Talk:Avatar (2009 film)/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Profit vs attendance #s records

I think some more mention should be given to the fact that although records are being broken profit-wise, this does not neccessarily reflect on attendance, due to high ticket prices... see this article [ http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2636&p=.htm] by BOMojo's president Brandon Gray/ Attendance should really be more reflective of a film's popularity, no?--Sparetimefiller (talk) 10:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I think that's a fair observation to incorporate into the article. Betty Logan (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

That is already noted in the Performance analysis section. Flyer22 (talk) 19:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Performance analysis

I have removed the following reference. Ebert did not predict a flop.

Ebert, Roger (December 11, 2009). "Avatar". RogerEbert.com. Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved December 17, 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreas Carter (talk • contribs) 10:43, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Ebert did not predict a flop. But he did say Avatar had been the subject of "relentlessly dubious advance buzz, just as his Titanic was. Once again, he has silenced the doubters by simply delivering an extraordinary film."

That is why I included that part. Ebert briefly commented on how people thought both films would be a significant disappointment. I have not restored that Ebert source to that part of the Performance analysis section. But be careful next time when you remove a source, to make sure that source is not duplicated anywhere else. For example, that source was duplicated in the Critical reception section for Ebert's review of the film. Yes, we have a references rescue bot, but they do not always come right away; sometimes they take days. Flyer22 (talk) 19:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Archive this page

I don't believe MiszaBot is doing her job very well. She needs to be fired. I think this page needs to be archived somehow, it's so loooooooooooooong (currently at 287kB, technically). I feel for anyone on dial-up. —Mike Allen 07:43, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree. It would be nice if someone would do a manual archive on the current idle discussions. DrNegative (talk) 07:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a way to speed up MiszaBot for specific talk pages. Flyer22 (talk) 08:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I trimmed it down to make it a little more manageable. Trusilver 08:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

God bless you. —Mike Allen 22:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I sped up MiszaBot so it will archive discussions with no comments after 4 days instead of 7. I was also looking at Talk:Avatar (2009 film)/Archive index and wondering why Talk:Avatar (2009 film)/Archive 4 exists when archives 2 and 3 do not. Apparently it applied to another article, perhaps the 2004 film? I didn't look too closely at what was on the page. ...but what do you think? ~BFizz 07:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

4 days may be too long. The talk page is rapidly becoming crowded again. --haha169 (talk) 04:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

The wrong archive number was caused by an incorrect counter = 4 in [1]. It should have been counter = 1. I have moved the oldest archive from Talk:Avatar (2009 film)/Archive 4 to Talk:Avatar (2009 film)/Archive 0. It is an archive for this article which was created 4 March 2006 [2] but had another name some of the time. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

A "Part 2" ready for 2010?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/hollywood.hits.2010/index.html

So according to that, the sequel is either already in the bag or finishing production. Should this be mentioned in the article? We mention that there is enough material for a sequel, but CNN's Oliver Sterns seems to go beyond that. Scryer_360 (talk) 02:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, it was stated by Cameron in an interview towards the end of last year that he had thought to make a sequel should AVATAR do well, but he also stated he hadn't even written a script for it yet; granted memory serves me correctly, of course. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② ^talk 02:15, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I just checked the article and they seemed to have made an error and changed it. Apparently the journalist was confusing it with "Avatar: The Last Airbender" according to the comments. DrNegative (talk) 04:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

There is this tidbit from Entertainment Weekly, commenting on a sequel.[3] -FeralDruid (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

My prior comment moot, as there's already mention in the article's opening paragraphs about a sequel. -FeralDruid (talk) 20:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Sci-Fan, not Sci-Fi

Avatar is Science Fantasy, not true Science Fiction. Hence the Eywa stuff. I feel this should be made clear. 167.128.58.153 (talk) 19:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Eywa seems like science fiction more than fantasy, since Eywa is a life form that encompasses the whole moon, as I recall. I think Dr. Grace Augustine, a scientist in the movie, referred to this as a global neural network. Also, it seems similar to the Gaia hypothesis. --Bob K31416 (talk) 19:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

