Quote:
Originally Posted by olivehead
You beat me to it. This is spot on. I would only add that, unlike some filmmakers who at a certain point in their career seem to go back to basics and work on less expensive and more character-driven films (and maybe Cameron simply hasn't reached this point in his career), Cameron seems have only one direction -- forward (meaning bigger stories, bigger budgets, although not necessarily bigger stars). I think he's always only been limited by what money he could come up with at a certain time in his career. I think that if he'd had $100 million to spend on the first Terminator, he'd have spent it.
|
I've always suspected that
Terminator 2 is precisely what Cameron would've done with
The Terminator if he'd been given $100M back in 1984.
The other "forward" you haven't mentioned with respect to Cameron is filmmaking technology.
The Abyss was not just a giant leap forward in CGI, but the technology that was developed to make underwater cinematography that much easier.
Avatar -- whatever faults the story may have -- was a considerable technical achievement in 3D photography. The poor guy was hoping that it would be the future of filmmaking. Too bad that the studios have, for the most part, gone the cheaper route of shooting in 2D, and using post-processing for the 3D.