James Cameron's Project 880/Avatar

[Policar]

It's just a rumor ( http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=9991 ) but apparently James Cameron's next film with not be Battle Angel Alita, but will be an original sci-fi project called Avatar. The script was leaked a few years back (no longer availible, sadly) but rumor has it that's it's amazing, although something of a cheesey love story a la Titanic. Whatever. I liked Titanic a lot.

It's supposed to be in 3D and made using his virtual studio. Assuming the technology is there, I'm really thrilled about this. I know not everyone is sold on 3D (including the vast majority of my friends who care about this stuff), but I am, so I'm stoaked. In my eyes, cinematography has always functioned to do two things: make stuff look cool, and add a sense of depth. Depth cues such as differences in color, lighting (back lights), camera movement, etc. have all existed to emulate 3D. Making a 2D plane look 3D is the cinematographer's main job, some would say. I'm sure there will be hitches along the way, but when sound and cinemascope were introduced it screwed aesthetic stuff up for a while, but there's no way we'd give up either now that we're used to them. Also, while your average film might not benefit from 3D, ultra-high budget sci-fi probably will. This is now my most anticipated film.

Also, I honestly think a transition to 3D is necessary. Every 20 years the film industry has introduced something to compete with radio/tv and with lower admissions, it's due again:

1895: First films.
1915: People get sick of the novelty of films, features introduced.
1925: Sound. (Competes with radio.)
1950s: Cinemascope, color. (Competes with TV.)
1970s: Sex, Violence, etc. (Competes with TV, which is now in color.)
1990s: CGI (Competes with HBO, which now has sex and violence.)
2010ish: 3D (To compete with widescreen color HDTV, DVDs, etc. etc.)

Well, maybe. Anyhow, I can't wait. Even if his next project sounded terrible I'd be first in line, and this sounds like a really good story, a cool new technology, and a good match between the two.

[Greggl]

Hes got his freediving project in the works...

Be interesting if Avatar goes back into the stack.. I thought that died with the
whole Carolco fiasco.

[Policar]

You my be right. I REALLY hope his next movie is Avatar, though. That the script was pulled a few months ago is a good sign, but it's definitely no guarantee.

No freediving, please. He's got to get over his obsession with water.

[mmm]

No freediving, please. He's got to get over his obsession with water.

LOL, so true.

Cameron featured in a documentary in the UK a week or two back which featured him diving too the wreck of the Titanic... WHAT A SURPRISE!!

However, as they left the wreck site, he stated that it was his last dive and he was now moving on. That pleased me so much, because IMO he is the most talented director in the history of cinema (yeah, I think he is that good) and he hasn't made a film for nearly 10 years.

Whatever he does next, I'll be first in line.

[bgundu]

I still have the orginal T-Shirt for Avatar when I had an interview at Digital Domain many, many years ago. My wife doesn't understand why I call it "My Precious".

[The Machinist]

IMO he is the most talented director in the history of cinema (yeah, I think he is that good)

Wow. Where can i get some of that black tar heroin?

[surf]

well, I like 3D :)

[Owen]

Wait a minute... what happened to James Cameron's Aquaman???



;)

[Greggl]

Cameron is pretty funny on that show... he doesn't yell enough though :)

[Taylor Moore]

Not to slag....but.
Cameron is a great director but....a total p-r-i-c-k tyrant to work for.

Ask any of his past employee's that quit titanic or DD.

Personally I don't think you need to work that way with employee's to get the best/worst out of them.

[Greggl]

The stories are pretty imfamous. He's up there with Michael Bay and a short list of
others :)

[Justyn]

I've heard that too. I had two friends who worked grueling hours on Titanic and then got totally slammed in the credits and by cameron as well. A prick in Hollywood.. I'm shocked and appauled (funny snickering).

I do think though that 3D is a sideshow hack opperation. It's been around for so long and keeps on resurfacing... I say to just give it a break.. Same with that Virtual reality nonsense. Film is escape... Fantasy sure, why cloud it with 5 cent gimicks.

