Jeg voksede op på en fast kost af science fiction. I gymnasiet, jeg tog en bus til skole en time hver vej, hver dag. Og jeg var altid optaget af en bog, en science fiction bog, hvilket bragte mig ind i andre verdener, og fornøjet, på en narrativ måde, denne umættelige form for nysgerrighed jeg havde.
I grew up on a steady diet of science fiction. In high school, I took a bus to school an hour each way every day. And I was always absorbed in a book, science fiction book, which took my mind to other worlds, and satisfied, in a narrative form, this insatiable sense of curiosity that I had.
Og I ved, den nysgerrighed viste sig også på den måde, at når jeg ikke var i skole var jeg ude i skoven, på vandreture og tog "prøver" -- frøer og slanger og biller og vand fra et vandhul -- og tog det med tilbage. Kiggede på det under et mikroskop. I ved, jeg var en rigtig videnskabs nørd. Men det handlede om at prøve at forstå verdenen, forstå grænserne for det mulige.
And you know, that curiosity also manifested itself in the fact that whenever I wasn't in school I was out in the woods, hiking and taking "samples" -- frogs and snakes and bugs and pond water -- and bringing it back, looking at it under the microscope. You know, I was a real science geek. But it was all about trying to understand the world, understand the limits of possibility.
Og min kærlighed for science fiction lod faktisk til at være spejlet i verden omkring mig, fordi det der skete - dette var i slutningen af 60'erne, vi tog til månen, vi udforskede dybhavet. Jacques Cousteau kom ind i vores stuer med hans utrolige udsendelser, der viste os dyr og steder og en vidunderlig verden, som vi aldrig rigtig kunne have forestillet os. Så, det gav genlyd med hele science fiction delen.
And my love of science fiction actually seemed mirrored in the world around me, because what was happening, this was in the late '60s, we were going to the moon, we were exploring the deep oceans. Jacques Cousteau was coming into our living rooms with his amazing specials that showed us animals and places and a wondrous world that we could never really have previously imagined. So, that seemed to resonate with the whole science fiction part of it.
Og jeg var en kunstner. Jeg kunne tegne. Jeg kunne male. Og jeg fandt ud af, at fordi der ikke var computerspil og denne mætning af CG film og al dette billedsprog i medie landskabet, blev jeg nød til at skabe billederne i mit hoved. Som I ved, det gjorde vi alle, som børn var vi nødt til at læse en bog, og gennem forfatterens beskrivelse, sætte noget på lærredet i vores hoved. Så, mit svar på dette var at male, at tegne fremmede væsener, fremmede verdener, robotter, rumskibe, al den slags. Jeg blev hele tiden irettesat i matematiktimerne for at lave kruseduller bag i bogen. Det var -- kreativiteten skulle ud på en eller anden måde.
And I was an artist. I could draw. I could paint. And I found that because there weren't video games and this saturation of CG movies and all of this imagery in the media landscape, I had to create these images in my head. You know, we all did, as kids having to read a book, and through the author's description, put something on the movie screen in our heads. And so, my response to this was to paint, to draw alien creatures, alien worlds, robots, spaceships, all that stuff. I was endlessly getting busted in math class doodling behind the textbook. That was -- the creativity had to find its outlet somehow.
Og der skete noget interessant: Jacques Cousteau udsendelserne gjorde mig utrolig begejstret for det faktum, at der var en fremmed verden lige her på jorden. Jeg vil nok ikke rejse til en fremmed verden i et rumskib en dag -- det virkede til at være temmelig utroligt. Men det var en verden jeg virkelig kunne besøge, lige her på Jorden, der var rig og eksotisk som alt der jeg havde forestillet mig ved at læse de bøger.
And an interesting thing happened: The Jacques Cousteau shows actually got me very excited about the fact that there was an alien world right here on Earth. I might not really go to an alien world on a spaceship someday -- that seemed pretty darn unlikely. But that was a world I could really go to, right here on Earth, that was as rich and exotic as anything that I had imagined from reading these books.
