MOVIE "AVATAR" AND SPIRITUALITY
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
Four articles:
Forwarded message from A. C.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Avatar Leads The Pack In Web Site's Most Spiritual Movies
Religion News Service
U.S., January 22, 2010: Movies about aliens, air travel, cooking, and
the war in Iraq were all among the most "spiritually literate" films
of 2009, according to the Web site SpiritualityandPractice.com. Chief
among them is "Avatar," a movie where the Hindu concept of the same
name is loosely used.
Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat, the Web site's founders, say the 10
top spiritual movies all "raise our consciousness to a fuller
engagement with our world" by depicting characters searching for
meaning and applying moral values to daily life.
James Cameron's blockbuster "Avatar," which pits avaricious humans
against pantheistic aliens, was "the spiritual surprise of the year,"
said Mary Ann Brussat, for creating an alternate world where the
"interconnectedness of all beings" is celebrated, and the natural
habitat is revered. The nine other films on the list are available on
their website.
End of forwarded message from A. C.
* * *
Avatar's reversal of fortune
By Maxim Osipov
The Sydney Morning Herald
Monday, January 4, 2010
Avatar box office tops $1bn
James Cameron's 'Avatar' shoots past one billion dollars worldwide,
only the fifth movie to hit that mark.
[Watch video]
With the dazzling 3D-vortex of colours, actions and emotions, James
Cameron's Avatar seems to have given everyone something to rave
about.
But let's get it straight -- Avatar is a downright misnomer for this
latest new blockbuster.
No, not because, sadly for Hare Krishna moviegoers, the film's got
nothing to do with Hinduism except its Sanskrit name. And some Hindu
activists who habitually frisk all new releases for concealed
sacrileges also needn't worry -- there are none in Avatar, or at
least not more that in those little digital icons they hide
themselves behind on their own e-chats.
[Caption] The path taken by Sam Worthington's character in James
Cameron's Avatar reverses the meaning of the Sanskrit word.
It's because the movie reverses the very concept that the term
"avatar" is based on.
Leave aside the fact that Hindu theology reserves the use of
"avatar", which in Sanskrit literally means "descent", almost
exclusively for appearances of Vishnu on Earth. The key point here is
that an avatar always descends from a higher realm into the lower,
restores prosperity, wisdom, and happiness -- and moves on unchanged
after the mission is accomplished.
However, the "avatar" Jake Sully -- and we the viewers along with him
-- shortly after his descent into the world of Na'vis sees the
"higher" realm of earthlings rapidly grow pallid and repulsive in
comparison to the pristine world of supposed savages. The "civilised
humans" turn out as primitive, jaded and increasingly greedy,
cynical, and brutal -- traits only amplified by their machinery --
while the "monkey aliens" emerge as noble, kind, wise, sensitive, and
humane.
We, along with the "Avatara" hero, are now faced with an
uncomfortable yet irresistible choice between the two races and the
two worldviews. And invariably, along with him we cannot help but
lean toward the far more civilised insides within the long-tailed,
blue-skinned, and technologically infantile exterior.
So much for a descending "avatar". Jake soon admits to himself in his
videolog: "I realised that I had it backwards, I wasn't sure what was
the dream and what was real." Having regained through the avatar body
not just his legs, but his dignity, his freedom, and his brethren
whose love and trust he struggles to earn, the rescuer becomes the
rescued, the benefactor becomes the benefitted. The "avatar" becomes
. . well . . . a refugee among the aborigines so content inwardly
that they wouldn't trade their tree for whatever the savvy "sky
people" gods have to offer! Contrary to The Matrix's Neo, Jake plugs
into a supposedly illusory world to discover it to be much more
tangible, wholesome and true than his own -- and wants to stay in.
This makes us ask the question: Why? And what on Earth (or on
Pandora) do "culture", "civilisation", and "human" stand for?
Not succumbing to the stock trifle of sci-fi genre, James Cameron
makes this question the fourth dimension of his movie -- and answers
it most convincingly: It's the qualities of kindness, gratitude,
regard for the elderly, self-sacrifice, respect for all life and
ultimately humble dependence on a higher intelligence behind nature
that qualify one as cultured, civilised, and human.
The other alternative is summed up by Jake Sully: "This is how it's
done. When people are sitting on something that you want, you make
them your enemy so that you can drive them out." And "They have
already killed their mother". Here you have it, the savage -- give or
take his spaceship, touch-screen and a rifle.
