James Cameron wants to re-release Titanic in 3-D:
Filmmaker James Cameron has confirmed he will bring Titanic back to the big screen in 3D.
The director recently joked about updating the 1997 blockbuster using the same technology that brought his Oscar-winning epic Avatar to life.
And now he has confirmed he is serious about plans to rerelease the historical film in 3D — but the new version won’t hit theaters until 2012, to mark 100 years since the legendary ship sank.
He tells USA Today. “We’re targeting spring of 2012 for the release (of a 3D version of Titanic), which is the 100-year anniversary of the sailing of the ship.”
Cameron also revealed he will be putting Avatar back into movie theaters by releasing a director’s cut later this year.
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
The Full Monty and LA Confidential lost the Oscar to Titanic…both much better films
That’s just what I want to pay good money for- Leo DiCraprio and that !@#$ing Celine Dion song in IMAX.
I hated this film. Were the special effects great? Yes. Definitely. Great cinematography. Great special effects. But a movie has to be about story, and the script was craptacular pabuluum. It could have been written by a High Shool drama student. To me, the biggest joke was he took one of the most exciting events of the 19th century, one filled with fascinating real life stories featuring some of the most famous folks of that era, and he threw that all away and plugged in a boilerplate, teen-girl romance.
For anyone who knows the history of that ship and the people on it it is astounding he did not tell the stories he could have told. That stupid, rich girl/poor boy/diamond necklace soap opera script he wrote is literally laughable in light of the real, true stories that happened at that event.
Also not like Kate Winslet’s lovely bosoms aren’t on ample display in much better movies either.
The only modification I’d like to see is to remove the hero and heroine. Whenever I’ve had my hands on a DVD of “Titanic” (I’ve never owned one) I’ve skipped past DiCaprio and Winslet and watched the reenactments of what really happened. I don’t think enough attention has been paid to what else the movie did in the next few years: anytime we have a movie make money on this scale, every studio head asks the director and writer proposing every script, “in what way is this script like Titanic?” or whatever the hit is. Titanic was not just bad in itself, it ruined the one full scale movie about Pearl Harbor we’ll see until probably the mid Twenty-first century. I have the sneaking suspicion there’s an excellent Randall Wallace script of “Pearl Harbor” somewhere that got cut to ribbons to make a love triangle.
Bingo Charlos!! I have been trying to get people to understand this for years. I tell them why I hate Titanic and they reply, “Yeah, but it was a good re-enactment of the wreck.” Yes, but each generation gets one shot for a big studio to pony up the bucks for something like this and he COMPLETELY FAILED TO TELL THE STORY!!! And you are exactly right. Studios foolishly assume the reason it made bazillions is precisely because it failed to tell the story. They falsely assume Americans don’t want to see real history unfold on the big screen. So, just as you said, they start wanting that in every big budget film “based” on real events.
I thought the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor to impress Tojo’s girl friend living in Hilo?
Thank God they didn’t attack Pearl Bailey or we’d have nuked them 3 times.
During the attack a seaman, Billy Gibbons, dropped a pearl necklace he was going to give his gal, Rose Bukater, into the harbor. It’s the true story Michael Bay based his film on.
Rose? I knew her. She had a sister who lived on the hill — she wouldn’t do it but her sister will. Also Billy probably couldn’t see because while he was partying on the patio he lost sight of the pearls in the glare caused by his cheap sunglasses. That’s what happens when you hangout with beer drinkers and hell-raisers.
How’s that, Floyd? My head’s in Mississippi.
Actually,Rufus,it was the 20th Century
Oh, you’re thinking about the ship, “Titanic.” I thought we were talking about the stagecoach.
I thought you meant BC… the chariot Titanic…
“I’m Barack Obama,your Captain!”…Titanic = USA
I only have one thing to say about a remake of “Titanic.” NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
It was worse than horrible. There is no word to describe how horrible the movie was. Cameron couldn’t tell a decent story because his knowledge of history is so lacking. The whole premise of Rose even running into a starving artist riding steerage is beyond ridiculous it couldn’t have happened. EVer. period. Dumbass (Cameron) had a chance to tell a good story not just about the Titanic but about class and how people percieved what it meant and instead of being subtle he took a ham and beat us over the head with it. And the whole Lake Neeshonek or whatever they were talking about in Wisconsin? ITS A MAN MADE LAKE THAT DID NOT EXIST TILL AFTER I THINK WWI. Why did Jack have to be poor? Why not a libertine artist that people of wealth hired to paint who was able to afford to be in first class? Its either because Cameron has the imagination of a Med Fly or it never occured to him to actually write amazing history. And why Wisconsin? I mean Jack could have been the Robert Burns or Hugh Hefner of 1912 and Cameron totally dropped the ball because he totally ignored the societal storms that were brewing under the surface to make some sort of pseudo marxist statement about class that we all already knew. Everything that happened after WWI had its start in the intellectual and literary and artist movements of Europe during this time period. The early 20th Century was a hubub of societal change and Cameron was too ignorant of what that could have meant to his story because he is an arrogant know it all who writes lazy scripts that more resemble childish teen literature or kiddie finger painting.
Amen, Sister!
Here is an example. You all know I went out of my way to do research into the life of Manfred von Richthofen, aka the Red Baron. He had a cousin named Frieda von Richthofen who while married to a British scholar, met DH Lawrence and ran away with him. Now stuff like that happened a lot before the earlier 20th century but if you look at her and DH Lawrence and others that traveled in and out of his (DH Lawrences) life these things happened with more and more frequency. Norms were being flaunted. Rebellion was in the air in ways none of us can understand. The time period was even more important in history and politics than the 60′s. Look at it this way: With out Lawrence and Frieda, Freud, and others you wouldn’t have the 60′s. Can you all imagine the story that idiot Cameron could have written using that kind of research? Gustav Klimt was starting the Viennese seccession movement, Picasso was beginning to be noticed, Mahler was creating, and of course the intellectuals such as Nietsche and others were making waves. A lot of social stresses were there and ripe to be picked……and there is Cameron taking a very complex and critical moment in Human history with the ability to use a horrifying event like the sinking of the Titanic to make a point and instead of becomming Jack London on one hand and Henry James on the other, we get this paint by numbers Days of Our Lives for teenagers all done in post modern language. He knows the thin surface and the names and thats it. What a moron.
A NIGHT TO REMEMBER was better.
+JMJ+
Man, that’s a big ego trip he’s taking . . . =S