The man who directed the supposed highest grossing film ever, and who can pretty do much anything he wants at this point in his career–including offing a band of Himalayan immigrants with Nerf light sabers–is not a happy camper.
This time his pent-up frustration is aimed at the Academy of Motion Picture Art and Sciences, who failed to nominate Avatar in the category of acting for this years Oscars. Seriously, James Cameron? The damn thing got nine nominations, including Best Picture, and you’re still not happy?
You spend 15-years making a movie, using groundbreaking CGI technology, release the film with the best 3D technology ever, and you’re upset that the actors didn’t get nominated? What the hell did you think was going to happen? Here’s a newsflash for ‘ya, James: When that much time and effort is spent on the bells and whistles of a film, where you use sophisticated equipment to capture the facial expressions and motions of a human being, and put them up on the big screen all smurf-like, no one gives a shit about the acting. Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana did not make this film $603 million dollars, the 3D and CGI did.
He says that the Academy is “confused” by the technology of Avatar, and therefore not giving enough credit to the actors of the film. Well, seeing as how Avatar wasn’t nominated for Best Original Screenplay, I’m guessing they didn’t have much to work with there. So it’s no wonder neither of them were nominated.
Oh, one more thing, James. Adjusting for inflation and basing the numbers on actual ticket admissions, Gone With the Wind is still the highest grossing film of all time. (Of! All! Time!) Avatar isn’t even in the top 20.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you greedy jackass.
Comments
Russell
February 12th, 2010 - 4:32:13 PM
Actually, Avatar is #20 of! all! time! domestic, and has been out less than 60 days. Pretty sure all the movies ahead of it were out more than 60. Also pretty sure the majority of the movies ahead of it have been re-released multiple times.....and none of them did 72% of their business oversees (and oversees is not accounted for on that list). But its cool to find another "journalist" who likes to alter factual information and lie to make a point. Its funny that I have a better understanding of how box office works than you do.
1
Jack
February 12th, 2010 - 5:07:15 PM
Jason, you're just another retard who thinks you're a badass because you don't like a popular movie. What have you done in your life that allows you to dismiss the success of the most cutting edge movie of our time? James Cameron's movie is great, and your movie is a pile of non-existent shit.
2
James Melzer
February 12th, 2010 - 6:08:03 PM
Hey Jack, (at least I got YOUR name right), I'm not dismissing the film. I said it has the best 3D technology ever, and groundbreaking CGI. It's a freakin technological marvel for the senses. What I am dismissing is Cameron's whining over the actors not getting nominated, because that's just ridiculous. Oh, and you're right, my non-existent movie is a pile of shit, but the three novels I've sold in my time, with the fourth one on the way, are doing just fine. Thanks!
3
Greg
February 12th, 2010 - 9:23:21 PM
This is ridiculous. It's funny how everyone jumps on a ship as soon as it sets sail. like when the whole world loved Obama, then he turned out to be a turd that won't flush. Cameron's film succeeds (and let's forget about adusting for inflation and all that crap, we live in the present, sorry people) and everyone is watching and waiting for him to fail. He has already come out and said he was a jackass with his "king of the world" comment. He already admitted that avatar's success was a huge suprise. It sounds like 12 years has mellowed the man a little. He's still one of the best groundbreaking directors out there (better that George Lucas and his shit prequel trilogy anyway). I don't think he should get best picture, that should go to inglorious basterds, but definately best director. Love it or hate it, he wrote and directed a movie that touched the whole planet. THE WHOLE PLANET!!. (Sorry Bigelow, Hurt Locker didn't even break even.) Now he just wants a little respect for his actors who had to wear those motion capture suits and face-rigs for 18 months. I say Zoe Saldana's performance was beautiful, and it was HER performance, it doesn't matter if she looked blue. This is the future of cinema. It's called progress people. It's like when we all hated CGI at first. But now it's everywhere. And Mr. Melzer, I commend you on actually responding to your own criticism. I can't tell you how many of these things I've been a part of involving criticising something or someone successful(usually by jealous women knocking successful men in my opinion, but you know what "they" say about opinions)and none of them have the balls to defend themselves. (which is why I think they're women, they can start shit, but they can't finish it) Anyway, this is just what I think. Thanks everybody.
4
kyle
February 15th, 2010 - 11:46:20 AM
Greg sounds like he has problems with women. Take it somewhere else...
5
Jeremy
February 16th, 2010 - 2:48:50 PM
I really liked the Hurt Locker, but I can see how it's too intense for some people. You can't judge quality by popularity, otherwise this site trashed "Valentine's Day" for no good reason...
6
Greg
February 20th, 2010 - 8:29:22 PM
Well, Kyle, good job on commenting on the actual substance of the article. What a little douche! Take your vibrator somewhere else...
7