JC: You know, that's a really good question, and it's one I'm surprised I haven't been asked because I've been asking it of myself. Obviously, these two movies are working the same way, in kind of a global consciousness. So what do they really have in common? I think it's the depth of emotion. I mean there may be aspects of the storytelling—that you're going on a journey and you're in the shoes of someone that you care about. In the first case, it was Rose because you go on her journey and then you meet Jack. In this film, you go on Jake's journey and then you meet Neytiri—you don't meet Neytiri until half an hour into the film. I think it's the depth of the emotion and a sense of the reality of the experience, like this is really happening somehow. And also, for a film to work on that scale, in terms of revenue worldwide—I was talking about this yesterday with my co-producer Jon Landau—it has to work for people of all ages. It has to be for kids [and] it has to be for teenagers, and usually that's two totally separate things. When you make a movie for kids, the teenagers stay away; when you make a movie for teenagers, it's too rough for the kids. Something that's for teenagers doesn't usually work for 20- and 30-somethings, and older people don't even go to the movies. Whereas with both of these films you have an 8-year-old that could go to the movies with his grandparents, so the age thing is important. The other thing is that it has to play equally to men and women. I think that's also tricky, because as a group—not as individuals; individuals are all different—women like different things then men do. And so to give both genders something that they can feel strongly about is also tricky, but you have to do it. And it has to play in different culture and language groups. Titanic obviously did that, and Avatar does that. So it has those things in common even though the stories are very different.