striving to keep it real in District 9, Neill Blomkamp used virtually unknown actors. It was risky to cast an actor who had only one other small film role before entrusting him to carry a major feature film project. Yet it was a gamble that paid off in a big way.

Having an unknown face playing Wikus made it easier to believe that he was a real person stuck in a horrible real-life situation. It kept the viewer linked into the story.

Avatar, of course, took the direct opposite approach and cast several big name and recognizable stars in order to attract an audience. There was Sam Worthington (who had just come off his starring role in Terminator Salvation), Sigourney Weaver (a James Cameron favorite from Aliens), Zoe Saldana (made famous for her role as Uhura in Star Trek) and Michelle Rodriguez (best known from the television series Lost).

Every time a new scene started, there was a familiar face for the audience to exclaim at and admire. It did not help keep the audience grounded in the film and the reality that Avatar had created; instead, it promptly took the viewer out of that reality.

High Expectations vs. No Expectations

Also with Avatar, everyone saw it coming. It had been highly publicized since the day it had begun filming. For it was touted to be the next great film from the Oscar award-winning producer James Cameron. It was relying on Camerons hefty reputation to carry it through in order to become a box office success.

So, with the James Cameron legacy and promotional machine pushing it in a huge blaze of glory and high expectation, virtually everyone had heard of the film well before its release and it was simply a countdown to the Christmas extravaganza at the box office.

District 9, on the other hand, was a film that no one saw coming. Despite coming from Peter Jackson, another Oscar award-winning producer, the name recognition and publicity push just was not there. Instead, the studio elected to focus on a novel grassroots publicity campaign. It screened select scenes before a rabid group of sci-fi fans at San Diego Comic-Con one year before its release and let them, along with some strategically and thought-provoking ads, drive the momentum to introduce District 9 to its audience before its release.

Because those mysterious billboard ads and bus bench ads simply read Humans Only, no one knew what the film was about. It was simply out of curiosity moviegoers initially checked out the film and word then quickly spread. But even with the tagline a Peter Jackson film, it was not a hyped film. It was only because of the grassroots campaign that, once lit, spread like wildfire.

Waiting for Technology vs. Waiting on Nothing

Unlike the egomaniacal JamesCameron who boasts how he wrote the script within two weeks more than 10 years ago and had to wait for the technology to develop before he could actually make his dream project; prior to making District 9, it was but a tiny story that Neill Blomkamp had previously made a short-film called Alive in Joburg. It was not until the financing fell through for the feature film Halo that he had been working on with Peter Jackson that Neill and Peter decided to tackle the small story and bring it to a wider audience.

There was no waiting about it. They just saw the opportunity and went for it. It did not even deter them that the special effects company they wanted to use was already tied-up working on Avatar.

No, once Peter Jackson and Neil Blomkamp decide to move forward, they moved with lightening speed. They did not wait over a decade for technology to develop to do the film of their dreams. They took a leap of faith and made a fantastic film -- one that is now competing against the gargantum Avatar, that cost 10 times as much and took more than 10 years to make. District 9 is indeed the little film that launched itself with the speed many other film makers would envy.

Which had the more realistic love-story?

District 9 offered us an established loving relationship where Wikus would do anything to get back to his wife, and who still looked after her despite being separated by the harshest of circumstances.

Whereas, Avatar offered a young man seduced by the wonder of a new world and the amazing delights it had to offer. He did not fall in love with Neytiri initially, but only after he realized he wanted to become one of them. Thus, it was hard to distinguish whether he was more in love with the Navi-life than with her?

After all, Jake assimilated into her world and did not attempt to bring her into his. Was it more an act of love to willingly give up humanity itself and become one of her own kind to be with her?

Both films seemed to rely on the powerful bonds of love that compelled their protagonist to embrace extremes in order to prove their love for the woman of their dreams. Yet Wikuslove ultimately felt more realistic as he would do anything for the woman he loved, even if it meant being separated from her and watching from afar.

Jakes love of Neytiri felt dependent on his love the world she could provide for him. He did not just want her, he wanted to be one of them and to live amongst them. His love felt more conditional as a result. Thus, Wikusunconditional love is much more powerful, real and touching.

Apartheid vs. Corporate Greed

Both Avatar and District 9 had strong socio-political messages and they were no-holds barred about it. District 9 was a thinly-veiled mirror of apartheid in South Africa; and Avatar was a not-so-subtle allegory of the destruction of the Amazon and the American Indians all due to corporate greed. The separate but equal treatment of the prawns in District 9 was repulsive and despicable, yet relatable given how vastly different they appeared to us - at least initially.

For we later saw, Wikus and Christopher had learned to rely on and trust each other, and in the process, they also seemed to better appreciate one another.

In Avatar, it was just the opposite: the Navi had no desire to be granted equal status among the humans, they simply wanted to get rid of the humans. The Navi were just as discriminatory about excluding humans as the humans were about keeping them separate. It was even more telling that Jake chose to give up his human body in order to live amongst the Navi. He did not want to live amongst them as a human. He only wanted to live with them as one of their own kind.

So while neither film really addressed the separate but equal treatment as being wholly wrong, they did succinctly address the wrongness of corporate greed. In District 9, it was MNUs desire to get a hold of the alien weaponry and to be able to use it that compelled them to work with the government in the relocation efforts of the prawns.

And in Avatar, it was the greed of RDA in securing the largest deposit of unobtainium that motivated them to use mercenaries and military personnel in the forced-relocation of the Navi. Corporate greed was prevalent in both films and depicted with an equal measure of callous disregard for the well-being of the alien race to be forcibly-relocated.

In District 9, there was no resolution to this issue, other than Wikus was able to escape their evil clutches and hopefully evade capture until Christopher Johnson returned to cure him. In Avatar, Jake mounted a successful war to eradicate RDA and its military presence from Pandora.

But in the end, one was left with the feeling that corporate greed would ultimately strike back at a later date - perhaps in a sequel film. Greed is not something that can be cured, and to this day apartheid still is a cancer we cannot eradicate from our own world, so it is hard to imagine it being cured in a sci-fi realm either.

Conclusion

In sum, both films were equally weighted in their success in generating significant box office revenue and in addressing weighty socio-political issues. But the real differences lie in the categories of: realism, scope of story, portrayal of disabilities, casting of recognizable actors, expectations, timeliness in bringing their stories, and their central love stories.

In seven of the nine categories, District 9 was simply the superior film. Accordingly, with so much in its favor, it clearly deserves to win the Oscar. Avatar is but a pale shadow in comparison. When looking for a Best Picture, the Academy surely will weigh such considerations and determine that District 9 is the worthier film and crown it as such.

A controversial opinion, but a sound one. District 9 simply deserves to be the Best Picture winner of the 2010 Oscar.