When we heard news that a big-screen version of “Battleship” was headed our way, many of us weren’t thrilled.
To that list of those who aren’t fans you can add Oscar-winner James Cameron.
Cameron says the proposed film that will see warships take on aliens is a disgrace.
“We have a story crisis,” he says. “Now they want to make the ‘Battleship’ game into a film. This is pure desperation.”
“Everyone in Hollywood knows how important it is that a film is a brand before it hit theaters,” he added. “If a brand has been around, Harry Potter for example, or Spider-Man, you are light years ahead. And there lies the problem. Because unfortunately these franchises are becoming more ridiculous. Battleship. This degrades the cinema.”
This isn’t the first time in recent memory that the director has come out and been critical of big-budget offerings by Hollywood. He was critical of “Piranha 3-D” last year.
Those who live glass houses should not cast stones. Cameron has never had an original thought so he has no right making such comments.
Avatar degraded cinema.
Seriously?!? He has no room for calling Battleship a sign of a story crisis. It may very well suck, but how does he know and who's he to judge? Avatar was extremely derivative and had a crappy story. It's like Shamalamadingdong not knowing how bad his latest movies have been; the ego is so huge, there's no room for objective self-evaluation. It's sad.
Have to agree that Avatar wasn't as good as all the hype ( I wasn't impressed) but I also have to say I had the same gut reaction when I heard they were making a Battleship movie...it does seem that Hollywood has run out of ideas.
At least Avatar wasn't a brand when it hit cinemas. Give him that....
I happen to really like Avatar. Not for (what passes for) the story, but for the visuals.. That said, I agree that Cameron has little standing to cast aspersions at another film's lack of originality.
Wasn't impressed by Avatar at all. Nor I believe that Cameron is someone that should be listened to too much. He was praised for his future vision on 3D cinema, but untill we can watch 3D without glasses in our homes and actually pay for it, we still have a long path ahead!
@ David Hill - You're aware that the Avatar video game was released before the movie, right?
Regardless of what you thought of Avatar, it's ridiculous to say that Cameron has no right to speak his mind on the topic. We all speak our minds on crap like this every day. Why should he not be permitted to do the same?
Hell, I talk spout opinions on upcoming movies like it's going out of style. So do the Slicers during the movie segment of the show each week. It seems like folks in this thread are implying that if you actually make movies for a living you should shut up and keep your opinions to yourself.
Cameron has his right to an opinion like everyone else, but when you've just made a bazillion dollars off a flashy, effects-driven blockbuster whose plot was an uninspired carbon copy of at least two other films, and whose main selling point was pioneering a new effects technique, it seems a bit rich to be spouting off about other films being "ridiculous" and "degrading the cinema".
If anyone is qualified to comment on potential films, it is Cameron. After all, he directed two of the largest grossing films of all time. If that isn't adequate, WHAT IS?
The skills, values and vision to create such financial juggernauts speaks to a man that understands film making at a level few can understand.
I do find it funny that people that want to criticize Cameron's films refer vaguely to other films. What were they? HOW MUCH DID THEY MAKE?
Last, how can you make a movie about a board game that moves little pieces around in the blind? Better to remake "Starship Troopers" in a version that doesn't mke RAH spin in his grave.
Avatar = Dances With Wolves in space. Both were at least Oscar-nominated movies that made a lot of money. Avatar was just prettier.
Ahh... a story about planetary natives being overwhelmed by a more technologically advanced civilization. Yet through luck and by pluck, the natives win out in the end though the clever use of their environment and more primitive technology. Winning free of the menace more because they have "heart" and "determination", than by any clever writing or plot point.
But, it was not the plot I minded so much, as it was the CGI and the trite character stereotypes used (enemies were one dimensional and evil with no real justification, there was a gruff, yet fair leader, a tough, yet sexy warrior woman, a wise healer, etc..).
You really have to hate that Battle Star Galactica show.
I think Cameron makes an excellent point... Hollywood is so derivative today. There hasn't been an original idea since the beginning of film. He is right in saying that movies like "Battleship" degrade cinema... what's next? A Hot Wheels movie or some such nonsense. Cameron may be an asshole, but he's an innovator. Most of the technology used in Avatar was stuff that he and his various teams came up with, plus he's invented a couple of underwater cameras, an ROV (I think) and is an advisor to NASA. The fact that he directed the two highest grossing films of all time lends his opinions some credibility. I'm not in love with the guy, but as far as film goes, he's pretty much the leading authority... At least he's not schlocking up his old films like Lucas.