Så, jeg besluttede mig for at jeg ville blive scuba dykker, da jeg var 15 år. Og det eneste problem med det var at jeg boede i en lille by i Canada, 950 kilmoter fra det nærmeste ocean. Men det gjorde mig ikke modløs. Jeg plagede min far indtil han endelig fandt scuba undervisning i Buffalo, New York, lige på den anden side af grænsen fra hvor vi bor. Og jeg blev faktisk certificeret i en pool ved YMCA i den døde vinter i Buffalo, New York. Og jeg så ikke oceanet, et rigtigt ocean, før to år senere, hvor vi flyttede til Californien.
So, I decided I was going to become a scuba diver at the age of 15. And the only problem with that was that I lived in a little village in Canada, 600 miles from the nearest ocean. But I didn't let that daunt me. I pestered my father until he finally found a scuba class in Buffalo, New York, right across the border from where we live. And I actually got certified in a pool at a YMCA in the dead of winter in Buffalo, New York. And I didn't see the ocean, a real ocean, for another two years, until we moved to California.
Siden da, i den mellemliggende periode på 40 år, har jeg brugt cirka 3.000 timer under vandet, og 500 timer af de timer blev brugt i ubåde. Og jeg har lært at det dybhavs miljø, og selv de lavvandede oceaner, er så rige på utrolig liv der virkelig er udenfor vores fantasi. Naturens fantasi er så grænseløs sammelignet med vores egen tarvelige menneskelige fantasi. Jeg har stadig, den dag i dag, dyb respekt for det jeg ser, når jeg dykker. Og min kærligheds-affære med oceanet er løbende og lige så stærk som den nogensinde har været.
Since then, in the intervening 40 years, I've spent about 3,000 hours underwater, and 500 hours of that was in submersibles. And I've learned that that deep-ocean environment, and even the shallow oceans, are so rich with amazing life that really is beyond our imagination. Nature's imagination is so boundless compared to our own meager human imagination. I still, to this day, stand in absolute awe of what I see when I make these dives. And my love affair with the ocean is ongoing, and just as strong as it ever was.
Men da jeg valgte en karriere som voksen, var det at lave film. Og det virkede til at være den bedste måde at forlige denne trang jeg havde til at fortælle historier med min trang til at skabe billeder. Og jeg tegnede, som barn, tegneserier og så videre. Så, det at lave film var en måde til at sætte billeder og historier sammen, og det gav mening. Og selvfølgelig var de historier jeg valgte at fortælle science fiction historier: "Terminator", "Aliens" og "Dybet". Og med "Dybet" satte jeg min kærlighed for det at være under vandet og dykning sammen med det at skabe film. Så, I ved, sammensætning af to passioner.
But when I chose a career as an adult, it was filmmaking. And that seemed to be the best way to reconcile this urge I had to tell stories with my urges to create images. And I was, as a kid, constantly drawing comic books, and so on. So, filmmaking was the way to put pictures and stories together, and that made sense. And of course the stories that I chose to tell were science fiction stories: "Terminator," "Aliens" and "The Abyss." And with "The Abyss," I was putting together my love of underwater and diving with filmmaking. So, you know, merging the two passions.
Der kom noget interessant ud af "Dybet", hvilket var at løse et specifikt narrativt problem ved den film, hvilket var, at for skabe denne form for flydende vand skabning tog vi faktisk computer generet animation, CG, til os. Og dette resulterede i den første soft-surface karakter, CG animeret der nogensinde var i en film. Og selvom filmen ikke tjente nogen penge -- det løb knap nok rundt, burde jeg sige -- var jeg vidne til noget forbløffende, hvilket er at publikum, det globale publikum, var tryllebundet af denne åbenbare magi.
Something interesting came out of "The Abyss," which was that to solve a specific narrative problem on that film, which was to create this kind of liquid water creature, we actually embraced computer generated animation, CG. And this resulted in the first soft-surface character, CG animation that was ever in a movie. And even though the film didn't make any money -- barely broke even, I should say -- I witnessed something amazing, which is that the audience, the global audience, was mesmerized by this apparent magic.
