Will James Cameron be the death of movies (and possibly us all?)

[lovelovefilm]

So I read an article today that announced that James Cameron is planning to re-release his first epic - Titanic - in 2012. He's also planning to re-release Avatar to scoop up the 7 people who didn't see it the first time around. Considering Hollywood is becoming more and more obsessed with the re-boot, the re-make and other demons of unoriginality, is re-releasing old films the next step? Are there actually any new ideas out there?!

[j7wild]

he might as well re-release Aliens, Terminator, Terminator 2, The Abyss and True Lies in 3D

speaking of True Lies, why didn't he ever make a sequel to it?

He is also currently re-making Fantastic Voyage, Forbidden Planet and making Terminator 5 which hopefully will make people forget the Hideous, Horrible, Crappy Terminator 4!!

[odj_310388]

So I read an article today that announced that James Cameron is planning to re-release his first epic - Titanic - in 2012.

He's also planning to re-release Avatar to scoop up the 7 people who didn't see it the first time around.

Considering Hollywood is becoming more and more obsessed with the re-boot, the re-make and other demons of unoriginality, is re-releasing old films the next step?

Are there actually any new ideas out there?!

Personally I would love to see Titanic in 3D, its one of those last summer films that did a hell of a lot in practical. Heck Cameron himself said that if he was doing the film today it would have all been in CG, would have taken something away imo. Granted there are scenes in Titanic that are CG but there is a certain tactile nature to it that you know most of those areas were created.

Yea cause Avatar reached $2.6 billion on people only seeing it once, yea right. *rolls eyes* Do you realise how long Titanic ran for in the cinemas? 41 weeks. Avatar has been out for 12 and because of Alice in Wonderland and the up-coming Clash of the Titans its being pushed out of the 3D screens. Cameron wants people to be able to see this film for as long as possible and keep seeing it as many times as they want. I've seen it twice myself, will I go and see it again if it gets re-released in the summer? Probably! Its that good a film.

3D has been accepted (weather it should have been or not is another argument) as a format that is viable. And when that happens people are bound to re-release older films in this new format for profit, that's half of what the industry is, profit.

Considering you put questioning original ideas at the end of a talk on a film like Avatar makes me question your entire post. Avatar pushed so much, granted you may say that it didn't push story or characters, I'd agree but I'll be damned if it didn't push everything else. Avatar's performance capture will pave the way for such emotive 3D characters to the point where if a actor is a bad actor, they will make their 3D character a bad actor. Watching Alice in Wonderland after Avatar is a painful experience for two reasons, one the world does not mix with the live action therefore taking me out of the experience and not making me believe in the world, two the animated characters do not behave like I think they should behave, therefore taking me out of the experience and not believe in the characters.

[j7wild]

Watching Alice in Wonderland after Avatar is a painful experience for two reasons, one the world does not mix with the live action therefore taking me out of the experience and not making me believe in the world, two the animated characters do not behave like I think they should behave, therefore taking me out of the experience and not believe in the characters.

I've been wanting to see it; so you are not recommending I pay $14 to see it?

[ClaytonMG]

I personally do not think Titanic should be in 3D. It will cheapen the experience IMO. Terminator 2 seems like something that actually might be a good choice to convert for 3D though. However, I don't really think any film should be converted to 3D (except for CG films which have 3D enviorments created for them anyway).

I am sick of the whole 3D thing in general though and don't think I'll be paying extra to see anymore 3D features. It's just tiring hearing about it. And how some people think it'll become the standard... that's just disturbing.

[jacques1400]

All I can say is that 3D was tried before, and granted the technology has greatly evolved, but it's still a gimmick. Taking into consideration that I never was able to understand what all the fuss was about back then, only to find out later in life that I am unable to see anything 3D (and still cant), I am forced to see a movie for what it is.
So, sorry but nothing can replace good filmaking, and if you need to use a "gimmick" to promote it, then it's obviously not as good as it should.
Cameron hit the jackpot with Avatar, but sure as hell did'nt win the jackpot at the academy awards.
To me this concept is simply a reflection of the total lack of imagination in Hollywood these days, let's recycle all the old stuff with 3D technology and we can double dip at the theatres too, after all it's cheaper than paying for something new.

[redbear]

...So, sorry but nothing can replace good filmaking, and if you need to use a "gimmick" to promote it, then it's obviously not as good as it should.
Cameron hit the jackpot with Avatar, but sure as hell did'nt win the jackpot at the academy awards.
To me this concept is simply a reflection of the total lack of imagination in Hollywood these days, let's recycle all the old stuff with 3D technology and we can double dip at the theatres too, after all it's cheaper than paying for something new.

took the words right out of my mouth. though, i think cameron was lucky avatar did as well as it did, financially. i saw it once and that was more than enough for me. it was an FX film and nothing more than that - though, the FX were pretty nice, i wasnt enough for me to see it again let alone playing more to see it in 3D.

[j7wild]

I said the same thing 10 days ago but no one listens (or reads) what I say (or write):

http://www.movie-list.com/forum/show...7&postcount=15

now they are going to crank out movies in 3D so fast just for the sake of having them in 3D and in the short run, the quality is going to suffer;

not everyone has 14 years like Cameron to make a movie!!

