The Avatar Effect | Hacker News Reader

The Avatar Effect

online.wsj.com

72 pointsfiaz12 comments

For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nail_house

Quick summary: Back when they took their communism more seriously, the PRC abolished property rights, so it was common to get property for development by simply eminent-domaining the residents off the land, usually with a "fair" compensation. Property rights are sort of entering the scene now, and it's still controversial whether someone is allowed to benefit from a rise in their property value. This, obviously, makes for a certain amount of tension between developers building a strip mall over an old neighborhood, and the one family in a one-room shack in the middle of an ongoing construction site who refuses to sell.

There was a discussion here recently on the Chinese perspective of Avatar:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1039121

It also happened in "Up."

Houses in a small "village" I used to live in in china are being demolished... probably for factories. They aren't even compensating us because we can't "prove" ownership, since they didn't have "deeds" back when my parents lived there.

I'm not really complaining, since I don't live there, and don't want to live there (the houses were basically brick with cement), but it does have some sentimental value.

If you think this doesn't happen in America, please read up on the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Yards#Controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Develop_Don%27t_Destroy_Brookly...

The whole premise of Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn's argument is that the Government is taking from one private owner and giving to another. The argument is that eminent domain should only be used for the Government, not to benefit a for-profit company.

It's a little too late now, since Ratner has already bulldozed the neighborhood, effectively ruining it before the argument can be settled in courts.

It will be interesting to see if the "People's" government will try to limit viewings of the film; if not countrywide, then at least in certain areas. Wouldn't surprise me at all.

We suspect that neither Mr. Cameron nor 20th Century Fox (a sister company to this newspaper) had any idea of the effect their movie would have on the other side of the world.

While Cameron probably did not predict that exact scenario, I find it hard to believe that he did not see the parallels between the film he created and what's happening right now all over the world as first-world countries continue to exploit the third-world at the expense of those living in it.

In this situation it's only slightly different as the conflict is within the country itself. It's not surprising the film resonates strongly with those humans who find themselves in the same shoes as the Na'vi.

See: "The real Avatar story: indigenous people fight to save their forest homes from corporate exploitation"

http://news.mongabay.com/2009/1222-hance_avatar.html

I saw an advert on Lovefilm, basically McDonald's waffling on about promoting Avatar. McDonald's are the essence of evil capitalism, wrecking the environment and people's health, yet Cameron let them promote his film.

This implies that Cameron was in a position where could say no to them. Was he? Just because he had free rein to do as he wished with the actual film does not mean he had control over merchandising and tie-ins.

And why not? If you made a propaganda piece to point out the flaws in a certain sector of society, wouldn't it be deliciously ironic if you could get that sector to promote and pay for it?

and if you were part of that sector, wouldn't it be deliciously ironic to promote, pay for, and profit from the piece?

No. There's no part of being a successful businessman which means you can't care about the environment.

The ironing is delicious.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com