I ved, det er Arthur Clarkes lov at enhver tilstrækkeligt avanceret teknologi er meget lig magi. De så noget magisk. Så det gjorde mig meget begejstret. Og jeg tænkte, "Wow, dette er noget der skal gribes i filmkunsten." Så, med "Terminator 2", hvilket var min næste film, tog vi det meget længere. Vi arbejde med ILM og skabte fyren af flydende metal i den film. Successen afhang af balancen om den effekt ville virke. Og det gjorde det, og vi skabte magi igen, og vi havde det samme resultat med et publikum -- selvom vi tjente lidt flere penge på den.
You know, it's Arthur Clarke's law that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. They were seeing something magical. And so that got me very excited. And I thought, "Wow, this is something that needs to be embraced into the cinematic art." So, with "Terminator 2," which was my next film, we took that much farther. Working with ILM, we created the liquid metal dude in that film. The success hung in the balance on whether that effect would work. And it did, and we created magic again, and we had the same result with an audience -- although we did make a little more money on that one.
Så, ved at tegne en streg mellem de to erfarings prikker blev til, "Dette bliver en helt ny verden", dette var en helt ny kreativ verden for filmskabere. Så, jeg startede et firma med Stan Winston, min gode ven Stan Winston, der er førende make-up og væsen designer på den tid, og det blev kaldt Digital Domain. Og firmaets koncept var at vi kunne avancere forbi den analoge process med optiske printere og så videre, og vi kunne gå direkte til den digitale produktion. Og det gjorde vi faktisk og det gav os en konkurrencefordel i et stykke tid.
So, drawing a line through those two dots of experience came to, "This is going to be a whole new world," this was a whole new world of creativity for film artists. So, I started a company with Stan Winston, my good friend Stan Winston, who is the premier make-up and creature designer at that time, and it was called Digital Domain. And the concept of the company was that we would leapfrog past the analog processes of optical printers and so on, and we would go right to digital production. And we actually did that and it gave us a competitive advantage for a while.
Men i midten af 90'erne blev vi hængende i væsen og karakter design tingene som vi faktisk havde skabt firmaet til at lave. Så, jeg skrev dette stykke der hed "Avatar", der virkelig skulle flytte grænserne for visual effects, for CG effekter, endnu længere, med realistiske menneskelige følelsesmæssige karakterer skabt i CG, og hovedpersonerne ville være kun være CG, og verden ville være CG. Og grænserne skubbede tilbage og jeg blev fortalt af folkene i mit firma, at vi ikke ville være i stand til at kunne gøre det i noget tid.
But we found ourselves lagging in the mid '90s in the creature and character design stuff that we had actually founded the company to do. So, I wrote this piece called "Avatar," which was meant to absolutely push the envelope of visual effects, of CG effects, beyond, with realistic human emotive characters generated in CG, and the main characters would all be in CG, and the world would be in CG. And the envelope pushed back, and I was told by the folks at my company that we weren't going to be able to do this for a while.