And getting back to the Hindu theology, Bhagavad-gita (16.1-4) echoes
this distinction: "Fearlessness; cultivation of wisdom; charity;
self-control; austerity; simplicity; refrain from unnecessary
violence; truthfulness; freedom from hatred; renunciation;
tranquility; aversion to fault-finding; compassion for all living
entities; freedom from covetousness; gentleness; modesty; steady
determination; vigour; forgiveness; fortitude; cleanliness; and
freedom from envy and from the passion for honour -- these are
qualities befitting real civilised humans.
"Pride, arrogance, conceit, anger, harshness and ignorance are
qualities of barbarians."
In order to descend -- that is, to be an avatar -- one first ought to
be above. Unfortunately for our civilisation, epitomised by the human
conquistadors on Pandora, from the place where we are happily getting
ourselves into, we can only climb.
Maxim Osipov is a student of Sanskrit and Indian philosophy and a
follower of the Hare Krishna movement since 1991. Mukunda Goswami
contributed to this article.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/avatars-reversal-of-fortune-20100104-lpod.html
Comments:
19 comments
Lovely article Maxim, do us a favour and email it to Miranda
Devine would you? Last week, in a spectacularly Freudian failure, she
claimed that the hallmarks of capitalism are expansionist imperialism
fueled by the "qualities" you've listed above and that the right to
own property and sell at a time of your own choosing was some kind of
subversive "Leftie" ideology.
- Sean og O'Coinne - Dapto - January 5, 2010, 11:01AM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Yes, sci-fi flicks about other worlds abound with ficticious
mining corporations. And corruption is usually the enemy force
provided in the plot. Cameron's anti-imperialism thread is obvious.
But remember The Adventures of the Incredible Hulk? THe army was the
enemy to the Hulk and that emotional device proved popular in a
society that was free to question authority.
Ms Devine's assertion that Leftie ideology was evident was based
on the fact that the Church of Climatology is an alarmist left-wing
movement and Cameron champions this cause in the plot. He also quite
obviouslyderides the US forces no matter what anyone says. We can
only assume he does all this for dramatical purposes (It worked in
The Hulk). Yet it does lead us to ask questions about it's message.
The message is clear: Teach our kids that climate change is a
real problem as Gore said it was and that US forces are bad. That is
inescapable.
I still enjoyed the movie as I am 3D fan but Beowolf was better.
- edhan - Sydney - January 5, 2010, 2:47PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Fabulous entertainment. Don't know and don't care what Cameron's
motives are (providing art and getting paid for it???). No one is
really going to change their mind on the the problems of the world by
watching a film. You have to get off your arse, not sit on it, to do
that.
- Roger Fedyk - Melbourne - January 5, 2010, 3:08PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I agree with Sean. It was a nice article. Avatar conversations I
have heard generally talk about how much money it has made, or how
great the special effects are. Nice that someone illuminated the
movie's simple, yet poignant, message.
- walter - January 5, 2010, 3:19PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
It's my thinking that the title of the movie takes a more modern
definition of the word Avatar, which is: "A temporary manifestation
or aspect of a continuing entity" rather than the strict Hindu
definition. Obviously there's a lot in this movie you can relate to
in the real world, but in the case of the title Occam's Razor
applies.
- NJC - Melbourne - January 5, 2010, 3:31PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Welcome to the 21st century Maxim, where the term "avatar" is now
used to describe an electronic image that represents you in a digital
world. The movie obviously extended that modern definition to mean a
fake alien that represents a human in an alien world.
Language evolves and is defined by its actual usage, try and keep
up.
And for a laugh, check how close Avatar is to Pocahontas:
- Gerald - January 5, 2010, 3:36PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Yes, Gerald, let's tell someone off for not getting with the
program because they're referring to how a word's been used for a few
thousand years rather than for a mere decade. Read, little digiphile,
and you might learn something.
- Graham - January 5, 2010, 3:56PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Context, Graham: Cameron's Avatar is a 21st century movie using a
word for its 21st century meaning. Maxim is talking about an homonym
that has little to do with the movie author's chosen meaning, and
complains that they don't match. :-)
It's as if I used "The Godfather" as an excuse to talk about
bringing up children in the Christian faith (and how the movie
doesn't match this expectation), where obviously that movie is about
a mafia boss.
- Gerald - January 5, 2010, 4:57PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I'm afraid I must add my voice to the chorus - the word "avatar"
as employed in the film clearly has nothing to do with religion and
everything to do with the high technology concept of an
artificial/computerised representation of oneself. No doubt
liguistically this is related to the Hindu concept, but as a matter
of meaning it is today entirely divorced from it. Cameron plainly did
not intend any such religious subtext. That said, your article was
still an interesting read!