[Weston]

I think its cool that he's that way. It makes him all the more legendary....a true hollywood bastard. If thats what it takes to get what he wants then so be it....

and as for 3-d

i dont think it will be long before its no 5-cent gimmick....3-d is the future.

[Policar]

I do think though that 3D is a sideshow hack opperation. It's been around for so long and keeps on resurfacing... I say to just give it a break.. Same with that Virtual reality nonsense. Film is escape... Fantasy sure, why cloud it with 5 cent gimicks.

Almost everyone I talk with agrees with you on that one, but I'm not convinced.

Consider that sound was around for 20-30 years before its introduction but in immature forms and that it took an economic issue (WB and Fox wanted to catch up to Paramount without the investment in quality orchestas and theaters) to make it a reality. And even then it was considered a gimmick for a long while.

Widescreen and three-strip technocolor existed as mature technologies WAY before they became common, but studios needed them to differentiate film from TV. People regarded them as gimmicks at first, but now everyone loves both.

Also interesting: sound, widescreen, and color all made cutting slower since more information was presented. I think 3D will do the same. Personally, I like fast cutting. Hmm.

Anyhow, I don't think 3D is 100% perfected yet, but I saw an IMAX 3D thing a few years ago and it was a lot of fun. So I'm hopeful.

[The Machinist]

I don't get all this Cameron worship.

Then again I abhor Titanic.

But if he is indeed a jerk I'm even more confused why people adore him. Any director who is unprofessional with his cast and crew does not deserve to be working. The opportunity to make a feature film is a privledge not a right.

[Weston]

i think if your a filmmaking genious and youve turned out stuff like The terminator and Titanic....then it is a right.

[The Machinist]

How can you consider Titanic "genius filmmaking"?

Cause he implemented Cutting edge special effects into a hackneyed contrite stereotype ridden story?

Please get off it.

It is my opinion that Cameron is not a filmmaking genius. He is an excellent filmmaker when working with his particular brands of story. IE. Aliens and Terminator 2. I LOVE those movies. But genius? Let's not dumb down the meaning of the term by overusing it to describe every director who's work we love.
Fellini was a genius. I would not be so quick to put Cameron in his company.

And I don't care if you are Ingmar Bergman or Cecille B. Demille. No director anywhere has the right to demean, berate, or abuse their cast and crew. They are people who devote themselves to the vision. Just because they're being paid does not make them inferior or slaves for that matter. Which is how Cameron and other hot-headed directors seem to like to treat people.

[Weston]

Titanic is a the work of a filmmaking genious because it has the highest gross at the box office....and it got 11 oscars. which DOES mean something

If it makes him comfortable in his directing duties to berate and scream at employees and basically be an evil dictator....then fine. If you dont want to work in that enviornment then leave. Thats his style and it works for him. I respect him for it.

[The Machinist]

Titanic is a the work of a filmmaking genious because it has the highest gross at the box office....and it got 11 oscars. which DOES mean something

If those are your standards for genius then I'm glad the choice is not left to you.

Titanic's genius was in its technical execution which was SUPERB. No one can deny that. However technical achievements do not make for a Genius film. And neither does the box office take.

For my part I stand firm in my opinions of Cameron and poor behavior on the part of directors. They should lead by example.

[Weston]

what DO oscars mean?

and what is YOUR standard for genious? since you are apparently the one the choice is left to...

[The Machinist]

Look at my posts.

No where in there do i claim to get to be the one who makes that call.

I personally feel it is something that Time will Tell. The way the great filmmakers are revered today.

Also I did not dispute the Oscar argument cause I do feel the awards stand for something. Albeit maybe not what they once did but i do still believe in awarding excellence.

And lastly, I try to be very careful to make sure I state only opinion so as not to misrepresent my argument. What i have to say on this is my own opinion. If you want to call him a genius and sing the praises of "I'm king of the world" then by all means have fun.