Så, jeg lagde det på hylden og så lavede jeg en anden film om et stort skib der synker. (Latter) I ved, jeg tog ud og fremlagde det for studiet som "Romeo og Juliet" på et skib: "Det bliver denne episke romance, passionerede film." I al hemmelighed, det jeg ville gøre var at jeg ville dykke ned til det virkelige vrag af "Titanic". Og det var derfor jeg lavede filmen. (Bifald) Og det er sandheden. Nu vidste studiet ikke det. Men jeg overbeviste dem. Jeg sagde, "Vi dykker ned til vraget. Vi filmer det i virkeligheden. Vi vil bruge det i starten af filmen. Det vil blive virkelig vigtigt. Det vil være en fantastisk marketings fidus." Og jeg overtalte dem til at finansiere ekspeditionen. (Latter)
So, I shelved it, and I made this other movie about a big ship that sinks. (Laughter) You know, I went and pitched it to the studio as "'Romeo and Juliet' on a ship: "It's going to be this epic romance, passionate film." Secretly, what I wanted to do was I wanted to dive to the real wreck of "Titanic." And that's why I made the movie. (Applause) And that's the truth. Now, the studio didn't know that. But I convinced them. I said, "We're going to dive to the wreck. We're going to film it for real. We'll be using it in the opening of the film. It will be really important. It will be a great marketing hook." And I talked them into funding an expedition. (Laughter)
Lyder skørt. Men det fører tilbage til det tema om at ens fantasi skaber en virkelighed. Fordi vi skabte faktisk en virkelighed hvor jeg seks måneder senere, befinder mig i en russisk ubåd fire kilometer under overfladen i Atlanten, og kiggede på den rigtige Titanic gennem et koøje. Ikke en film, ikke HD -- virkeligheden. (Bifald)
Sounds crazy. But this goes back to that theme about your imagination creating a reality. Because we actually created a reality where six months later, I find myself in a Russian submersible two and a half miles down in the north Atlantic, looking at the real Titanic through a view port. Not a movie, not HD -- for real. (Applause)
Det slog benene væk under mig. Og det krævede meget forberedelse, vi skulle bygge kameraer og lys og alle mulige ting. Men, det slog mig hvor meget dette dyk , disse dybe dyk, var ligesom en rummission. I ved, hvor det var meget teknisk, og det krævede enorm meget planlægning. Man går i denne rumkapsel, man tager ned i dette mørke fjendtlige miljø hvor der ikke er noget håb om undsætning hvis man ikke selv kan sørge for at komme tilbage. Og jeg tænkte ligesom, "Wow. Jeg ligesom, lever i en science fiction film. Dette er virkelig koldt."
Now, that blew my mind. And it took a lot of preparation, we had to build cameras and lights and all kinds of things. But, it struck me how much this dive, these deep dives, was like a space mission. You know, where it was highly technical, and it required enormous planning. You get in this capsule, you go down to this dark hostile environment where there is no hope of rescue if you can't get back by yourself. And I thought like, "Wow. I'm like, living in a science fiction movie. This is really cool."
Så, jeg blev virkelig bidt af dybhavs udforskning. Selvfølgelig, nysgerrigheden, den videnskabelige del af det -- det var alt. Det var eventyr, det var nysgerrighed, det var fantasi. Og det var en oplevelse som Hollywood ikke kunne give mig. Fordi, I ved, jeg kunne forestille mig et væsen og vi kunne skabe en visuel effekt til det. Men jeg kunne ikke forestille mig det jeg så ud af det vindue. I takt med at vi tog på nogle af vores efterfølgende ekspeditioner, så jeg væsener ved hydrotermiske skorstene og nogle gange ting jeg aldrig havde set før, nogle gange ting som ingen havde set før, som faktisk ikke var beskrevet af videnskaben på det tidspunkt vi så dem og forestillede os dem.
And so, I really got bitten by the bug of deep-ocean exploration. Of course, the curiosity, the science component of it -- it was everything. It was adventure, it was curiosity, it was imagination. And it was an experience that Hollywood couldn't give me. Because, you know, I could imagine a creature and we could create a visual effect for it. But I couldn't imagine what I was seeing out that window. As we did some of our subsequent expeditions, I was seeing creatures at hydrothermal vents and sometimes things that I had never seen before, sometimes things that no one had seen before, that actually were not described by science at the time that we saw them and imaged them.
Så, jeg var fuldstændig ramt af dette, og skulle se mere. Så, jeg tog faktisk en besynderlig beslutning. Efter successen af "Titanic", sagde jeg, "OK, jeg sætter mit almindelige arbejde på pause som en Hollywood filmskaber, og jeg vil være en fuldtids eventyrer et stykke tid." Så, vi begyndte at planlægge disse ekspeditioner. Og vi endte med at tage til Bismark, og udforskede det med robotagtige køretøjer. Vi tog tilbage til Titanics vrag. Vi tog små robotter som vi havde skabt der lagde noget fiberoptisk kabel. Og ideen var at tage ind og lave en indvendig inspektion af det skib, hvilket aldrig var blevet gjort før. Ingen havde nogensinde kigget inden i det vrag. De havde ikke ressourcer til at gøre det, så vi skabte teknologien til at gøre det.
