Cannes Film Festival 2013

‘Avatar’ director James Cameron backs a space venture to expand Earth’s resources

Is life imitating art?

<p>James Cameron in London following the release of "Titanic 3D"

James Cameron in London following the release of "Titanic 3D"

Credit: AP Photo/Joel Ryan

Are you a fan of In Contention?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

James Cameron is not a man who believes in boundaries. He’s been pushing the edges of technology as well as his own creative limits (and those of his crew) for years. He recently returned from a journey to the Mariana Trench (a 7-mile-deep canyon and the ocean's deepest known point). He was in fact the first person in history to make it a solo trip.

Equally impressive is the fact that he helped to design the vessel that made the heretofore impossible journey.

I happen to love Cameron. For me, he is the best possible version of bonkers and gives "no limits" a very good name. Many of us spend our lives imagining the extraordinary. Cameron spends his in relentless pursuit of it. Amidst his other achievements, he is, of course, responsible for the top grossing film of all time: “Avatar.”

“Avatar” advanced the use of both 3D and performance capture technology. The film legitimately altered the way the industry thinks about and conducts its business. Among other things, respected auteur Martin Scorsese was inspired to delve into the world of 3D with last year’s Academy Award-nominated “Hugo” (which for some, at least partially, legitimized the medium), as did filmmakers as varied as Steven Spielberg, Wim Wenders and Francis Ford Coppola.

As in all things, however, there have been some short cut attempts to piggyback on the success of the film, including a lot of less-than-stellar 3D conversions and crass uses of the technology, of which Cameron has been quite publicly dismissive.

Want More...

Avatar?
  • Avatar_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.

In addition to the spectacular technological display that it represents,“Avatar” served as a warning of the dangers that overpopulation and an unsustainable strain on the Earth’s natural resources present. It also functioned as an allegorical chastisement for the practice of colonizing and razing the native materials of an indigenous populace.

It is somewhat ironic, given the film’s larger themes, that The Guardian reports that Cameron is now one of the lead backers for a private company that describe itself as a "commercial space pioneer" whose intent is to extract materials of non-Earth resources. Planetary Resources (the company in question) named Cameron and several other prominent entrepreneurs as members of its "investor and adviser group" in a recent press release. Cameron seems like a prime candidate to be a part of this venture, we imagine at least partially in the hopes of being a part of one of the first commercial trips into space.

It is no surprise that a man as interested in exploration, engineering and technology as Cameron would financially support this project. And though privatized space exploration makes a good deal of sense (given NASA’s seemingly stalled advance), there are several elements of this announcement that give me pause.

First, the irrational part of my brain feels like this is somewhat tempting fate. Did “Avatar” not warn us against plundering other planets for what we do not have ourselves? This is to say nothing of what “Aliens” presents of privatized space travel. I would no more like to see Cameron aid the corporatization of space than I would enjoy watching him contribute to the construction of artificial life. My response to the latter would in all likelihood be: “STOP BUILDING SKYNET.” That said, the more logical part of my brain also sees a few potential pitfalls in the endeavor.

I fear that, given even the potential of an escape into other worlds, we will fail to truly address the issues we face in terms of sustainability. We already do so little in that regard. Now, in all likelihood there will be no indigenous life on the “Goldilocks” planets this mission will seek. But “Avatar” presents a vision of a world as a complex organism in its own right, one with agency and a right to thrive. So are we to be nothing more than parasites, traveling from host to host until we drain the one we occupy of its vitality and then move onto the next?

Is that a hyperbolic response? Absolutely. As an avid science fiction watcher I may have some level of innate trigger paranoia around particular advances. On a more fundamental level, however, I just cannot help but believe that we have far too dangerous a gap between our ethical advancement and that of our technology. And there is a large part of me that feels we need to focus on the former and slow the latter if we are to truly thrive as a species long term.

Having said that, I would not say no to a trip into outer space.

