Can we all just agree that Avatar was never the most original concept and move on already? The latest claims to the "Avatar ripped this off" crown: Two relatively obscure comics that are enjoying renewed attention as a result.
Last week, Heavy.com pointed out the similarities between James Cameron's insanely successful special effects bonanza and Firekind, a short-lived series from the mid-1990s that ran in British comic 2000AD:
At one point Firekind's dreamy lead notes "the whole planet's wired into one massive circuitboard", a fair description of Avatar's neural net hoo-ha (although to my recollection nobody tentacle-penetrates anything in Firekind). Cameron previously settled out of court Harlan Ellison over elements of Terminator said to be "inspired" by Ellison's work, and is buddies with Judge Dredd screenwriter William Wisher Jr, so it's not even a tiny stretch to suggest he'd be familiar with 2000ad.
Well, there's "familiar with 2000AD" and then there's "remembering a strip that only lasted 13 weeks in 1993 that actually had an episode omitted midway through without anyone noticing," if you ask us, but we may be too realistic for this kind of speculation.
(That shouldn't be taken as a comment on the quality of Firekind, which we kind of loved at the time. But then, John Smith's intellectual, psychosexual SF always was one of our favorite things about 2000AD.)
Additionally, claims that Avatar is very close, visually, to 1980s comic Timespirits from late last year (Prompted, ironically enough, by our own suggestion that Roger Dean may have inspired the movie) getting renewed attention from comics site Bleeding Cool.
We're not saying that James Cameron didn't, necessarily, rip off these comics - although it's unlikely - or any number of other sources, but we're surprised by how many of these claims are being made. Is it because the movie is so unoriginal, or just so successful? And can everyone stop with the accusations before we start feeling sorry for James Cameron?