So, I was completely smitten by this, and had to do more. And so, I actually made a kind of curious decision. After the success of "Titanic," I said, "OK, I'm going to park my day job as a Hollywood movie maker, and I'm going to go be a full-time explorer for a while." And so, we started planning these expeditions. And we wound up going to the Bismark, and exploring it with robotic vehicles. We went back to the Titanic wreck. We took little bots that we had created that spooled a fiber optic. And the idea was to go in and do an interior survey of that ship, which had never been done. Nobody had ever looked inside the wreck. They didn't have the means to do it, so we created technology to do it.
Så, I ved, her er jeg nu, på dækket af Titanic, siddende i en ubåd, og kigger ud på plankerne der ligner dette, hvor jeg vidste at bandet havde spillet. Og jeg flyver et lille robotagtigt fartøj gennem skibets korridor. Når jeg siger, "Jeg betjener den", men mine tanker er i fartøjet. Jeg følte at jeg var fysisk tilstede i Titanics vrag. Og det var den mest surrealistiske form for deja vu oplevelse jeg nogensinde havde haft, fordi inden jeg drejede om et hjørne ville jeg vide hvad der var der, før fartøjets lys faktisk afslørede det, fordi jeg havde gået rundt på settet i månedsvis da vi lavede filmen. Og sættet var lavet som en tro kopi af skibets grundtegning.
So, you know, here I am now, on the deck of Titanic, sitting in a submersible, and looking out at planks that look much like this, where I knew that the band had played. And I'm flying a little robotic vehicle through the corridor of the ship. When I say, "I'm operating it," but my mind is in the vehicle. I felt like I was physically present inside the shipwreck of Titanic. And it was the most surreal kind of deja vu experience I've ever had, because I would know before I turned a corner what was going to be there before the lights of the vehicle actually revealed it, because I had walked the set for months when we were making the movie. And the set was based as an exact replica on the blueprints of the ship.
Så, det var denne fuldstændig bemærkelsesværdige oplevelse. Og det fik mig virkelig til at indse at oplevelsen af at være tilstede via TV -- at man faktisk kan have disse robotagtige avatarer, så ens bevidsthed bliver overført til fartøjet, ind i denne anden form for eksistens. Det var virkelig, virkelig ret markant. Og det er måske en lille smule af et glimt af, hvordan det kunne foregå om nogle årtier når vi begynder at have cyborg kroppe til at udforske eller til andre formål i mange forme for post-menneske fremtider som jeg kan forestille mig, som en science fiction fan.
So, it was this absolutely remarkable experience. And it really made me realize that the telepresence experience -- that you actually can have these robotic avatars, then your consciousness is injected into the vehicle, into this other form of existence. It was really, really quite profound. And it may be a little bit of a glimpse as to what might be happening some decades out as we start to have cyborg bodies for exploration or for other means in many sort of post-human futures that I can imagine, as a science fiction fan.
Så, efter at have oplevet disse ekspeditioner, og virkelig begynde at sætte pris på det der var dernede, såsom ved dybhavs kilderne hvor vi havde disse fantastiske, fantastiske væsner -- de er dybest set rumvæsner lige her på Jorden. De lever i et kemosyntetisk miljø. De overlever ikke på det sol baserede system som vi gør. Så, I ser væsner der lever ved siden af 500 graders vand røgfaner. Man tror de umuligt kan eksistere.
So, having done these expeditions, and really beginning to appreciate what was down there, such as at the deep ocean vents where we had these amazing, amazing animals -- they're basically aliens right here on Earth. They live in an environment of chemosynthesis. They don't survive on sunlight-based system the way we do. And so, you're seeing animals that are living next to a 500-degree-Centigrade water plumes. You think they can't possibly exist.
