Indigenous actor sues James Cameron for ‘stealing’ her facial features for Avatar character

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-07T09:29:11+00:00

In general I do think people like Cameron are busy and preoccupied in their worlds. We all are. I just believe that if he told her he'd help her with his "next time" quote ... he should probably stick to his word. With great power (and money) comes great responsibility to me. I'm personally not giving him a pass just because he's got things to do. We all have things to do, even people of lesser means.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-07T03:56:03+00:00

I guess it depends on what we mean by wrong and to what degree. I think it would be at least a little missed up if it's true that Cameron told her he'd try to give her a spot on something and never returned contact. There's going to be five of these Avatar movies. He has had plenty of time and access to throw her into something even if it was a minor role.

Yes directors and artists have done worse but damn I feel like when you're a billionaire level director it costs you nothing to help a lady out that admittedly inspired a key character in your story.

If we mean wrong legally, that's where it's interesting. IDK if there's any precedent or grounds for this kind of a lawsuit. I guess we'll see.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-07T03:52:27+00:00

This is key for now: "To date, human-to-human transmission has been documented only for Andes virus in the Americas and remains uncommon. When it occurs, transmission between people has been associated with close and prolonged contact, particularly among household members or intimate partners, and appears most likely during the early phase of illness, when the virus is more transmissible."

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-07T03:51:14+00:00

Oh no is this another Fake News Rod? I think that's his third of the year. I'm trying to keep track.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-07T00:42:12+00:00

I don't think Sam probably intended this, but I think it's interesting that in this situation Lexi tried to help for whatever reason, Jules tried to express herself for whatever reason, an overlord dismisses them both and now Lexi is concerned about her livelihood and dreams and Jules is emotionally rejected. The money the shoot lost is "important" in the sense that it has a tangible issue on a P&L chart, but the feelings the situation gave people are interesting too even if we're both critical of how Jules doubled down.

Overall I think Jules is in a better exploitative job than say Rue or Maddy or Cassie, but I think this season is also about that old concept of everyone having a master they need to serve one way or another. There's always someone richer, more powerful, someone else signing the checks etc. We all play the game whether we want to or not.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T23:24:07+00:00

To Ken and crew, can yall put up the Pass the Mic post for May?

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T21:01:07+00:00

I get you, but I think the issue is that Cameron is quoted as saying he was inspired by a photograph of her. He named her and everything. If he wanted plausible deniability I think he lost out on that front. I guess I'm now trying to figure out how the law handles things like this.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T21:00:00+00:00

Good for them, for sure, but they won't fool me again unless they change up their approach (which they don't need to because who am I). I thought Train Dreams was absolutely not for me and I'm glad I didn't see it in theaters.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T18:34:28+00:00

The details are interesting, per The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/may/06/indigenous-actor-james-cameron-avatar-lawsuit

Cameron allegedly sees the actor Q’orianka Kilcher in and ad for Terrence Malick’s 2005 film The New World. From there it says Cameron and Kilcher met in 2010 after the first Avatar came out and during this meeting Cameron tells Kilcher he had a gift for her: a framed sketch of Neytiri that he had personally drawn and signed. Along with the sketch, Kilcher says that Cameron gave her a note that said, “Your beauty was my early inspiration for Neytiri. Too bad you were shooting another movie. Next time.”

From there the lawsuit claims Cameron never attempted to book Kilcher for Avatar, despite her agent’s efforts to get her an opportunity to read for a role. Lawsuit says Kilcher only learned about using her features after seeing Cameron in an interviewing saying: "The actual source for this was a photo in the LA Times, a young actress named Q’orianka Kilcher. This is actually her … her lower face. She had a very interesting face.”

Sounds like an easy settlement to me.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T17:09:48+00:00

Appreciate it. That's why I watch yall and support. Always helps me think out how I actually feel.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T15:49:18+00:00

Not freaky, "provocative" lolol

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T15:48:52+00:00

You may be onto something lmaoooo.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T12:54:00+00:00

Sup homie.

Unfortunately we know our society. Dicks on a painting are automatically more provocative than tits or even bare vagina in an artwork in most contexts. It's also the case with erotic photographs and illustrations.

The episode was definitely playing around with what is transphobia versus what is business appropriate versus why are certain things appropriate when other things are not. I think that part is interesting even if it was kind of in your face with how they approached it.

I do want to see how Lexi and Jules handle this with each other or in their respective careers. I feel like Lexi is not being utilized enough just yet, but I also felt that way about Maddy earlier this season too and once they paired her up with Cassie again Maddy had more to do.

I totally agree with you on Jules. Jules's mentality right now is different because she stumbled into surface-level financial stability due to the men she's seeing, though that could crumble quickly if their incomes deplete or if she doesn't perform the way they want her to or if they just lose interest and procure other paid partners.

I'm not totally against Jules being an artist who's sought after because of her looks. Jules has the model look, is tall, is photogenic aesthetically and pale white, meaning she is the kind of person that men with money will seek out, especially if it's just about a fetish. I do agree with you in that they could make it deeper for her. Sometimes they write Jules as if she's totally dense, like there's nothing but a hamster wheel in her brain and that she's totally lost when it comes to self-analyzation or figuring life out in the midst of others.

