Cameron talks about AVATAR: says two sequels are possible, it's not anti-human, it's about aspiring to be better than we are

CAMERONThe film is definitely not anti-American. It’s not anti-human either. My perception of the film is that the N’avi represent that sort of aspirational part of ourselves that wants to be better, that wants to respect nature. And the humans in the movie represent the more venal versions of ourselves, the banality of evil that comes with corporate decisions that are made out of remove of the consequences.

SHOOT: Looking forward to more.

clipped from carpetbagger.blogs.nytimes.com In the New York Times article that John Anderson wrote on “Avatar,” you joked about doing a sequel based on the positive feelings you had about an early December screening. If you did make a sequel, where would you want to take this story? I’m not going to give out any story scoops now. I have a story mapped out that actually spans two films. Not in the sense that you’d do a film that ends in the middle, like the typical second-act trilogy problem, but I have enough story arc to cover two more films. And if we do make some money and I talk to Fox and they want to move ahead with a sequel, then I’ll sit down and write something. And you and I can talk again! When you wrote the film in 1995 and decided that technology wasn’t at a place where you could make it, what specifically did you feel like you couldn’t do at that time? The big issue was the scale of it.