Why did it take 12 years for James Cameron to make Avatar?

slate.com

10 points·fiaz··5 comments

FTA: "Often the story of what happened in between films is grander, and far stranger, than what eventually got made."

Okay... is that really the end of the article? I'm disappointed with how flippant this sounds, but: I think this article is the joke, and that Wired article is the punchline.

(Note: I know there's a 'video slideshow' at the end, but I don't think it mentions Cameron...)

Apparently that's the whole article. I'm surprised, actually.

(Is it just me, or is the phrase "read a video slideshow" doubly oxymoronic? It's not reading, it's watching. It's not a slideshow, it's a video.)

This is not a video, it's a slideshow (insofar as it's a self-contained sequence of card-sized pages), each of whose slides is a video clip.

The link leads to a section with several pages. Each page is about a hiatus in a director's career and contains a video with a longish paragraph about the delay. Reading is involved and it is akin to a slideshow (with videos instead of images).

I think "view a video slideshow" is a bit better.

You should read the Wired article on James Cameron / Avatar, which goes into nice detail of how his idea for Avatar began, where there were delays, and a brief history of his other film career: http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/11/ff_avatar_cameron/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com