- Patrick Bateman - Adelaide - January 5, 2010, 5:27PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Those arguing here that the movie's concept doesn't have anything
to do with Hinduism and is a computer-based idea will be surprised to
read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_(2009_film)#Themes_and_inspirations
"In a 2007 interview with Time magazine, Cameron addressed the
meaning of the film's title, answering the question "What is an
avatar, anyway?" Cameron stated, "It's an incarnation of one of the
Hindu gods taking a flesh form." He said that "[i]n this film what
that means is that the human technology in the future is capable of
injecting a human's intelligence into a remotely located body, a
biological body". Cameron stated, "It's not an avatar in the sense of
just existing as ones and zeroes in cyberspace. It's actually a
physical body."
- Mark - NSW - January 5, 2010, 6:08PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Miranda is right. This film is definitely subversive. If Philip
Ruddock were still Minister for Injustice he would have banned it for
encouraging insurrection and being mean to mining companies and
military contractors.
- Alex - January 5, 2010, 5:55PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
So those accusing the author of, basically, ignorance of modern
contexts, word usages, and Cameron's intentions owe him (and Cameron)
an apology here.
Here is the Time Magazine link:
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1576622,00.html#ixzz0a69HUhNB
- Mark - NSW - January 5, 2010, 6:54PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark-
Cameron here seems to be giving both descriptions of 'avatar',
and as I read it he explains that in the film it's basically the
second description (modern, technological one) which is relevant, the
only difference being that the avatar is of flesh and blood rather
than ones and zeros. I certainly didn't see any direct references to
Hindu gods in the movie.
That said, there is a definite spritual theme to Avatar, but
again I'm not sure how much it has to do with Hinduism. Probably more
of garden of Eden/biblical fall from grace type deal.
- Stu - Melbourne - January 5, 2010, 8:19PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Also (to Alex) I wouldn't say that the movie is actually
subversive in any real way. Rather it's almost a totally of the
moment expression of the current political correctness. The basic
plot is quite boring and has been done countless times elsewhere- see
Fern Gully (The Last Rainforest), Dances with Wolves, even District 9
covers very similar territory.
Technically great, storywise, not so much.
- Stu - Melbourne - January 5, 2010, 8:33PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I for sure am sooooo glad that it wasn't another 'hey world,
watch the Middle Eastern Terrorists with their weapons of mass
destruction lose against the mighty USA 911 role reversal/Aliens from
outer space against the mighty USA/One man to kill them all
films...oh and flash boobs here and here and here...oops forgot the
obligatory sex scene so we still have your attention and you are
still watching this boring drivel we're making you pay for
and...kazaam...another set of boobs here, here and here and OMG not
another terrorist. It's ok hand me the hand grenade. We can't say
this word in reality coz we'll get done over for racial
discrimination so we'll sneak it in this movie and oh crap, we forgot
to have the leading lady raped/brutalized so she can become a one
woman combat unit dressed like a prostitute who can single handedly
take out the entire worlds SAS and Special Forces units if she so
desired..but she'd rather sleep with them (flash back to sex scene,
lol). And while we're at it, we'll rate it PG13+: Parental Guidance
Recommended.
I am still waiting for a rating of SATATM+: See A Therapist After
This Movie, lol
Hereth I cometh to spreadeth my lunacy to amuseth the internet
commenters for the day.
Now where were we? Oh yeah Avatar. Great film :)
- avatar - Qld - January 06, 2010, 1:34AM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I think the movie itself held some notable contradictions like
the blatant sponsorship slug by McDonalds which I got to experience
in 3-d. Ummmmm ... I know the movie was expensive to make and all,
but doesn't taking handouts from McDs dilute the attempted ethical
message of the film?
I found the movie worth seeing just for the entertainment value.
Yeah it tries to make a point, and sure, there may be people out
there it stimulated to think about cultural/environmental
extermination. Still, I think the merit of the film lies in the
visuals.
- Dashoshmi - Byron - January 06, 2010, 7:15AM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Stu-
Thanks for your reply.
From what I have learned about Hindu mythology, many of their
deities are depicted as tall, blue-complexioned, wearing triangular
marks on their foreheads, having matted black hair (sometimes in
braids), and riding various beasts. Their chief god Vishnu usually
flies on a gigantic bird called Garuda. Hindus also believe that
every living creature has the same soul as we do, and that violence
against and killing of even an animal or a tree without a solid
excuse and an apology afterwards is a grave sin. They also believe in
reincarnation and in the ability of their deceased forefathers to
stay around and help, if they are remembered and respected well. They
also call Nature "Mother". These are some analogies between Avatar
and Hinduism and counting. Mere coincidences? Hmmm....