A little info on this can be found in the part that begins 2:50 into this video. --Bob K31416 (talk) 08:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Some more info. "The trees and all plant life of Pandora have formed electrochemical connections between the roots and effectively act as neurons, creating a planet-wide "brain" that has achieved sentience."[4] --Bob K31416 (talk) 09:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it wasn't supposed to be a life form, but something that stores memories and stuff. It was kind of confusing. But the Navi said it was a deity, and given that it sent all those animals to attack the soldiers (which they would never have done in so organized a fashion otherwise), I'm inclined to believe them. Nothing else could do this, especially at so early a stage in the evolution of most of the creatures on the planet. Such a high life form wouldn't have evolved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.55.103.59 (talk) 02:44, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Trust in the Force... >.> Seriously, how would anyone know that? I mean... do you know of any other planets we've been too or even seen that are anything like Pandora? This is all original research. We should stick to what the sources say. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 03:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

May the Source be with you. --Bob K31416 (talk) 06:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

But what I'm saying is that they never said it was a life form! They pretty much imply that Eywa really is a deity and the scientists were wrong, at any rate, so it's Sci-Fan! 207.55.103.59 (talk) 15:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Re "But what I'm saying..." - Well, you can say it, but so far you haven't given any evidence that can be checked. May the Source be with you. --Bob K31416 (talk) 15:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Exactly what Bob just said. At this point, the whole idea of it being Sci-fan is your opinion, and your opinion does not warrant it being included in the article. I suggest you read over WP:RS and then see if you can't find a source. Trusilver 16:30, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

And actually, if the whole planet was connected by a neural network, it wouldn't matter if it was sentient or not. "Eywa" may just be the network getting pissed at being blown up and sending animals to help defend it. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 00:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Bob, now you're being obnoxious and patronizing to an unsigned user. You have yet to give any sources of your own. In fact, I'm the one giving sources, and you guys the ones speculating! You guys are talking about what Eywa MIGHT be, and I'm talking about what they imply it is in the film! 207.55.103.59 (talk) 15:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I've given some evidence with sources. It's near the top of this section. Looking forward to seeing any links that you can provide that have any evidence. And BTW WP:NPA. Cheers, --Bob K31416 (talk) 16:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, as was I. Remember how Grace talks about the whole planet being connected...? There you go. Now, I say close this discussion until someone can find a reliable third-party source for it being science-fantasy. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Good Article Nomination

Why on Earth is there a rush for nomination ?

The article will fail for the very simple reason that it lacks stability. Stability is one the five tests that it must pass and it cannot.

Who nominated it ?

Who rushed it ?

Nominating for certain failure is the height of foolishness.

No Good Article Reviewer can possibly allow this article to pass.

6 months must be allowed to pass so that it can achieve stability and then it will pass. But not now it won't.

Whoever nominated it must withdraw the nomination before the article is deemed a failure. Tovojolo (talk) 23:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Read the "GA nomination?" category within the talk headers. Consensus was reached. DrNegative (talk) 23:44, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

And please would you define your definition of "stable"? According to WP:GA?, "it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute." Additionally, "Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold."

I don't see how the article violates any of that criteria presently. DrNegative (talk) 00:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Tovojolo, the article is stable. Articles with a much, much higher average edits per day have passed GA without a problem. I'm not going to bother listing all the reasons this is so, I've already stated them before and you probably would know that had you bothered to read the talk page. Trusilver 02:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Smoking/Race

I've seen criticism of Grace's smoking in the film. For example, see this from the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/business/04smoke.html Should this be mentioned? -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Another criticism is that the film perpetuates racial stereotypes, including the white man as savior of the savage tribe. See e.g., http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/6968020/Avatar-hit-by-claims-of-racism.html but this has been reported on widely. This is touched on in the critical reaction section, but just barely. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Avatar versus Titanic

Name	Titanic	Avatar
Release date:	December 19, 1997	December 10, 2009
4 weeks:	January 19, 1998	January 10, 2010
Domestic sales at 4 weeks	242.7 million	429 million
Foreign sales at 4 weeks	N/A	902.1 million
Totals at 4 weeks	*	1.31 billion**

*"Since opening Dec. 19, "Titanic" has not dropped from first place at the U.S. box office. Receipts, foreign and domestic, are now just over $700 million." Film `Titanic' Was Unsinkable After All The Washington Post Feb 11, 1998
** The media is reporting $1.34 billion.