For year-round entertainment news and commentary follow @JRothC on Twitter.

Sign up for Instant Alerts from In Contention!

Roth-cornet-sm
Roth Cornet
Contributor
Trending Now on HitFix Boards
Topic Started By Latest Post Replies
sandylewis90
2 months ago
1
sandylewis90
3 months ago
1
Discuss Movies General on HitFix Message Boards »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    Daniel

    Oh man, there are so many things wrong with the reasoning behind your fears I don't even know where to begin! Quite aside from the fact that practical solutions for effectively accessing and transporting extraterrestrial ressources aren't even in sight right now, I mean.

    I'll restrict myself to commenting only on that ridiculous idea of our ethical developement not matching our technological one. The very formulation seems to imply humanity as a whole is supposed to somehow, someday make an evolutionary leap to a level of higher consciousness, or something, where we will be able to use nuclear technology or similar stuff without ever becoming a threat to others or ourselves because we'll be so ethically advanced. That will never happen! Ethics is a solely individual faculty and humans do not need some souped-up 'ethics gene' to behave ethically. It takes a conscious, life-long effort, ideally starting with the education of the young already, to cultivate a truly ethical mindset and it's a constant process of re-evaluation and re-affirmation of your ethical values in every single one of your decisions. Ethics isn't something you achieve and then have for ever after with almost no aditional effort needed, like a piece of technology. Dudn't work that way, nor will it ever.

    April 21, 2012 at 6:45AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Edward L. Daniel, I agree with what you say about ethics, but what I take from Roth's article is that we may want to spend a little bit more effort on trying to slow the damage we are doing to this planet through the misuse of its own resources before we start looking to drain other worlds of theirs.

      It's interesting to think of James Cameron being involved in this. He's so often a figure of fun in film discourse, but he does seem to be a true envelope-pusher in terms of seeking out new possibilities of technology.

      And on a lighter note, Roth, I too wouldn't say no to a trip into outer space!

      April 21, 2012 at 1:39PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Roth Cornet A) I'm clearly joking about the Skynet paranoia. B)I'm aware that these are loooooooong term goals. C) I don't think we will necessarily make an evolutionary leap forward in consciousness (though that would be nice)but outside of private schools are ethics even a part of the curriculum? Not typically. That's a fairly simple shift in focus we could collectively make -- to decide that ethical study has the same value as that of science, math or literature. In my mind it absolutely does. It is something that is developed from an early age -- my issue is that we as a culture make very little effort to develop it. We do make an effort to develop other skill sets. We invest money and time (in this case a great deal of both) in developing technology. Let's look at what at what one of the world's most well know theoretical physicist's had to say about that:

      "When you see something that is technically sweet, you go ahead and do it and you argue about what to do about it only after you have had your technical success. That is the way it was with the atomic bomb."

      and

      "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."
      J. Robert Oppenheimer


      Finally neither one of us is qualified what ethics "solely" consists of.

      Thanks.

      April 21, 2012 at 5:10PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Roth Cornet Edward -- Absolutely! And for the most part this sounds like an interesting project to me. I am really kidding about the "skynet paranoia" but perhaps that didn't come through. But I do with we'd put some more focus on thinking before we act as a culture. And learning to do that takes effot even on an individual level. Many thanks!
      Roth

      April 21, 2012 at 5:12PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Selim Rana Shelly

    Thanks Roth for your article 'Avator' directior James Camron

    April 21, 2012 at 12:43PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on In Contention

2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS

oscarside.jpg

Best Picture

Best Director

Best Actor

Best Actress

Best Supporting Actor

Best Supporting Actress

Best Adapted Screenplay

Best Original Screenplay

Best Cinematography

Best Costume Design

Best Film Editing

Best Makeup And Hairstyling

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Production Design

Best Sound Editing

Best Sound Mixing

Best Visual Effects

Best Animated Feature Film

Best Documentary Feature

Best Foreign Language Film

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook