this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2026
435 points (98.0% liked)

Comic Strips

23002 readers
3487 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Per the internet, so grain of salt and all, unobtanium predates Avatar by some time, typically used as a brainstorming device. You know how a physics problem might say "assume a frictionless environment" or something of that nature, in order to focus on a specific point or phenomena? Unobtanium is sort of like that. Picture a bunch of aerospace engineers in the mid-50s, talking about how they're gonna put a person in space. They're throwing all their spaghetti against the wall, hoping some of it will stick. One guy stands up and says, according to his calculations, if they can get the mass of the launch vehicle down to X, he's confident they can do the thing. Unfortunately, material science being what it is at the time, there is nothing that would be light, strong, cheap, and workable enough to fashion such a vehicle, but the math all checks out. These engineers jokingly start referring to the hypothetical material that would satisfy all their needs as "unobtanium", while they search for practical solutions.

Fast forward 60 years, and Cameron is writing his Pocahontas in Space movie. He needs a name for his MacGuffin, but, being a MacGuffin, it's entirely irrelevant to the plot outside of the fact that the characters are destined to fight over it. So, he decides to call it unobtanium, since that's pre-existing shorthand for "rare material that does everything you need it to", and that's literally all this material needs to be for the plot.

It's still silly, sure, but no more or less silly than mechs fighting giant blue people that fuck via ponytail sounding.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Yeah, but it's like if a movie was trying to be taken seriously, but literally called its macguffin the MacGuffin. It would take you out of it every dramatic scene because they're just using the plot device by the word for the kind of plot device it is. Unobtanium is a real world term for something partly defined by not really existing. You can make up a stupid but plausible name and people won't mind (Marsium, Pandorium, etc) or you can go with something wildly implausible like making up an alien word for it (bonus points if you then give it phonetic decay into english) and nobody cares or even thinks it's cool. But this snapped people out of it a bit because nobody would call a material they're actively mining unobtanium, worst case they'd give it nicknames.

And it also just fell right into this spot where the setting felt carefully constructed though fantastical, but the plot felt like an afterthought, and here's a piece of the setting that clearly only exists for the plot and it's loudly announcing that fact with its really stupid name.

[–] YerLam@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I listened to a steampunk opera years ago where the thing they were all fighting over was called an MCG. It took reading the writers notes afterwards for me to realise it was literally a MCGuffin, I did not feel smart that day.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

I agree with you in all of the particulars of your argument, but am ultimately unphased by the use of the term. Cameron stopped one step short of calling it MacGuffinite, and I can understand why that would annoy some people. However, within the context of Avatar, it just doesn't bother me.

If I wanted to conjure an in-universe reason for it, I can do so without straining my credulity too much. Aerospace engineers in the 50s develop a term for a hypothetical wonder material that they can't get their hands on: unobtanium. Fast forward hundreds of years, and a material is discovered on Pandora which possesses qualities which were previously only thought of as theoretically possible. Perhaps jokingly, perhaps sincerely, the new wonder material is called unobtanium, referencing the fact it is no longer hypothetical, but it's still damn hard to get a hold of.

Now, I recognize that 1) none of that is explained in the movie, so it's just head canon, and 2) as you say, calling a material you are actively mining 'unobtanium' is stupid. However, I don't think it's any more or less stupid than your suggested alternative courses of action given the context of the plot.

If unobtanium had ANY relevance to the story beyond "this is the source of conflict", I'd wish for more juice there. But Cameron is nothing if not a functional screenwriter. No matter how much lipstick you put on the pig, the sole purpose of the scene is to telegraph the third act conflict (and allegorize the Iraq War, to some extent, but he does more with that elsewhere). The screenplay spends only bare minimum amount of time covering that detail before speeding along to more relevant thematic matters.

So, I agree that it's a dumb contrivance that is clunky. However, it's just so irrelevant that I don't care. Call it whatever you want to, the name, like the material itself, is completely inconsequential. Frankly, I'm actually warming to the idea of calling it MacGuffinite. Put a line in that it was named after the first marine to die on Pandora or some such bs. Have your cake and eat it too, a plausible in-universe name, and a tell to not think about it so much.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I get that writers use placeholder names for all sorts of things, but as you said yourself, it's meant to be replaced later. That giant budget, and nobody could think of a better name than Unobtanium?

It was either a terrible oversight, or it was chosen purposefully. Either one indicates an objectively poor artistic choice.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well, I'll start by disagreeing with the premise that an "objectively poor" artistic choice exists, at least in this context. There are choices that work for you and choices that don't, but neither are objective. The name unobtanium was chosen because it represents a hypothetical substance that is everything that Cameron needed it to be to tell his story in a single word. He's practically telling the audience, "look, guys, don't think about it that hard, I'm speeding through the set-up because I know everyone is here to look at pretty shit in 3d".

In another story, one where the specific properties of unobtanium were in any way relevant (beyond being valuable), that sort of handwavey shorthand might perturb me. However, as it stands within the context of the film, it's fine. It's functional screenwriting, and that, to me, is a hallmark of Cameron's style.

Also, I'm not suggesting unobtanium was a placeholder for Cameron. I'm saying that it doesn't necessarily strain my credulity to believe that, if scientists are pre-conditioned to refer to a hypothetical wonder material as unobtanium, and then they actually discover a wonder material, they might continue referring to it as such. Or, if not scientists, at least corporate ghouls like Ribisi who probably can't pronounce the "official" name, if one exists.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Using shorthand because you're bored with your own exposition dump, and want to speed it along, seems like a strong sign of a poor screenplay.

EVERYBODY knows it was a terrible name, even those offering weak-ass rationalizations. NONE of you sound like you've even convinced yourselves.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm not saying it's a brilliant name. Im arguing it is an inconsequential detail that does not matter in the context of the story, and it should be treated as such. You called it "possibly the stupidest artistic choice in cinematic history". I guess I just find that to be at least as ridiculous as "unobtanium", if not moreso.