- Mark - NSW - January 06, 2010, 2:57PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark- you've made some good connections which I hadn't thought
of, and a couple of which I weren't aware of. Thanks.
The film certainly is a mish mash of various cultural/spiritual
references. I do think Maxim makes a good point about the the avatar
as ascending rather than decending, though as the audience we already
knew or suspected that this was what was going to take place (as I
say, we've seen this movie in different iterations before). Perhaps
that is why I didn't really give the Hindu connection that much
thought. But it makes sense. Cameron is definitely making the point
that technological humanity (as a group/stereotype) regards itself as
superior (ascended) over the indigenous Nabi, while it is the
opposite which is actually true.
There's another interesting reversal in the film seen in the end
battle, if you compare to Cameron's previous film, Aliens. In Aliens,
the human in the exosuit is the hero (also a reversal on the popular
Hollywood notion of two men fighting it out in the last scene, here
it is two women). In Avatar the exosuited, technological human is the
villian, while the alien is now the hero. Working as it does as an
anti-technological film, this brings the message home rather well.
(though the medium itself works to betray the message)
- Stu - Melbourne - January 06, 2010, 4:21PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Stu-
Thank you for your observations. The point about the reversal of
the combat scene in Aliens is smart. I especially liked your last
point about the medium that betrays the anti-technological tenor of
the film, was excellent -- as is what Dashoshmi wrote above about the
movie's sponsorship by McDonalds.
- Mark - NSW - January 06, 2010, 5:58PM
Comments are now closed
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
End of forwarded article from:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/avatars-reversal-of-fortune-20100104-lpod.html
* * *
Hindus ask for a disclaimer with James Cameron's 'Avatar'
By ANI
November 9, 2009
Nevada (U.S.) - Hindus have urged James Cameron to attach a
disclaimer in the starting and end of his upcoming film 'Avatar'
explaining that it has no relationship with Hinduism or its concepts.
Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, in a statement in Nevada (USA) today, said
that "avatar" was one of the central themes of Hinduism and
insensitive handling of faith traditions sometimes resulted in
pillaging serious spiritual doctrines and revered symbols and hurting
the devotees.
Zed, who is president of Universal Society of Hinduism, explains that
"Avatar", a Sanskrit term, means descent or incarnation.
Hinduism is shaped by its traditional belief in the incarnation of
Vishnu (the Preserver in Hindu trinity) into ten forms to establish
dharma (divine law), which include Matsya, Kurma, Varaha, Narasimha,
Vamana, Parasurama, Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Kalki (believed to come at
the end of present Kaliyuga).
Hindus believe that without such intervention, the entire created
universe would have gone into decline. Many devotees also regard
their respective Gurus as incarnations of the Divine.
Budgeted around 230 million dollars, 'Avatar', an upcoming digital 3-
D science fiction feature film, is directed and written by Canada
born three Oscars winning James Francis Cameron, 55, of highest-
grossing and 11 Oscars carrying 'Titanic' fame.
In it, a band of humans, two centuries in the future, are pitted in a
heroic battle against a distant planet's indigenous population.
It is due to be released in France-Egypt-Belgium on December 16 and
USA on December 18 next. (ANI)
End of forwarded article from:
http://blog.taragana.com/e/2009/11/09/hindus-ask-for-a-disclaimer-with-james-camerons-avatar-58594/
* * *
Q&A with James Cameron
By Rebecca Winters Keegan
Time Magazine
Thursday, Janusary 11, 2007
[Caption] Oscar-winning director James Cameron, 2006.
Ethan Miller / Getty
In April, nearly 10 years after Titanic made its box-office splash,
director James Cameron starts filming his next feature, the sci-fi
film Avatar. He spoke to TIME's Rebecca Winters Keegan.
Time: You wouldn't think the guy with the highest-grossing film of
all time would take 10 years to get his next green light.
Cameron: It's always a miracle when a film gets made. We started
designing the creatures 18 months ago, creating the world, the
plants, the animals; we started working on the performance capture
technology. I couldn't make this when I wrote it, which was before
Titanic. It wasn't technically possible. At a certain point I said,
the technology may not be 100% mature, but it's time.
Time: Avatar will be in 3-D. Why did you choose that format?
Cameron: It's immersive. It wraps the movie around you. It's not
necessarily just for kids' films either. It works in a dramatic sense
because it gives you a heightened sense of reality. Whatever you're
watching has a kind of a turbo-charged level of audience involvement.
In a science fiction film like this one, you'll be able to inhabit
that world, not just watch it but be in it. I think people want that.
