James Cameron Thinks Ex-Wife Kathryn Bigelow’s ‘The Hurt Locker’ Would Have Been Better In 3D
By The Movie God
| @
|
Saturday, August 14th, 2010 at 10:25 pm
In an interview with Entertainment Weekly recently, Avatar director James Cameron spoke about his ex-wife and fellow Academy Award-nominee for Best Picture and Best Director, Kathryn Bigelow. Cameron talked about competing (and eventually losing) against her at the Oscars and also his thoughts on 3D being used in a smaller movie like Bigelow’s Best Picture-winner, The Hurt Locker.
It’s no secret that Cameron is the godfather of the 3D revolution, working to prove how incredible it can be when done correctly, and how he hopes that one day the technology’s usage will be a given with each film. When talking about The Hurt Locker, and whether it could have been better with 3D, here’s what the director had to say:
I think [The Hurt Locker] would have been better in 3D. Absolutely. It wouldn’t have been hugely better in 3D, but I’m talking a future where you don’t have to put “˜in 3D’ on the movie poster anymore, the same way you don’t put “˜in color’ on posters anymore.
Cameron then went on to talk about Oscar night, and how Bigelow and her little trials and tribulations of war movie-that-could went on to win the biggest prizes against his juggernaut in Avatar.
It was David and Goliath. Goliath had made more than a couple of billion dollars and The Hurt Locker had made about what it cost to shoot, about $15 million. The Academy always likes to be the great equalizer. But I don’t begrudge her any of that. I couldn’t think of a better outcome for our lives. I got my Oscar. She got her Oscar.
Interesting quotes indeed! But Cameron is just an interesting gentleman — we all know this to be true.
As good as he is, he’s clearly delusional about the importance of 3D. Sure, it’s going to play a big part in the future of cinema, but there’s no way it will replace conventional cinematography. And if 3D is going to continue to be used in movies, it will have to morph into a completely different way of going about making movies. Even James Cameron couldn’t move away from what doesn’t suit 3D, such as focus and all other rules of cinematography. It will have to be an art-form on it’s own.
You may have noticed that we're now AD FREE! Please support Geeks of Doom by using the Amazon Affiliate link above. All of our proceeds from the program go toward maintaining this site.
Students of the Unusual™ comic cover used with permission of 3BoysProductions
The Mercuri Bros.™ comic cover used with permission of Prodigal Son Press
As good as he is, he’s clearly delusional about the importance of 3D. Sure, it’s going to play a big part in the future of cinema, but there’s no way it will replace conventional cinematography. And if 3D is going to continue to be used in movies, it will have to morph into a completely different way of going about making movies. Even James Cameron couldn’t move away from what doesn’t suit 3D, such as focus and all other rules of cinematography. It will have to be an art-form on it’s own.
Comment by Haldered — August 14, 2010 @ 11:59 pm
Not everything needs to be 3-D.
Comment by korollocke — August 15, 2010 @ 10:30 am
James Cameron is a complete idiot. He needs to stop doing things that are not directing
Comment by Andrew Littler — August 15, 2010 @ 1:40 pm
fuck 3D
Comment by Doc Blitzgeek — August 15, 2010 @ 5:26 pm