På samme tid begyndte jeg at blive interesseret i rum videnskab også -- igen, det er science fiction indflydelsen, som et barn. Og jeg endte med at blive involveret i rum samfundet, virkelig involveret med NASA, sidde på NASAs rådgivningskomite, og planlægge faktiske rummissioner, tog til Rusland, gå gennem pre-kosmonaut biomedicinske protokoler, og alle den slags ting, til faktisk at flyve til den internationale rumstation med vores 3D kamera systemer. Og dette var fascinerende. Men det jeg endte med at gøre var at tage rum videnskabsfolk med os ned i dybet. Og tage dem ned så de havde adgang -- astrobiologer, planetariske videnskabsfolk, mennesker der var interesserede i disse ekstreme miljøer -- tage dem med ned til skorstenene, og lade dem se, og tage prøver og afprøve instrumenter, og så videre.
At the same time I was getting very interested in space science as well -- again, it's the science fiction influence, as a kid. And I wound up getting involved with the space community, really involved with NASA, sitting on the NASA advisory board, planning actual space missions, going to Russia, going through the pre-cosmonaut biomedical protocols, and all these sorts of things, to actually go and fly to the international space station with our 3D camera systems. And this was fascinating. But what I wound up doing was bringing space scientists with us into the deep. And taking them down so that they had access -- astrobiologists, planetary scientists, people who were interested in these extreme environments -- taking them down to the vents, and letting them see, and take samples and test instruments, and so on.
Så, her var vi i gang med at lave dokumentarfilm, men faktisk lavede vi videnskab, og lavede faktisk rum videnskab. Jeg havde fuldstændig lukket sløjfen mellem at være science fiction fan, I ved, som barn, og gøre disse ting i virkeligheden. Og I ved, hen af vejen i denne opdagelses rejse, lærte jeg meget. Jeg lærte en masse om videnskab. Men jeg lærte også en masse om lederskab. Nu tror man at en instruktør skal være leder, leder af, skibets kaptajn, og den slags ting.
So, here we were making documentary films, but actually doing science, and actually doing space science. I'd completely closed the loop between being the science fiction fan, you know, as a kid, and doing this stuff for real. And you know, along the way in this journey of discovery, I learned a lot. I learned a lot about science. But I also learned a lot about leadership. Now you think director has got to be a leader, leader of, captain of the ship, and all that sort of thing.
Jeg lærte i virkeligheden ikke om lederskab før jeg lavede disse ekspeditioner. Fordi jeg skulle, på et bestemt punkt, sige, "Hvad laver jeg her? Hvorfor gør jeg dette? Hvad får jeg ud af det?" Vi tjener ikke penge på disse pokkers shows. Vi kan næsten få det til at løbe rundt. Der er ingen berømmelse i det. Mennesker tror jeg forsvandt mellem "Titanic" og "Avatar" og jeg polerede mine negle et eller andet sted, mens jeg sag ved stranden. Lavede alle disse film, lavede alle disse dokumentar film til et meget begrænset publikum.
I didn't really learn about leadership until I did these expeditions. Because I had to, at a certain point, say, "What am I doing out here? Why am I doing this? What do I get out of it?" We don't make money at these damn shows. We barely break even. There is no fame in it. People sort of think I went away between "Titanic" and "Avatar" and was buffing my nails someplace, sitting at the beach. Made all these films, made all these documentary films for a very limited audience.
Ingen berømmelse, ingen ære, ingen penge. Hvad laver du? Man gør det for opgaven i sig selv, for udfordringen -- og oceanet er det mest udfordrende miljø der er -- for spændingen ved opdagelsen, og for det mærkelige bånd der opstår når en lille gruppe mennesker danner et tæt knyttet team. Fordi vi ville gøre disse ting med 10, 12 mennesker, og arbejdede i årevis af gangen, nogengange på havet i to, tre måneder ad gangen.
No fame, no glory, no money. What are you doing? You're doing it for the task itself, for the challenge -- and the ocean is the most challenging environment there is -- for the thrill of discovery, and for that strange bond that happens when a small group of people form a tightly knit team. Because we would do these things with 10, 12 people, working for years at a time, sometimes at sea for two, three months at a time.