[Weston]

you implied it was up to someone.......

i just wondered exactly who and what.

i mean no disrespect to you through this argument....those were just my opinions....and i agree with you that money made is no measure of genious.

as for singing "i'm king of the world".... i'm a bad singer...and no king

[J.R. Hudson]

I absolutely love:

The Terminator
Aliens
The Abyss
T2
Titanic

...The rest of his reel I can leave as it does nothing for me (True Lies was fun admittedly but not epic)

I have always wondered what it was he has been doing going on a decade with this obsession with Titanic and underwater exploration. Of course; I have a pipe dream of sailing around the world one day so I suppose he is doing 'Whatever' he want's to do ?

Having always been a fan of Camerons work but am familiar with the 'I am the 800 Pound Ass Monkey' reputation.

I agree; there isn't really a need to treat people like shit to get the best from them. I'm surprised someone hasn't bitch slapped his ass.

[Greggl]

No director anywhere has the right to demean, berate, or abuse their cast and crew. They are people who devote themselves to the vision. Just because they're being paid does not make them inferior or slaves for that matter. Which is how Cameron and other hot-headed directors seem to like to treat people.

Actually, I find that the best projects are the produts of a climate of terror or adversity.
Fear of failure, fear of exposure, hatred for the studio, hatred for the way the film is being shot, etc. If you find a 'nice' director, its pretty much guaranteed that there is a viper of a producer, AD or someone else that plays the role of the 'bad guy' so the director doesn't have to.

The climate of how the film was made can be felt on-screen and the list of our best directors is a list of some extremely demanding and, in most cases, 'difficult' A-type
personalities.

[J.R. Hudson]

Being demanding and being a total prick are two different things. Experiencing Adversity and having a Ass Hat scream at you are two different things.

Nice director's = A Viper somewhere else ?

That's too vague I think. In fact, I think the rumours of bad-guys and prick's are too few and far for that to be a norm.

The 'A' in A-Type personalities does not mean ASSHOLE

[The Machinist]

I'm with you Hudson.

Greggl, Do you live in Old Town Key West?

I have relatives who live in Truman Annex and your hometown holds a special place in my heart.

[Filmjunkie677]

Any director that is more special effects then story just doesn't cut it in my book.
Just like Lucas.
But Cameron is def. a better storyteller then lucas. By far.
Cameron lost his touch after Terminator 2 in my opinion.
I could really care less if he even makes another picture.

[Greggl]

Nice director's = A Viper somewhere else ?

That's too vague I think. In fact, I think the rumours of bad-guys and prick's are too few and far for that to be a norm.

The 'A' in A-Type personalities does not mean ASSHOLE

Thats pretty different from my experience. Its almost a good cop-bad cop situation if the director is a really nice guy. I'm not going to go far enough to name people directly as they are all still working and I may decide to go back someday :)

With directors, easily 50% were demanding, abrasive and overall difficult. Producers, it was like 90% :) Combine that with the list of folks that NEVER want to work with specific individuals again and a LOT of money and Hollywood really does live up to its reputation. I know that I've got 2 producers that I'd never work with if I could help it.

[J.R. Hudson]

Definatley relative.

My limited experience has seen both kinds.

[mmm]

I absolutely love:

The Terminator
Aliens
The Abyss
T2
Titanic

...The rest of his reel I can leave as it does nothing for me (True Lies was fun admittedly but not epic)


John, that is every film he has ever Direted (barring Piranha II & non-fiction).

That's what I mean, he just makes gold. Sure, Titanic was cliche and a poor romance but was still a hell of a movie. His execution is near flawless IMO. His writing isn't quite as good.

As far as being an arsehole, he probably is, but I think that is a result of having such a strong vision and his frustration when people fail to relise it. When I direct, I get frustrated but try to hold back. I know there are times when it has meant my films have suffered. I'm sure you can do it without being an arsehole, but it is harder still.

Aliens is a good example. I think Sigourney Weaver would have buggered that film up (like she did with 3 & 4 with Fincher & Jeunet) but I think that Cameron's opinionated, stubborn attitude probably held it together.

[J.R. Hudson]

I know there are times when it has meant my films have suffered.