[jacques1400]

I said the same thing 10 days ago but no one listens (or reads) what I say (or write):

http://www.movie-list.com/forum/show...7&postcount=15

now they are going to crank out movies in 3D so fast just for the sake of having them in 3D and in the short run, the quality is going to suffer;

not everyone has 14 years like Cameron to make a movie!!

We always value your comments J7.

[redbear]

I said the same thing 10 days ago but no one listens (or reads) what I say (or write):

http://www.movie-list.com/forum/show...7&postcount=15

now they are going to crank out movies in 3D so fast just for the sake of having them in 3D and in the short run, the quality is going to suffer;

not everyone has 14 years like Cameron to make a movie!!

We always value your comments J7.

who..what ?? someone say something ??



j/k ...

[odj_310388]

All I can say is that 3D was tried before, and granted the technology has greatly evolved, but it's still a gimmick. ...only to find out later in life that I am unable to see anything 3D (and still cant), I am forced to see a movie for what it is.

I'm not trying to hate on you for not being able to see 3D cause in my opinion that sucks bawls but to judge something a gimmick when you cannot even experience it, kinda one sided don't you think?

I had your exact opinion of 3D before Avatar came out, heck I was thinking of going to see it in 2D but no, I gave it a chance and damn am I glad I did.

[michalz00]

Will James Cameron be the death of movies?

So far he is the only director that guarantees (and continues) to draw huge crowds in theaters

[jacques1400]

I'm not trying to hate on you for not being able to see 3D cause in my opinion that sucks bawls but to judge something a gimmick when you cannot even experience it, kinda one sided don't you think?

I had your exact opinion of 3D before Avatar came out, heck I was thinking of going to see it in 2D but no, I gave it a chance and damn am I glad I did.

My statement was simply to explain that I can only judge a movie by what it is without 3D, I am not judging Avatar itself, the Academy Awards did that.
Gimmicks to sell films have been used for years, shaking seats, surround sound of different names with bass so low in the spectrum it made your brain numb, electric shocks, and yes, the 3D experience. Just because I cant see 3D does not mean I am blind, I can see when a shot was specifically made to have it's effect on viewers, things coming straight at you, or popping out in your face, they just appear to me out of place and not necessary for the story (I am not referring to Avatar specifically here). Just like the entire planet, you saw Avatar and that's great, you loved it and I am happy for you, but personally I enjoyed Titanic better and it was'nt 3D.
You can hate me for it if you want, and that's OK, I'll just send you a link to my wife's blog and discuss it ,...

[odj_310388]

My statement was simply to explain that I can only judge a movie by what it is without 3D, I am not judging Avatar itself, the Academy Awards did that.
Gimmicks to sell films have been used for years, shaking seats, surround sound of different names with bass so low in the spectrum it made your brain numb, electric shocks, and yes, the 3D experience. Just because I cant see 3D does not mean I am blind, I can see when a shot was specifically made to have it's effect on viewers, things coming straight at you, or popping out in your face, they just appear to me out of place and not necessary for the story (I am not referring to Avatar specifically here). Just like the entire planet, you saw Avatar and that's great, you loved it and I am happy for you, but personally I enjoyed Titanic better and it was'nt 3D.
You can hate me for it if you want, and that's OK, I'll just send you a link to my wife's blog and discuss it ,...

Haha I don't hate you, I just thought it a bit presumptuous to call something gimmicky without even experiencing it. And I agree most film makers look at 3D and think "Lets throw things at the screen. It'll make people go whoa!" but when it came to Avatar that wasn't the point, the point was to simply make a great film, like Titanic, and make it in 3D at a quality that would make the screen become a window instead of a flat object. So if anything older films are better candidates for 3D than newer ones as people are going to specifically think of shots for 3D to "WOW" audiences with new films instead of focusing on making a great film and having it have a sense of depth with the 3D. After hearing rumours about it for a while I personally would LOVE to see the Original Star Wars films in 3D, amazing films, seen for the first time as a window into that world instead of just a flat screen. The only thing that would hold me back is it gives Lucas another chance to mess with them. XD

[ClaytonMG]

My statement was simply to explain that I can only judge a movie by what it is without 3D, I am not judging Avatar itself, the Academy Awards did that.
Gimmicks to sell films have been used for years, shaking seats, surround sound of different names with bass so low in the spectrum it made your brain numb, electric shocks, and yes, the 3D experience. Just because I cant see 3D does not mean I am blind, I can see when a shot was specifically made to have it's effect on viewers, things coming straight at you, or popping out in your face, they just appear to me out of place and not necessary for the story (I am not referring to Avatar specifically here). Just like the entire planet, you saw Avatar and that's great, you loved it and I am happy for you, but personally I enjoyed Titanic better and it was'nt 3D.
You can hate me for it if you want, and that's OK, I'll just send you a link to my wife's blog and discuss it ,...

That is EXACTLY why I hate 3D. At first I was all for it just because of the huge advancements made with the technology over the past few years. Then I started noticing, when watching in 2D, that these shots were uselss and intrusive.

As for Avatar... It didn't really go out of its way for these gimmicks but there were some moments where they obviously went "wow this will be awesome in 3D!!!" Like you said, much like a sound designer that goes overboard.

But I still see surround sound as a natural way to enhance the experience (provided the mix is properly done and not distracting). Maybe because you don't have to wear glasses that blurr/dim the viewing experience or something... I don't know.