My numbers can be double checked at boxofficemojo.com.

Anyone know where I can find the foreign box office sales for Titanic for its fourth week?

158.70.145.156 (talk) 16:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't matter, because it won't catch Titanic - its drop-offs are too large! Betty Logan (talk) 17:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

IP, what are you proposing? I have already covered the Avatar vs. Titanic information in the Performance analysis section. Are you saying that you want some other information about this included? If so, I would be against it. This article is already pretty long, and we do not need any more analysis information included about Avatar's box office performance.

Betty, you feel that Avatar will not catch Titanic domestically, worldwide, or both? Flyer22 (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I doubt it will catch Titanic either domestically or globally, at least not on a first run. If it continues at the current drop-off levels it will probably make about another $100-$150 million at the US box office and about twice that amount internationally. The real question is will it overtake The Dark Knight which it has a realistic chance of doing, meaning Cameron gets the double double? IMAX re-releases could see it sneak past Titanic eventually though, but not in ticket sales. Betty Logan (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Titanic, 7 weeks (December 19, 1997 to February 11, 1998*)= $700 million

Avatar, 4 weeks (December 10, 2009 to January 10, 2010) = 1.31 billion

Making double the money (1310 vs. 700) in almost half the time (4 vs 7) shows that Avatar has a very good chance of catching Titanic. I could be wrong, I was wrong about my prediction that Phantom Menace (#11 worldwide, half of what Titanic made) would upset Titanic. I didn't factor in that the movie would suck.

All time worldwide, Avatar is second only to Titanic.[5] All time domestic, Avatar is seventh, the Dark Knight is second.[6]

Betty, what do you mean the "first run"? I assume you mean movie theaters?

I am not stupid enough to post as an anon any material on a page as popular as this one, I would quickly be reverted by editors who watch this page. Anons are wise to post on talk pages first, and get approval from the long time editors watching the page first, before posting anything on a popular page such as this one. 158.70.145.156 (talk) 15:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

IP, please read Wikipedia:No original research. DrNegative (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

A first run is basically a film's initial release. Most films only have one release these days, but Disney still have re-releases for some of their films. Star wars had a re-release for its 20th anniversary that allowed it to steal the top spot back from ET. IMAX films often have re-releases - The Pola Express gets released every year. The problem for Avatar when comparing it to Titanic is not how much it has made, but how much more it can make. Titanic for its first couple of months didn't have any drop-offs; Avatar on the otherhand had no drop-off in its second weekend, a 10% drop-off in its third and a 25% drop off in its fourth. It's highly likely that either next week or the week after Avatar will be making less money on a weekly basis than Titanic at a comparitive stage. The same thing happened with The Dark Knight - it was way ahead of Titanic for the first four weeks but ended up well short of the final total. Avatar will probably get IMAX re-releases because lets face it, if you are a huge fan would you rather watch it on DVD or go to a IMAX showing? So if it is re-released every year and makes $10 million a pop it will eventually overtake Titanic, but I would be surprised if it surpasses it this year. Betty Logan (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Betty, I am not sure how you believe that Avatar will not surpass Titanic domestically or worldwide when even box office analysts are unsure of that. This guy says he has the numbers showing that Avatar will surpass Titanic. And this article from Hollywood-elsewhere.com is asking when Avatar will surpass Titanic. Both believe that Avatar will surpass Titanic sometime in February. I am not sure what to believe.