You and Jimmy; sorrounded by assholes. :laugh: :grin:

[mmm]

You and Jimmy; sorrounded by assholes. :laugh: :grin:

Maybe that is why I admire him, it makes me look like a nice guy!:grin:

Seriously though, I think "giving in" is a bad trait for a director. Being an arsehole is too.You have to find the balance between the two. Peter Jackson seems to do it well. He gets what he wants and everyone still seems to love him! It must be his "teddy bear" looks:
http://i.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/040130/173654__pj_l.jpg

[J.R. Hudson]

Good point

Although I would not know; I have never heard of Spielberg, Tarantino or Scorsese being A - Hat's.

[mmm]

Good point

Although I would not know; I have never heard of Spielberg, Tarantino or Scorsese being A - Hat's.

I have seen some behind the scenes showing Spielberg being pretty rude to some guys. Not on a Cameron level though.

[Justin_Kirch]

too bad peter jackson doesn't look like that anymore, mmm.

there is a way to communicate with actors and not be asshats to them. some directors don't know how to handle certain situations and they are bitches to everyone, on the other hand, they may be bitches because it's the best way to handle the situation. it's definitely a catch-22.

i wouldn't go as far as calling Cameron a genious though. i really don't think he is. Kubrick was a genious, Cameron hasn't lived up to that yet. He makes good movies, yes, but i'd consider him more of a smartass than a genious.

[J.R. Hudson]

Good call on that.

I love Cameron but he isn't Tarantino or Speilberg or Scorsese (my personal film genius's).

[The Machinist]

That's all I'm saying.

By the way I hate cell phone companies. I'm currently on hold with Sprint who is trying to give me the financial bend over without the satisfaction of a Sgt. Hart reach-around. Why is it every single cell phone company I have subscribed from always gives me problems with billing and/or service? I have had phones from Cingular, Verizon, T-mobile, and now Sprint and everyone of them has given me horrible customer service.

[Blaine]

Warning! Opinions about to Flow.

That's the great thing about the movies. They're democratic. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head (I don't think), you see what you want to see. If you don't like a director, you don't go. If you don't like an actor, you don't go. And vice versa. Nobody can make me like American Beauty. And they've tried. I like Cameron's movies. IMHO, Aliens was a science-fiction masterpiece. While I totally loved Terminator, the sequels left me flat. They were watchable, 2 was much better than 3, but to me, if they hadn't been made I wouldn't have felt the loss. Titanic, I liked it, and I don't really care for Leonardo.

What's genius? I'm not sure. I like Scorcese but he's done things I didn't care for. Same for Cameron, Spielberg, Coppola, the Scott Brothers, the Coen Brothers... They're are all accomplished and have also shown signs of excess. There are a lot of directors that I haven't mentioned that have made some great movies but have also had their share of stinkers.

[Evan S]

3D makes me dizzy, and a lot of other people. Plus - it hurts your eyes after 30 or so minutes. I hate 3d... and those stupid glasses too.

[Blaine]

and those stupid glasses too.

If they could do it without those stupid glasses, that might be neat. And can they make so I can see 3D on my big screen TV?

[Greggl]

Good point

Although I would not know; I have never heard of Spielberg, Tarantino or Scorsese being A - Hat's.

Spielberg works with *crack* producers.. they carry the weight so he can be
a near auteur. Going back to his roots, Julia Phillips is imfamous for how much
of a ballbreaker she was. Everyone that I know that was involved with her
on Close Encounters is still keeping garlic around, just in case she comes back :)

She also produced for Scorsese with similar results, both on-screen and off.

Kathleen Kennedy is no pushover... even going a few tiers down, Speilberg's
crew from Jurassic have moved on. My list of never work for again, includes
one of those alumni that allowed Spielberg to retain 'good cop' and has now
gone on to make life difficult for a whole new group of people :)

Bottom line, every sucessful director out there is either REALLY tough, or has
a 'thug' on staff to put the pressure on when things 'go wrong'.

For my stuff, I let my AD know from day 1 that they are going to be the
guy that everyone is going to hate. All the bad news comes from the AD,
allowing me to actually get on the side of the cast/crew. Good cop/bad cop.

