James Cameron Rips Into Piranha 3D

[Jaebird]

Can someone remind Cameron that 3D doesn't make a movie? Also, tell him that the only reason people are slapping 3D onto their movies nowadays is because it's a weak attempt to get more cash from the movie-going audience who are stupid enough to waste their money on this shit. It sure as hell isn't a "Renaissance".

Mr. Dances with FernGully should keep his mouth shut.

 

[Krion_Vark]

Did the 3D technique add anything to our experience? No, not really, but we still enjoyed ourselves.

Everything that has to be said about 3-D is right there. In the rides at Disney World where 3-D like this originated they don't just use 3-D they use peripheral things as well. Like fans at your feet to be like mice running around. Or smells of cinnamon. Seriously I do not think that 3-D added anything in my experience when I saw Avatar. Yeah it was cool. But it didn't do anything MIND blowing besides blowing a hole in my wallet.

 

[LightspeedJack]

Shut up Cameron even Piranha 3D had a better plot and dialogue than Avatar!

 

[Danpascooch]

I hope he doesn't think he's the be all end all expert on 3D because of that crappy movie he made (Avatar is what I'm talking about, if you happen to have lived under a rock AND have Syphilis for the past few years)

He probably does though

 

[Con Carne]

Yeah, Cameron is right. Its trying to latch on to the 80's staple of horror films. It did it, albeit a dumb as hell movie. If he wanted to bad mouth it, I think he should have talked about just how horrible of a movie it is, and left the 3d alone.

 

[crystalsnow]

I love how the only people who hate Piranha 3D are the ones that don't get that it's meant as a joke.

 

[TheEnglishman]

Wait, James Cameron is accusing people of using tactics to maximise profit, is he also critisising them of being Canadian?

Considering how Cameron says how diverse the medium of film is, it's rather ignorant of him to assume that 3D can only be used in the restrictive medium of "Giant Epics with optional storyline". In the case of Piranha 3D it was using 3D as part of it's Shamless Exploitation Style Parody. There was logic to its use. (at least in comparison to some *cough* Clash of the Titans *cough*)

We can't all make 3D films so epic they don't need remotley original storyline's Mr Cameron! Some of us just need to make do with Lesbians dancing naked underwater IN 3D!

 

[Assassin Xaero]

I haven't seen Piranha 3D, but I have to disagree.

Spoiler: If anything, this is an example of what we should not be doing in 3D.

 

[TheEnglishman]

I love how the only people who hate Piranha 3D are the ones that don't get that it's meant as a joke.

That would work on the assumption that they've actually seen it.

 

[Dioxide20]

3D: Avatar, YES
Piranha 3D, NO

Agreed. I hate the 3D effects in these types of movies, the "OMG TEH (insert object here) IS COMIN RIGHT AT MAH FACE!!1!" effect is not what 3D should be used for.

 

[DSK-]

Technology in entertainment doesn't necessarily make it enjoyable experience. Sure it may look pretty, but everything else may be lacklustre and crappy.

The last time I saw a movie at the cinema was back in 2000. I have yet to come across anything that has made me want to watch it on the big screen rather than renting the DVD. A Renaissance? perhaps, in technological terms. Evolution rather than revolution of the visual medium, I dare say.

Of course, this might be because I'm a boring bastard at the best of times.

*shrugs*

 

[Pandalisk]

I never liked the 3D gimmick anyway, i never saw a single difference from 2D to 3D and wearing those 3D glasses over my own is bloody annoying.

As for Avatar's 3D about the only thing i noticed jumping out at me was the subtitles and from time to time those snow dust petal things.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

I haven't seen Piranha 3D, but I have to disagree.

Spoiler: If anything, this is an example of what we should not be doing in 3D.

We do not speakth of that movie, sir! NOT. SPEAKTH!

Also, Cameron.. Avatar sucked in anything but visual appeal. Go away.

 

[sms_117b]

Didn't like Avatar thought the 3D effects were un-noticable really, however Piranha was awesome back when I watched it years ago, so I might make it the second 3D film I see

 

[somekindarobot]

I think Cameron is just pissed that Piranha 3D exposes 3D as what it really is: a gimmick, nothing more, and certainly not a technical revolution in in the mediums of television and cinema as him and others have been touting it. Sure, it can be a fun gimmick, but still just a gimmick.

I'm with Cameron on this one. I loved the 3D in Avatar because it showed depth of field. Piranha 3D and the upcoming Resident Evil movie (which I refuse to see under any circumstances) use it as an excuse to throw things at the screen. I hate it hardcore.

Forgive me if I sound asinine, but I never can tell the difference between "depth of field" 3D and 2D (perhaps it's just my inadequate vision, though). Therefore it is my honest opinion that 3D is good for nothing but throwing things at the screen, hence not good for much at all.

 

[FloodOne]

Did I stumble into an alternate universe where James Cameron makes works of art?

God save me...

 

[Xanthious]

I will say this to Cameron. You take 3D away from Avatar and it's just a shitty remake of Dances With Wolves using screwy looking cat people. I've seen it in DVD at home w/o 3D and it was just mediocre. You take 3D away from Piranha 3D and it's still a funny and enjoyable movie that doesn't use 3D as a crutch to mask it's shortcomings.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

I think Cameron is just pissed that Piranha 3D exposes 3D as what it really is: a gimmick, nothing more, and certainly not a technical revolution in in the mediums of television and cinema as him and others have been touting it. Sure, it can be a fun gimmick, but still just a gimmick.

I'm with Cameron on this one. I loved the 3D in Avatar because it showed depth of field. Piranha 3D and the upcoming Resident Evil movie (which I refuse to see under any circumstances) use it as an excuse to throw things at the screen. I hate it hardcore.

Forgive me if I sound asinine, but I never can tell the difference between "depth of field" 3D and 2D (perhaps it's just my inadequate vision, though). Therefore it is my honest opinion that 3D is good for nothing but throwing things at the screen, hence not good for much at all.

I do, but admittedly it shows up best when something else is used as a point of reference (any scene where they were looking out of the window in a ship in Avatar).

 

[The Amazing Tea Alligator]

Ahaha! What a hippocritical prick. Ya because Avatar was a damn fine film filled with interesting characters, an unforgettable story and shit. Bastard.

 

[DanDeFool]

You know what would elevate 3D movies to works of art? Make a movie that uses the 3D effects to mess with your head. Say it uses optical illusions created with 3D to enhance a horror or suspense movie, or to create some good WTF moments in a bizarre or otherworldly movie. I'll bet a movie like INCEPTION could have had some fun with strange 3D effects, with the paradoxical architecture and whatnot.