As for re-releases, Cameron is re-releasing Titanic in 3D. I take it this means in theaters? It would be interesting to see Avatar and Titanic surpassing each other back and forth. Flyer22 (talk) 23:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

• "Will it beat "Titanic," or not? Before inflation, probably. After? that's a tougher call. Despite its popularity, it's unlikely that "Avatar" will stay atop the box office for as long – 16 straight weeks – as "Titanic" did. sphere.com.[7]
• "Film traders predict that the Pandora fever will top the box office in the next few weeks." Avatar getting ready to be king of box office. galatta dot com. (wikipedia blacklist for some reason)
• "At the international box office, it certainly has the pace to overtake the boat story’s $1.242bn total, but can it pull in enough to push past Titanic’s $1.842bn combined all-time score? To do so it would need to gross a further $400m or so overseas to add to the $100m that is still possible from North America – after all, Fox top brass expect it to overtake The Dark Knight’s $533.3m to become the second biggest domestic release. So in conclusion – maybe" Guardian.[8]

Who knows? 158.70.145.156 (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

And this guy from Manolith.com, already included as a source in this article, has reasons why Avatar will not surpass Titanic. But what is your point, IP? The "will it or won't it?" matter about Avatar surpassing Titanic is already sufficiently covered in the Performance analysis section. Flyer22 (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

What is your point in covering it in your "Performance analysis" section? For the same reason I am covering here, because it is a notable subject covered by many reliable sources.

Based on your chilly response, lord knows I would never try to add any reliable sources to your "Performance analysis" section. 158.70.145.156 (talk) 15:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

It was not meant to be a chilly response. I was asking so that we can assess whether we left anything significant about this topic out of the Performance analysis section. You put this section here on this talk page without specifying your reason for doing so. Thus, my question of "What is your point?" being issued. If it is simply to discuss the matter, I have to point you to WP:FORUM; Wikipedia is not a forum. Yes, it is interesting to discuss this stuff. But discussing this stuff should be about bettering this article, what to add and what not to add (stuff like that). Flyer22 (talk) 21:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Human's aren't using gas masks but oxygen masks

This is my first ever post on a talk page. All of my other edits I have done while not logged in. Forgive or correct me if I do something I shouldn't. I just noticed an inconsitency in the article. The following line might need to be changed:

"Humans cannot survive exposure to Pandora's atmosphere for very long and must use gas masks."

TO

"Pandora's atmosphere lacks oxygen necessary for human life so oxygen masks are required." Or something to that effect.

The masks that they wear are not gas masks. They are simply oxygen masks. The guy in the beginning of the movie says 20 second to unconsciousness and dead after a short while longer (can't remember his exact words for the second part). I am versed in altitude physiology and I know that Hypoxia (medical) causes unconsciousness. I also know that your body has a "reserve" of oxygen that last 12-20 seconds and then it is gone. I would just like to propose that the "Gas Mask" gets changed to "Oxygen Mask" as it seems plain to me that the atmosphere doesn't contain toxic gases but DOES lack the oxygen. Think about the point where Jake Sully loses consciousness because the window is broken and he isn't wearing a mask. If it were a toxic gas, he would require treatment or might have died. With just hypoxia, he recovers as soon as oxygen is reintroduced into his body. Let me know what you think. Jcobb86 (talk) 14:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

The Activist Survival Guide has this on the Exopacks (p.12): "Pandora's atmosphere would be easily breathable—if it wasn't contaminated by a pungent mixture of carbon dioxide, xenon, and hydrogen sulfide. The additional gases cause a variety of unpleasant reactions, including choking and burning of mucous membranes, followed by unconsciousness within twenty seconds and death within four minutes." and further, "Nevertheless, the partial pressure of oxygen in the Pandoran atmosphere is similar to that of Earth's atmosphere. In order to breathe, it is only necessary to filter out the toxic components." Sebastian…talk 14:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice thanks for that. On a side note... I might pickup that book. Jcobb86 (talk) 14:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure that the issue is resolved here. I still believe that the gas mask statement is misleading. I propose we change this statement to say something closer to what the book tells us. Maybe even a direct quote. Assuming a direct quote is not something we want to use, it would be more accurate to say:

"Pandora's atmosphere is harmful to humans, exposure to the atmosphere causes unconsciousness in a matter of seconds and death in minutes. A lightweight breathing apparatus, called the Exopack, has been designed to filter out the high concentrations of carbon dioxide, xenon and hydrogen sulfide so that a human may breath the oxygen that is present."

