James Cameron Says The Hurt Locker Would Have Been Better In 3D
It's a fairly well established fact that James Cameron has a big ego. It goes from declaring himself "King of the World" at the Oscars to the unending espousing of Avatar's brilliance. But when his film lost both Best Picture and Best Director at last year's Academy Awards, it's understandable that said ego got a bit bruised. So what does someone like Cameron do after that kind of event? He talks about how the movie that beat him could have been better.
With the re-release of Avatar coming next week, Cameron did an interview with Entertainment Weekly in which he flat out said that The Hurt Locker would have been a better film had it been in 3D. Though he added a caveat that it "wouldn’t have been hugely better in 3D," he continued to express his belief that the future of filmmaking rests in the extra dimension, saying, "I’m talking about a future when you don’t have to put “in 3D” on the movie poster anymore, the same way that you don’t put “in color” on posters anymore. Imagine that point in time, when 3D is just a natural, innate part of viewing." He also added that the battle between The Hurt Locker and Avatar was a David and Goliath story (in this metaphor, he is Goliath), and that "the Academy always likes to be the great equalizer."
This story actually makes me question whether or not Cameron has actually seen any of the 3D movies that have come out post-Avatar. Looking at our "Ten Best 3D Movies" list, you might notice that there isn't a single entry from 2010. Post-conversion 3D is incredibly shitty and many sections of the mainstream audience have already grown tired of the gimmick. Give it up, Mr. Cameron.
Back to top