Og i det bånd opdager man at den vigtigste ting er den respekt man har for dem og som de har for en, at man har gjort et stykke arbejde som man ikke kan forklare for en anden. Når man kommer i land og man siger, "Vi skulle gøre dette, og det fiberoptiske kabel, og dæmpningen, og dit og dat, hele teknologien i det, og sværhedsgraden, den menneskelige præstations del af at arbejde på havet." man kan ikke forklare det for folk. Det er den ting som politibetjente måske har, eller mennesker i kamp der har gennemlevet noget sammen og de ved at de aldrig kan forklare det. Skaber et bånd, skaber et bånd af respekt.
And in that bond, you realize that the most important thing is the respect that you have for them and that they have for you, that you've done a task that you can't explain to someone else. When you come back to the shore and you say, "We had to do this, and the fiber optic, and the attentuation, and the this and the that, all the technology of it, and the difficulty, the human-performance aspects of working at sea," you can't explain it to people. It's that thing that maybe cops have, or people in combat that have gone through something together and they know they can never explain it. Creates a bond, creates a bond of respect.
Så, da jeg kom tilbage for at lave min næste film, der var "Avatar", prøvede jeg at anvende det samme lederskabs princip, hvilket er at man respekterer sit team, og til gengæld gør man sig fortjent til deres respekt. Og det ændrede virkelig dynamikken. Så, her var jeg igen med et lille team i et ukendt område, lavede "Avatar", fandt på ny teknologi der ikke eksisterede før. Enormt spændende. Enormt udfordrende. Og vi blev en familie i løbet af en periode på fire og et halvt år. Og det ændrede fuldstændigt måden hvorpå jeg laver film. Så, mennesker har kommenteret såsom, "Jamen, du ved, du fandt ocean væsnerne frem igen og satte dem på planeten Pandora." For mig, var det mere en fundamental måde at gøre forretning på, selve processen, ændrede sig som resultat af det.
So, when I came back to make my next movie, which was "Avatar," I tried to apply that same principle of leadership, which is that you respect your team, and you earn their respect in return. And it really changed the dynamic. So, here I was again with a small team, in uncharted territory, doing "Avatar," coming up with new technology that didn't exist before. Tremendously exciting. Tremendously challenging. And we became a family, over a four-and-half year period. And it completely changed how I do movies. So, people have commented on how, "Well, you know, you brought back the ocean organisms and put them on the planet of Pandora." To me, it was more of a fundamental way of doing business, the process itself, that changed as a result of that.
Så, hvad kan vi syntetisere ud af alt dette? I ved, hvad er lektien, der er lært? Jamen, jeg tror nummer et er nysgerrighed. Det er den mest kraftfulde ting man ejer. Fantasi er en kraft der faktisk kan manifestere en realitet. Og ens teams respekt er vigtigere end alle laurbær i hele verden. Der er unge filmproducenter der kommer op til mig og siger, "Giv mig noget råd til at gøre dette." Og jeg siger, "Lad være med at begrænse dig selv. Andre mennesker gør det for dig -- gør det ikke mod dig selv, lad være med at spille mod dig selv, og tag chancer."
So, what can we synthesize out of all this? You know, what are the lessons learned? Well, I think number one is curiosity. It's the most powerful thing you own. Imagination is a force that can actually manifest a reality. And the respect of your team is more important than all the laurels in the world. I have young filmmakers come up to me and say, "Give me some advice for doing this." And I say, "Don't put limitations on yourself. Other people will do that for you -- don't do it to yourself, don't bet against yourself, and take risks."
NASA har et udtryk de godt kan lide: "Fiasko er ikke en mulighed." Men fiasko skal være en mulighed i kunst og udforskning, fordi det er et trosspring . Og ingen vigtige anstrengelser der krævede innovation blev gennemført uden risiko. Man skal være villig til at tage de risici. Så, det er tanken jeg vil efterlade jer med, det er at hvadend man laver, fiasko er en mulighed, men det er frygt ikke. Tak. (Bifald)
NASA has this phrase that they like: "Failure is not an option." But failure has to be an option in art and in exploration, because it's a leap of faith. And no important endeavor that required innovation was done without risk. You have to be willing to take those risks. So, that's the thought I would leave you with, is that in whatever you're doing, failure is an option, but fear is not. Thank you. (Applause)