Seems a little lengthy but it is more informative IMHO. Opinions? Jcobb86 (talk) 15:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Personally I really don't think it's necessary to bloat the already-long plot section with such a large discussion of a relatively minor point- the atmosphere is toxic, we get it. That being said, I suggest - "Pandora's atmosphere is toxic to humans, necessitating the use of breathing masks." Doniago (talk) 15:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I can agree with this. Thanks for putting it more succinctly. Can we get it changed or do we need more input? Jcobb86 (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done - I went ahead and made the change. It's only one sentence, so if anyone feels further discussion/modification is needed, it's not a big deal. You're welcome! :) Doniago (talk) 19:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Is Avatar an original story?

Is Avatar an original story or is it based on another work? Livingston 10:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

If you want contemporary stuff a bit like Fern Gully and Independence Day, only here the humans are the ones who have basically exhausted the resources of their own homeworld(s), and are now unpleasantly seeking amends. Koyae (talk) 11:23, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

It does seem very similar to Fallen Dragon by Peter F. Hamilton. Haven't seen any mention of that as an inspiration ... but it's hard to ignore. Kmmontandon (talk) 21:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It also has many similarities with Strugatsky brothers' works, especially Disquiet (which actually features planet Pandora that is very similar to the film's one).

It also seems to have a character called Nava in it.

I am sure that the plot is very similar to another I read about in the last few months, but I cannot remember what it was, or who wrote it. This is doing my head in, as I am sure that it is derived from it. Jason404 (talk) 06:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

There is a short story featuring similar exploring method. "Call me Joe".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_me_Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.166.124.54 (talk) 03:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

The movie premise does include almost _every_ Furry [Fandom] fiction Trope in existence... --203.14.156.193 (talk) 00:59, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

There's a a definite resemblance to "Call me Joe" - I noticed it as soon as I heard the plot of this film (I first encountered "Call me Joe" in the Starstream comicbook adaptation!). In Development, I have added mention of apparent connection to writings by Anne McCaffrey (dragon bonding) and Ursula Le Guin (tree-hugging aliens invaded by militaristic humans). Considering Cameron openly stated that his film is a compendium of all the science fiction he's read, maybe a separate section on infuences is called for? - 152.76.1.244 (talk) 05:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

The original items in the story were the tree, Eywa, the biolinks between creatures and the "unobtanium" that made the Hallelujah Mountains fly. As soon as the movie got 5 minutes in I thought of "Call me Joe." I kept expecting the avatars to strengthen and the people to die in their pods, but the equivalent was handled well through the tree. There are three other sci-fi stories I read before 1975 that this movie used for the plot, but I can't think of two of their names. The first was a story with a lush world that had a plant intelligence exactly like the one described by Sigourney Weaver with a female botanist-scientist who figured it out. There were these harmless and pretty floating creatures that the botanist called "phytos" that acted quite like the "seeds of the tree" that landed on the lead character in Avatar. The later part of that book is about the planet's total biosphere "waking up" and becoming conscious. The second story is less exact, but had a world I remember being named Pandora. And that world had incredibly dangerous animal life in it like the Pandora world in Avatar. The third story was even less exact, "The Integral Trees" and didn't have floating mountains, it had trees growing in space in a disk of dense gas surrounding a star. 69.230.116.219 (talk)SciFiKid —Preceding undated comment added 00:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC).

Not to mention everything from Pocahontas to Ferngully to Dances with Wolves...

