That's a complete non-sequitur. And TCD has no clue what he's talking about.
koberulz
joined 2 years ago
Insecure much?
The Sprinkler Sprinkled (1896) is a remake of The Sprinkler Sprinkled (1895). It's not something that's been going on "almost as long as there have been movies", it's been going on exactly as long as there have been movies.
That Ruth is dead is explicitly stated in the movie.
"I felt like I was 130 years back in time watching what the Lakota Sioux might have been saying at a point when they were being pushed and they were being killed and they were being asked to displace and they were being given some form of compensation," he said. "This was a driving force for me in the writing of Avatar – I couldn't help but think that if they [the Lakota Sioux] had had a time-window and they could see the future… and they could see their kids committing suicide at the highest suicide rates in the nation… because they were hopeless and they were a dead-end society – which is what is happening now – they would have fought a lot harder."
Blaming the Native Americans for their own genocide is pretty fucked up.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/apr/18/avatar-james-cameron-brazil-dam
Avatar was made to lecture Native Americans about how their genocide was their own fault, but you seem to be using it as a positive comparison?
Is clicking on the link just opening the browser without going to any Web pages for anyone else?
How is this franchise still a thing? One entry did surprisingly well 20 years ago, and somehow continued flops haven't dissuaded anyone?
https://youtu.be/olqVGz6mOVE?si=wyVvuCOso24IZHso
TL;DR: Marcia Lucas didn't do anything editors don't do on every film ever, and the "saved in the edit" video is garbage.
It's legal to sell things.
You can't copyright facts. How would the world even function if you could?
Information is not zero-sum.