Cameron/Jackson talk | Movie News
Cameron/Jackson talk
Dec. 23, 2009

The latest issue of Newsweek just hit a couple of days ago and it's The Interview Issue, and in it there's a cool back-and-forth between two of the most talked about directors of the moment, James Cameron and Peter Jackson. The two are basically interviewing themselves and talking primarily about technology, their uses of technology, and its perception both in the marketplace and in the mainstream. Good stuff.
Below is an excerpt I thought was rather interesting when you consider some of the things being said regarding sfx and story in both Cameron's AVATAR and Jackson's THE LOVELY BONES. CLICK HERE to head on over to Newsweek.com to read the whole thing.
JACKSON: There are all great tools that people haven't quite gotten their heads around yet. But one of the things that has happened [is that] people focus on technology. Probably the film industry has been guilty; there's more attention spent on the technical aspects than the story. That's led to a self-fulfilling prophecy. People regard CGI as a gimmick, they almost blame CGI for a bad story or a bad script. They talk about CGI as if it's responsible for a drop in standards. We've gotten to a point now where there isn't nothing else we haven't seen. We've seen dinosaurs, we've seen aliens; with Avatar we've seen realistic creatures. I think we're going to enter a phase where there's less interest in the CGI and there's a demand for story again. I think we've dropped the ball a little bit on stories for the sake of the amazing toys that we've played with.
CAMERON: I think you're right. What's interesting in the marketing evolution of Avatar is that we put out a teaser trailer that was all about the imagery, and people were less than satisfied, because they weren't learning enough about the story. We put out a story trailer that set the stage and told you what the main character was, and all of a sudden people were wildly excited about the movie. There's the proof within the marketing evolution of a single film.
Source: Newsweek
Extra Tidbit: I'm gonna have to agree with PJ's last sentence there. I'm glad he himself sees that.























































































6:06AM on 12/27/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
1:55PM on 12/25/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
1:53AM on 12/24/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
11:56PM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
8:28PM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
7:14PM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
6:13PM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
4:27PM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
4:08PM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
11:46AM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
11:31AM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
10:31AM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
11:23AM on 12/23/2009 Add as a friend | MFC profile
story was nothing new, i agree 100 percent on that, but visually it was new, 3d was incredible, and the action alone made me very very happy i saw the movie
story was nothing new, i agree 100 percent on that, but visually it was new, 3d was incredible, and the action alone made me very very happy i saw the movie