Exactly what I thought: Dances with Wolves - IN SPACE! AND 3D! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.137.11.76 (talk) 13:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Fern Gully was the first thing I found myself thinking of when I watched the movie, same with my mum apparently. But as far as I know it wasn't directed based on anything, it just seems to include a lot of very common storylines. Danikat (talk) 17:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here... --89.27.15.232 (talk) 14:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

From the description given so far in the article it sounds a helluva lot like Ursula K. Le Guin's The Word for World is Forest. Metamagician3000 (talk) 11:13, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Also very similiar to Alan Dean Foster's book 'Midworld' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midworld —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.47.44 (talk) 00:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I also was struck by the many, many similarities to Foster's works (midworld, sentenced to prism, and mid-flinx). I could go on for paragraphs on the similarities. And these are *not* simple plot elements -- these are major components of the world. It has me thinking "rip-off". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeshoff (talk • contribs) 19:33, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I am suprised that nobody mentioned 1995 Blue Byte's software game 'Albion' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albion_(game) which is strikingly simillar not only with story but also with character desing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.179.14.78 (talk) 11:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Meh. Avatar appears familiar because many of the story elements are very simple ideas. Even the idea of humans controlling other lifeforms with their minds is as old as stories themselves. Witchcraft, psychic powers, and now science. Heck, Lovecraft wrote about aliens transferring their minds into alien bodies. Some people are always trying to take the wind out of other people's sails for no good reason. 92.9.60.71 (talk) 15:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Pandora, the lush jungle planet with incredible lifeforms and non-technological native population, is featured prominently in several of the Strugatsky brothers works, especially the late 1960's Snail on the Slope, specifically featuring a downed human helicopter pilot whose severed head was fastened on a native's body, immersed into their society - having his conscience in effect implanted into an alien body - who becomes a warrior on their behalf in the end. And, at the "base", there's an episod when a seed takes root in a human's body very rapidly. Coincidence? Not very likely.

There are many "coincidences" between this book & a film. For example, Forest in Stugatskys' book is reasonable being. Also book has such a fragment: "Hет, — сказал Алик, — просто они чувствуют друг друга на расстоя— нии. Фитотелепатия. Слыхали?" Translation: No - said Alex. But they (trees) sense each other from grate distance. Herbal telepathy. Have you heard about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.100.117.32 (talk) 22:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

How's that not a set of *many* *amazing* similarities? Name of planet, name of a character, type of civilization, type of life, the cituation of a human implanted into the native body and society, the natives able to control their incredibly vital environment by sheer thought, humans trying to exploit the natives (well that's one is a virtual given in any story but all the rest..... c'mon!). WillNess (talk) 20:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Unless you have a reliable source to back that claim, it can't be included in the article. The IP above you said it best, "Avatar appears familiar because many of the story elements are very simple ideas." Erik (talk) 20:25, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I am a reliable source. I've read the book. Also, the book itself is a reliable source. Do you want year of print and page number for every one of the facts I mention? WillNess (talk) 00:28, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

You are probably reliable, but how general are we allowed to get? Can we include similarities between Romeo and Juliet because they fell in love and they're from two warring groups, any romance book with a love triangle, or The Hero with a Thousand Faces (what I first thought of for some reason)? I feel like this is our interpretation; perhaps accurate and knowledgeable interpretation, but our interpretation nonetheless. CM (talk) 07:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

No, you are not a reliable source. You are basically doing synthesis, which is original research and not appropriate for inclusion. Unless actual reliable sources make such comparisions, it doesn't belong in the article. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 07:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

What kind of reliable source you may looking for? Official confirmation from film creators? Of course they won't do that! Moreover they'll do their best to delete such kind of information from English version of article. Russian Wikipedia already include paragraph about that and some links to sources, but they are internet media. I may suggest another link to real newspaper [9]. Isn't it reliable enough? And, of course, anyone may read the book and find that similarity. It is unfair not to include such information to the article because Wikipedia should not support malicious or casual attempts to mislead people of fantasy origin. 217.71.225.58 (talk) 17:11, 14 January 2010 (UTC) I mean, doesn't resistance of including drawing of a parallel between Strugatsky's and Avatar's Pandora goes against principle of neutrality? 217.71.225.58 (talk) 17:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Is this the excerpt from your reference[10] that you are referring to?

"Еще дальше — и ближе к Кэмерону — пошли Стругацкие, заставив своего Кандида из «Улитки на склоне» не просто жениться на Наве, но и столкнуться с породившей ее вымирающей цивилизацией, и даже защищать эту цивилизацию от прогресса. Но такой остроты конфликта, как в «Аватаре», у Стругацких не было: все-таки биологическая, деревенская, лесная цивилизация мужиков подвергалась атаке не со стороны родного кандидовского института. Ее атаковала сила, одинаково враждебная и Лесу, и Кандиду."