[Policar]

Spielberg is the director who's impressing me most right now. He may be turning out deeply flawed movies, but the guy's experimenting in interesting ways and he uses the frame better than anyone else.

Cameron's no Spielberg, but he's willing to experiment with new stuff, too, and his track record's almost as good. I don't really care if he's a jerk if he gets the movie made, to be honest. If you've got too much of an ego, it starts to show up in your work and this hasn't been too big a problem with him so far.

Plus, if this is for real (I just read 1/3 of the scriptment--it's okay), it's going to be an event. New 3D technology, shot with "virtual cinematography" where everything's done in pre-production, an unheard of budget, and the perfect genre to accompany it (the whole thing seems to be a tour of this alien world.) This may not be a great movie, but it's going to be a cool one.

After all, I think Peter Jackson is a mediocre director artistically and couldn't get a good performance out of someone to save his life, but the fact that he gets such spectacular projects made counts for a lot.

James Cameron's one of the few directors who's both artistic and able to make huge spectacle efficiently and intelligently. Let's just hope it's not too long, since the scriptment feels a little uhh...exposition heavy.

[Blaine]

You have to be tough and keep your eye on the ball with all the money at stake.

[The Machinist]

There's being tough and then there's demeaning another human being.

I think that's the distinction that needs to be made.

In no way do i think a director should be a pushover allowing laziness, or insubordination among your crew. However if you have a group of guys who are following the plan and working their butts off for you, you should treat them with respect. Nobody wants to work with someone who is viewed as difficult. Remember Norma Desmond...

[Blaine]

you should treat them with respect.

That should actually apply to everyone, and we'd all be better off.

[The Machinist]

Touche.

[D_and_G]

You don't have to be a pratt to be an effective director.

I worked on a film with a successful Asian director. They lit incense, had a feast, treated everyone with respect, and believe it or not the production was laid back. The actors responded better, and the crew acted as a cohesive whole.

As long as the directors vision is communicated effectively down through the ranks, the pratt-like behaviour is unnecessary. It's when there is ineffective communication combined with stress that personalities turn nasty.

I agree there are those tough as nails crew who get things done, but for the most part it's an uneccesary trait, in my book, and I don't think it really accomplishes that much. It's counterproductive in the long run to operate that kind of climate. At least I hope so. The examples of harsh run sets and egomania turning out amazing work, just stand out more than the amazing work that was created with a professionally run smooth laid back set.

There's enough pressure on a set without adding egomania and an atmosphere of fear. You can be a leader and a gentleman and still be strong. Maybe directors could learn a thing or two from the military. I've always admired how they can mix leadership, strength and respect in equal measure. :beer:

Cheers.

Like someone famous once said - "Power only ampllifies what is already there. If you're a gentleman you will be even more so, and if you're a dick, you'll be a super dick."

(quote modified for filter) :thumbsup:

[J.R. Hudson]

Well I guess we all know who on this thread we're not going to do any work for. (I jest guy's) :huh: :laugh: :lipsrseal :evil:


"I think Peter Jackson is a mediocre director artistically and couldn't get a good performance out of someone to save his life"

I see your point; I felt Kong grossly miscast; however felt LOTR, The Frighteners and Heavenly Creatures had nice performances (Nothing I would point a finger at anyway).

I definatley fall into the camp of chill as long as everyone is pulling the their weight.

[Blaine]

I see your point; I felt Kong grossly miscast

GROSSLY miscast. C'mon Adrian Brody? Jack Black? I don't THINK so.

[Greggl]

I do agree that laid back sets are the ideal... there is another element that hasn't
been addressed. Thats the 'pecking order'. I've been on a few sets where the
producer, DP or talent 'overshadow' the clout of the director. The director ends
up as essentially a figurehead thats pretty much along for the ride or a co-director
at best. These also tend to be 'laid-back' sets as conflict is avoided as everyone
tries to satisfy the 'director-by-proxy'.

I saw this a lot with Disney's stable of first time directors, paired with experienced
DPs and producers.

