Tree of Souls - An Avatar Community Forum - View Single Post - my hope(s) for the franchise's future
View Single Post
  #8  
Old 08-23-2014, 07:21 PM
avtrfan avtrfan is offline
Avatar Driver
avtrfan has no status.
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 23
Default

re-reading my previous post, i realised i didn't express myself as well as i should have. what i meant to say was that the rewrite was done in such a haste (and apparently without review) that important details were lost during the process. the best examples i can quickly come up with are:

* in "project 880", "unobtainium" is said to be a joke name that stuck. that little detail was lost in the rewrite and the mineral's name, as used in the film, was one of the earliest criticism coming from the reviewers.

* the original text lays out the reasoning behind the idea of building a school for the na'vi, again something that was lost in the final film: to train the indigenous population to do the mining for the humans. like it was said in '880, "welcome to imperialism 101" (quoted from memory). in the final film, the existence of the school, its purpose was not fully fleshed out or explained in a satisfactory fashion, that i recall.

* mo'at's line in "880" when grace dies, is (again, from memory) "the great mother could not save her body". had this line been used instead of the one heard in the film, or actually had jc more or less essentially used the scene from "880", then we would have a good explanation for grace's return in the sequels.

and that's not counting the bits that didn't quite work right or even contradicted others, that crept into the final script.

yes, those are all "just details". but it's details that can make or break an otherwise perfectly good novel or film.

to repeat myself, not all of the rewrite was for the worse. some of it was for the better. it's just that too many good points/ideas that helped "project 880" hold together ended up being lost, something that could have been avoided had a review/feedback loop process been used during the rewrite. stanley kubrick and arthur c. clarke had something similar when 2001: a space odyssey was being written, kubrick playing the part of the nitpicker, finding flaws in inconsistencies in what clark wrote.

hopefully, jd enlisted a brigade of nitpickers to help in creating a script that is as perfect as can be.

now, it also helps if you have a good starting point for your script -- sometimes, you just can't dig yourself out of a hole. i do have ideas about that (who doesn't?), but that should part of another post or thread.
Reply With Quote