"Кэмерон тырит у Стругацких щедро, используя не только изобретенную ими планету Пандору с ее ракопауками и тахоргами, но и название своих туземцев — Нави, недвусмысленно восходящее к упомянутой Наве (Б.Н. Стругацкий от претензий официально отказался). При этом он создает — и, к сожалению, никак не использует — ситуацию по-настоящему перспективную: вот есть Пандора с ее органической, полурастительной жизнью, которую регулирует, кормит и охраняет целая сеть мыслящих деревьев. Вот есть Земля образца 2154 года — думаю, именно 2154 терабайта потребуется для сиквела, — Земля высохшая, загубленная прогрессом, для жизни малопригодная."

If so, could you give here your translation into english of this passage? Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, this one, I'll try to translate... Just I'd try to start a little early: "Другие предлагают вспомнить «Покахонтас», к истории которой Кэмерон в самом деле демонстративно отсылается: любовь цивилизованного (либо инопланетного, либо иностранного до полной инопланетности) гостя к туземке — чрезвычайно выигрышный сюжет, и русскому человеку тут грех не вспомнить примеры поближе и поинтереснее, чем «Покахонтас»: эта схема объединяет столь непохожие сочинения, как «Олеся» Куприна, «Аэлита» А.Н. Толстого и «Сон в начале тумана» Рытхэу, полузабытый на Родине, но культовый в Европе, особенно в эпоху моды на этно. Олеся, Аэлита, Пыльмау — Аэлита, кстати, тоже синяя, — ни типологически, ни даже поведенчески ничем не отличаются от принцессы Нейтири. Еще дальше — и ближе к Кэмерону — пошли Стругацкие,..." and finish a little early too.

Others suggest to remember "Pocahontas". Cameron indeed demonstratively referred to the story of it: love of civilized (either extraterrestrial or so foreign up to full extraterrestriallity) visitor [grammatically referred by author as being male] to indigene [grammatically referred by author as being female] is extremely advantageous plot and it wouldn't be a bad thing for Russian to remember more close and more interesting examples than "Pocahontas". This scheme [i.e. "Avatar"] unite such dissimilar works like Kuprin's "Olesya", A.N. Tolstoy's "Aelita" and Rytkheu's "A Dream in Polar Fog", almost forgotten at the homeland but cult in Europe, especially at the epoch of vogue of ethno [not sure how to translate, but it means ethnic culture since Rytkheu is Chukchi]. Olesya, Aelita, Pylmau - Aelita, by the way, is blue too - neither typologically nor behaviorally does not differs from princess Neytiri. More further — and close to Cameron — went Strugatsky [it is ironically written by author of article that is it Strugatsky's books which are more close to Cameron's "Avatar" than other's books]. They not only forced their Candid to marry Nava but meet dying civilization that gave birth to her and even protect that civilization from progress. But there was not such acuteness of conflict in Strugatsky's work: biological, village, forest civilization of man still was attacked not from Candid's home institute. It was attacked by force similarly hostile both to Forest and to Candid.

Cameron steal from Strugatsky generously [Russian verb тырить written here have the same meaning like English steal but it does not sounds as direct indictment, people who use such verb to indicate process of "stealing" does not treat this "stealing" as extremely serious crime but show understanding of "pilferer's" behavior but including shade of meaning of contempt robber. Also тырить does not indicate robbery of large money or big damage, it means quite the contrary] using not only devised by them planet of Pandora with crayfishspiders and tahorgs in it, but name of his indigenes - Na'vi - unambiguously come from mentioned Nava (B. Strugatsky officially abandon a claim).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.71.225.58 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the translation. I don't see that much similarity between Strugarsky's work and Avatar, except possibly that both works got ideas from similar places. Other works mentioned, e.g. Pocahontas and Dances with Wolves, seem much more similar. Have you considered that Strugarsky may have gotten ideas from the same place that Cameron got ideas, e.g. Pocahontas? The avatar idea seems to be much closer to Call Me Joe that has already been mentioned, where someone controls an alien body remotely, compared to Strugarsky where a head is fastened onto another body (mentioned in a previous message), which is more like Frankenstein. The tall blue people came from a dream that Cameron's mother had, and Cameron put that into his first screenplay in the 1970's. See Themes and inspirations section. The name Na'vi being close to Nava in Strugarsky doesn't seem like much to speak of. Maybe Strugarsky and Cameron both got it from the native americans called Navajo. BTW, was Strugarsky's work published in english? --Bob K31416 (talk) 14:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Of course there is no much similarity especially in the plot of the story of Avatar and Strugatsky's books, but the idea of Planet of Pandora with wild jungle filled with wild dangerous animals many appears in many Strugatsky books of the series of Noon Universe, most of them where published in English. List is here.