[J.R. Hudson]

EVerytime I hear these stories I long more and more for an RR (Troublemaker) kind of situation !

[Justyn]

Wow... This was a lively chat today. A good friend of mine bailed on Miami Vice because he couldn't handle Michael Mann screaming and being an absolute prick for 16 hours a day. And for him to quit a big fat day rate job.. must mean he's one hell of a big prick.

Some excellent points on this thread. That's why I love it. Different ideas.. and here's a joke that I love to tell. It can be applied to DP's especially well, so here goes.


What's the difference between God and a hollywood director?

Answer: God doesn't think he's a director.


And I call it a night!

[Greggl]

EVerytime I hear these stories I long more and more for an RR (Troublemaker) kind of situation !

Hehe.. it was Troublemaker that really pushed me over the edge as far as leaving California! Skywalker Ranch was one hell of a train set.. RR has a slightly smaller scale one... I figured I could cram something HO scale into a place in Key West :)

[mmm]

GROSSLY miscast. C'mon Adrian Brody? Jack Black? I don't THINK so.

I would agree with you about Jack Black until I saw the film. I was really surprised and thought he was the 2nd best aspect, after Kong himself.

Just for the record, I am pretty laid back on set, and have never worked for an arsehole director, just plenty of arsehole producers. I think that a director has to be able to stand up for himself, which is easy if everyone else is cool and respectful, but if you have an awkward cast or crew member, you need to have some balls IMO.

[Draccan]

"with great powers come great responsibility" anyone?

I honestly don't think being an a$$hole has anything to do with making good movies. Kubrick, Woody Allen, Wong Kar-Wai, Jarmusch, Wenders seem to be more low key and still make excellent filmmakers.

Being an a$$hole director just mean you exploit the power money and fame has given you.

I thought Titanic, Aliens and Terminator were very entertaining, but I wouldn't call it art.... well at least not Titanic... ;)

[Blaine]

"with great powers come great responsibility" anyone?

I honestly don't think being an a$$hole has anything to do with making good movies. Kubrick, Woody Allen, Wong Kar-Wai, Jarmusch, Wenders seem to be more low key and still make excellent filmmakers.

Being an a$$hole director just mean you exploit the power money and fame has given you.

I thought Titanic, Aliens and Terminator were very entertaining, but I wouldn't call it art.... well at least not Titanic... ;)

One man's art is another man's poo poo. Whether you like it or not doesn't change the fact that it is art. Storytelling is an artform. You may not like the story or the way of telling it, but that doesn't make it any less art. Art is what we do. Some of us make GOOD art, some of us make BAD art, but it is still art. And as the saying goes: beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[J.R. Hudson]

I alway's find it odd people don't dig Titanic (Yes, you can resurect an entire thread about it)...

But, out of all Cameron's work; I'd say Titanic is the more artistic of them

What would youcall art Draacon ?

What would you call 'Titanic, Aliens, Terminator and Titanic' ?

[Blaine]

I alway's find it odd people don't dig Titanic (Yes, you can resurect an entire thread about it)...

But, out of all Cameron's work; I'd say Titanic is the more artistic of them

What would youcall art Draacon ?

What would you call 'Titanic, Aliens, Terminator and Titanic' ?

Aliens is my #2 all time sci-fi movie right behind Blade Runner. It is #4 on my all time favorite movies regardless of genre. Terminator (the original) is another GREAT movie. #7 Sci-fi/#65 all time favorite. Titanic #41 in my top 100. Being entertaining and art ARE NOT mutually exclusive. It's hip to not like a movie that is a hit at the box office but the democracy of the box office has to mean something. People are lining up an plunking down their hard earned money for some reason. We may not always agree with the opinion of others but exactly who is it that determines whether something is art or not?

[J.R. Hudson]

It's hip to not like a movie that is a hit at the box office

Exactly.

Titanic is the single example of this. I've never seen so many people say they didnt like it (A Blockbuster)

[Draccan]

I alway's find it odd people don't dig Titanic (Yes, you can resurect an entire thread about it)...