If people are going to get out of their homes and go to the cinema,
the cinema better show them something it hasn't in the past.
Time: Will audiences be able to watch this at a regular multiplex?
Cameron: Yes, but people will have to seek out the theaters that
have 3-D. Right now there are about 300 3-D theaters. By the time the
film's out [summer of 2008], there are projected to be more than
1,000.
Time: What is an avatar, anyway?
Cameron: It's an incarnation of one of the Hindu gods taking a flesh
form. In this film what that means is that the human technology in
the future is capable of injecting a human's intelligence into a
remotely located body, a biological body. It's not an avatar in the
sense of just existing as ones and zeroes in cyberspace. It's
actually a physical body. The lead character, Jake, who is played by
Sam Worthington, has his human existence and his avatar existence.
He'll be shown using live-action photography in 3-D and computer-
generated imagery.
Time: Are you happy to be returning to sci-fi?
Cameron: I am. Science fiction's very good at taking something
timely that maybe you can't look straight at. That's its true role,
making us think about the consequences of our actions now. Avatar is
an adventure about how we as humans deal with nature. I'll probably
get a reputation as a tree-hugging hippie.
Time: Do you feel pressure to duplicate Titanic's success?
Cameron: I've been off doing documentaries, and now I'm back to play
in the league I left years ago, so there's gonna be expectation --
can he still make a movie? I don't think I'll beat Titanic's record,
and I don't think anyone else will for a while. I'll be happy if this
film makes money relative to its budget.
Time: How did you cast your lead?
Cameron: In the age group I was looking for, early 20s, there
weren't any obvious guys. The character is a former Marine who's a
paraplegic and has just been kind of thrown away. The actor Sam is
one of these young Australian guys who's gonna be the next Mel Gibson
or Russell Crowe. They grow 'em different down there, you know? In
Gladiator, you understood why those guys stood behind Crowe. I needed
to find a guy in his 20s who had that quality. And it's not an easy
thing. It was about being able to stand up and lead men in battle. A
lot of these up-and-coming guys don't have that strength.
Time: Is this a political film?
Cameron: War and the consequences to the soldier is a theme in my
movies. Terminator has a scarred soldier character. We have to face
the consequences of setting our people off to do our bidding in a
foreign land. But it's not a major undercurrent of the story. I'm not
trying to make some anti-Bush statement.
Time: Did you vote for the Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger?
Cameron: I'm Canadian, so I can't vote here, but I did support him.
He's only a Republican in California. In Oklahoma, he'd be seen as a
pinko.
Time: Did you have fun playing yourself on Entourage?
Cameron: It's fun watching another director sweat.
Time: Do you still feel like King of the World?
Cameron: I've got five kids. I feel like King of the World in my
house.
Read more:
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1576622,00.html#ixzz0ecYpnk1t
End of forwarded article from:
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1576622,00.html
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
hari....@indero.com
to say. Recently he posted an article blasting the same movie from an
american christian right perspective. Now he has a change of mind?
Will the real jay stevens,aka dr. jai etc. stand up. Or is he just a
hypocrite?
I think he is having a real internal struggle to think if he wants to
convert again to his newly found love for his new source of inspiration
and to join those with whom he finds he has much in common .
hari....@indero.com
By Harmeet Shah Singh, CNN
London-based Survival International has drawn a parallel between the
Na'vi of "Avatar" and the Dongria Kondh tribe in the eastern Indian
state of Orissa, who it says are struggling to defend their sacred
mountain from being mined by British firm, Vedanta Resources.
The global human rights watchdog, Amnesty International, has also
lashed out at Vedanta over its plans at Orissa's Niyamgiri Hills.
"The proposed mine threatens the very existence of the Dongria Kondh,
an 8,000-strong indigenous community that has lived on the Niyamgiri
hills for centuries," Amnesty noted in its report.
In its condemnation of the firm's controversial project, Survival
International placed an advertisement in the Hollywood magazine
Variety, urging "Avatar" director James Cameron to help the Dongria
Kondhs.
"Like the Na'vi of 'Avatar', the Dongria Kondh(s) are also at risk,
as
their lands are set to be mined by Vedanta Resources who will stop at
nothing to achieve their aims," said Survival director Stephen Corry
in a statement. "The mine will destroy the forests on which the
Dongria Kondh(s) depend and wreck the lives of thousands of other
Kondh tribal people living in the area."
"'Avatar' is fantasy... and real," read the Survival advertisement.
"Like the Na'vi of 'Avatar,' the Dongria Kondh(s) are also at risk.