The Pandora with forest with living moving trees in it first appears in Disquiet which is probably wasn't translated into English. Strugatskys write a "remake" of that book which was published as "Snail on the Slope" in English according to that link. The Forest in that book is much similar to Disquiet's one but there is no mention of Pandora in "Snail". (That is because or why "Snail" is not from Noon Universe series.) Strugatsky's Planet of Pandora looks like original idea, Frank Herbert's Planet of Pandora appeared many years after.

I do not tell that there is much similarity between Strugatsky's and Cameron's stories, just the jungle of Planet of Pandora. But there are really a lot of similarities between "Avatar" and other works, Strugatsky's is just one of them. So many references made me thinking that Avatar is combination of many ideas... 217.71.225.58 (talk) 14:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC) 217.71.225.58 (talk) 14:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Re " I do not tell that there is much similarity between Strugatsky's and Cameron's stories, just the jungle of Planet of Pandora." - Regarding the similarity of the jungle of Pandora and Strugarsky's jungle, could you present a published source that makes this claim? --Bob K31416 (talk) 14:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately the newspaper article I tried to translate is only published source I have. I mean I have this newspaper issue and I do not know if there other published sources, just large amount of internet pages.217.71.225.58 (talk) 14:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I too have come up with my own analysis of the film but I realize that I can't put it in the article because of WP:NOR. It is unfortunate, but that is the nature of this encyclopedia, which tries to report only what is in reliable sources, rather than the ideas of editors which may or may not be correct. So, although it may be unfortunate personally for the editor who comes up with an idea, and possibly unfortunate for the reader if the idea is correct, it is fortunate for the reader that the Wikipedia is more credible because of this policy. Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Does the Russian Wikipedia have a policy that is similar to WP:NOR? --Bob K31416 (talk) 18:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Avatar is another remake of Heart of Darkness User: nova9047 —Preceding undated comment added 21:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC).

Avatar is closely based on the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs and other authors of the pulp fiction era of literature, of course it should be mentioned. Neurolanis (talk) 05:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I had a post explaining the resemblance to an episode of "Avatar: The Last Aribender" entitled "The Swamp", though some person probably deleted it for some reason. Anyway, in this episode, the characters venture to a great swamp/forest that is similar to the flora of Pandora. At the center of this swamp is a giant tree, larger than all others, much like Hometree and the Tree of Souls in Cameron's Avatar. What strikes me as most odd is that in this swamp, every organism is 'connected' to one another just like the "global organism" on Pandora. The giant Hometree-like-tree in the center of this swamp is also the center for all of the connected organisms in the swamp. One character in this episode explains that the swamp can make death and time only an illusion. This is like the Na'vi's belief that when they die, they simply go back to Eywa. Also, this character is the defender of the swamp, like the Na'vi, who prevents it from outside destruction. Surprising similarities, no? Infoadder2010 (talk) 13:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

That is just original research. Feel free to post it on a blog! BOVINEBOY2008 :) 15:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Re "I had a post explaining the resemblance to an episode of "Avatar: The Last Aribender" entitled "The Swamp", though some person probably deleted it for some reason." - It was archived as is done routinely with older sections. At the top of this page there's info on archives. Regards, --Bob K31416 (talk) 22:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)