But, out of all Cameron's work; I'd say Titanic is the more artistic of them

What would youcall art Draacon ?

What would you call 'Titanic, Aliens, Terminator and Titanic' ?


Well this is of course a can of worms. First of all I do believe it is and always have been about personal taste. There are thousands of ideas about what is art exactly and starting that discussion in this thread might not be very useful. But I can give you just one snippet of my thoughts about that:
For me art is something that wants to be more than just entertaining. Thus comes the didactic aspect - the wish to teach us / show us something in a new way.

In Titanic I have a hard time grasping what is Camerons message or what I can learn from this film, besides aesthetics. It is art for arts sake maybe. But there are no true metaphor, no depth. It answers all my questions - and for me art is something that makes me ask questions.

Terminator actually has a little bit of social criticism in its dystopic view of the future. One could argue to brush it of as sci-fi entertainment and rightly so, but I will defend the film of its approach to the future - and yes it did make me ask questions when I was younger.

I am not bashing the films - for a decade Alien + Aliens were my favourite films. I am a Ripley fan incarnate, but I just think one has to consider careful the message and value of the metaphor of a film before one put that sticker Art on it.
In many ways the discussion of whether or not something is art is useless (like all art in general hehe) - lets discuss what the it tries to tell instead.

And Cameron is the big hot shot American special effects dude no doubt - but his films does not contribute to the world in a way that it justifies treating employees like ****. If one can not create art / films / whatever without being a dick then maybe one should stay home and reconsider what it is one is trying to do and for who...

Just my 0.02$

LLD

[Greggl]

Aliens is my #2 all time sci-fi movie right behind Blade Runner.

Ridley Scott has a reputation as a hard-case as well.. going WAY back.

[Blaine]

There are usually two sides to every story.

[surf]

I am with John

[The Machinist]

My beef with Titanic is that i didn't enjoy it. To this day i still do not find the film entertaining for many of the reasons i stated earlier. Other people like it and thats cool but it didn't work for me.

[Blaine]

My beef with Titanic is that i didn't enjoy it. To this day i still do not find the film entertaining for many of the reasons i stated earlier. Other people like it and thats cool but it didn't work for me.

I can accept that. I enjoyed it and found it entertaining even though I can't stand Leonardo. I particularly liked the Bill Paxton side of the story.

I really try to separate the personal lives of the people involved in making the movies from the movies themselves. Granted, it can be hard sometimes.

[mmm]

I have just been watching Titanic, and I think it would be so much better if Kate Winslet wasn't cast.

Hmmmmm... who would I have cast... Natalie Portman? Scarlett Johansson? What do you guys think?

[Draccan]

I have just been watching Titanic, and I think it would be so much better if Kate Winslet wasn't cast.

Hmmmmm... who would I have cast... Natalie Portman? Scarlett Johansson? What do you guys think?


Come ooooon.... Kate Winslet (nude) was the highlight of the film...

She she she..... :kiss:

mmm

LLD

[Darkline]

I love Cameron's work, but I agree with the machinist that he is great in a certain field. Action flicks with great charatcers, in my opinion he is unrivaled.

But genius is normally handed out to cutting edge styles of film-making. A director who can re-invent himself and define whole genreations of wannabe's with his style. Someone at the front of whole movements in cinema. Not someone who can execute commercial cinema very well.

Simply because something is commercial does not tranlate to it being of value either. According to box office revenue, Stephen Sommers and Chris columbus are actually great directors....

Oscars. It's Hollywood who vote.. People jump on the band wagon. Have you noticed once a film is nominated for best picture it (more often than not) seems to get nominated for everything else too. Costume, sound mix, cinematography, actor, actresses

Out of all the films from all corners of the globe could you honestly say in 1 year a single film topped every other in every category? It's ridiculous.

A lot of it is political. Oscars have no signifcance on the quality of a film - just a 'popular with the masses and easy please' award in general. Its backpatting for people in the business.

But not to take away from Cameron, he really knows how to fuse action and characters better than other directors in his peergroup. I look forward to his next film; tho battle angel just isnt twanging my strings right now.