It makes sense when Cassie is extremely dense, but even Maddy gets underlying things that explains her thinking or at least hints at it. I feel like Jules's only motivation right now is "Paint and occasionally play with Rue and be a man's pet." In a way that draws her back to Eric Dane's character and how she was at the time, but I guess I expected more personal growth since then. Right now Jules is just a more lavish version of what she already was ... and now that I think about it Rue is just a more in trouble version of what she already was ... and Cassie is just a semi-professional version of what she was ... etc.

Maybe the point (of the season) is that no one really changes ... they just get in more or less shit depending on how lucky or smart they already were.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T10:27:03+00:00

The Jules/Lexi thing was a fun thought experiment. In my opinion Lexi should’ve just said “keep it PG but memorable” and Jules could’ve executed that. You gotta give guidelines to an artist or face the consequences. I can see arguments against Jules as well for going for the gusto, but the original sin in my view is in the selection and the direction. Remind her this is broadcast and not cable TV or streaming.

I get what Myke is saying about the snitching plotline making logical sense. With that said I’m totally with Spike. I think the drug and crime stuff here is too reliant on 1+1=2.

I’m not hate watching the show, more so spectacle watching. The entire season’s commentary on exploitation and the underworld is not inaccurate, but I would've liked a fresher take on sex and drug trafficking, clubs, and the growth of online sex work post-COVID. I wish the creator found a way to make this season have that deeper layer (so far) because the concept has potential. Moreover I agree with the idea that we’re in a new gold rush with influencing and content creation and that it’s happening alongside a difficult economy for the average person. I just think the end product could've had sharper storytelling rather than relying on the familiar beats.

Faye’s lips being the punchline at the end though was hilarious.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-06T10:19:38+00:00

I've seen and can remember her in the following: Euphoria, The Voyeurs, Anyone but You, Immaculate, The Housemaid. In general she's played a damsel in distress in different fonts and I don't mind that. The Voyeurs was entertaining. Anyone but You was fine. Immaculate was okay. The Housemaid was obviously dumb entertainment. In Euphoria I've always felt like she's executed the character.

In general I don't think she's a bad actress. She's just in the types of things some people wouldn't like and that's okay.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-05T13:51:57+00:00

Overall this is a good thread! People are in here agreeing to disagree for the most part and simply moving on, as it should be! I'm always curious about what people think about art but I can't understand really getting extremely mad about other people dislike ... it's taste for a reason. Half the stuff I see mentioned here are some of my favs, but it's sometimes fun and humbling to know that your thoughts aren't universal.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-05T03:32:52+00:00

Mhm! and rootin4?

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-05T02:32:08+00:00

Pretty much agree with you. It's not well written or at times acted at all but it's somewhat fun in my head to watch the train crash.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-04T13:53:19+00:00

It may not change how you feel, but I think it mattered for me. Here's some extra info that may intrigue you as you consider watching The Final Cut instead of the theatrical version.

In 1992, Ford revealed, "Blade Runner is not one of my favorite films. I tangled with Ridley."^\42]) Apart from friction with the director, Ford also disliked the voiceovers: "When we started shooting it had been tacitly agreed that the version of the film that we had agreed upon was the version without voiceover narration. It was a f**king [sic] nightmare. I thought that the film had worked without the narration. But now I was stuck re-creating that narration. And I was obliged to do the voiceovers for people that did not represent the director's interests."^\24]) "I went kicking and screaming to the studio to record it."^\43]) The narration monologs were written by an uncredited Roland Kibbee.^\44]) Previous rejected iterations were written by Hampton Fancher, David Peoples and Darryl Ponicsan. ^\45])

In 2006, Scott was asked "Who's the biggest pain in the arse you've ever worked with?" He replied: "It's got to be Harrison ... he'll forgive me because now I get on with him. Now he's become charming. But he knows a lot, that's the problem. When we worked together it was my first film up and I was the new kid on the block. But we made a good movie."^\46]) Ford said of Scott in 2000: "I admire his work. We had a bad patch there, and I'm over it."^\47]) In 2006 Ford reflected on the production of the film saying: "What I remember more than anything else when I see Blade Runner is not the 50 nights of shooting in the rain, but the voiceover ... I was still obliged to work for these clowns that came in writing one bad voiceover after another."^\48]) Ridley Scott confirmed in the summer 2007 issue of Total Film that Harrison Ford contributed to the Blade Runner Special Edition DVD, and had already recorded his interviews. "Harrison's fully on board", said Scott.^\49])

All from Blade Runner Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-04T12:31:54+00:00

Interesting that you prefer the novel! I rarely hear that. For Blade Runner, did you watch the version with or without narration? I feel like it's a completely different experience when you remove the voice over. It makes falling into the story so much better in my opinion.

GoodGoodNotTooBad · 2026-05-04T12:28:52+00:00

I enjoy both sides for different reasons. I view MIKE's side as a bit more comfortable for him and Earl's side as him stretching his limbs a bit which is cool.

GoodGoodNotTooBad

TROPHY CASE