Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Media Movies

James Cameron Guest Edits Wired Magazine 137

Posted by CowboyNeal from the sitting-in dept.
colonist writes "Terminator and Titanic director James Cameron is guest editor of the December issue of WIRED Magazine: 'This special issue of Wired is about honest-to-God, two-fisted, hairy-knuckled exploration.' Cameron worked for nearly a year on this issue, developing stories on the future of exploration in the oceans, on earth and in space. Contributors include Buzz Aldrin, Sean O'Keefe, Burt Rutan, Robert Ballard, Sylvia Earle and Kim Stanley Robinson. (The issue is not online yet.) Apart from making blockbuster films, Cameron explores the depths of the oceans and is a member of the NASA Advisory Council and the Mars Society."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

James Cameron Guest Edits Wired Magazine More

James Cameron Guest Edits Wired Magazine

Comments Filter:

  • James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tezza ( 539307 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @04:19AM (#10862758)
    I think you should mention a Director's most accomplished work, rather than his biggest grossing.

    Terminator is good though.

    • Aliens? You mean the lame blood-n-guts sequel to Ridley Scott's outstanding suspense/horror flick? Well, I suppose it was better than Titanic, but that sure as hell ain't saying much.

      • Re:James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:5, Funny)

        by blowdart ( 31458 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @04:41AM (#10862796) Homepage

        Imagine the satisfaction if he'd got confused. De Caprio is at the front of the boat, arms outstretched, "I'm King of the World ma!" then Winslett opens her mouth, the alien mouth shoots out into the back of his head ....

        Sorry. Won't happen again.

      • Aliens? You mean the lame blood-n-guts sequel to Ridley Scott's outstanding suspense/horror flick?

        Yes. Aliens.

        Alien was good as well.

        Geez, you express an opinion here and all you get is Nay Sayers screaming you down.

        I hope the people who marked my first post as flaimbait feel happy in their usage of their Mod points. You people are just reinforcing GroupThink. My post may not have been Shakespeare [slashdot.org] but it was on topic.

        • Re:James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:5, Interesting)

          by bsartist ( 550317 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @05:15AM (#10862867) Homepage
          Geez, you express an opinion here and all you get is Nay Sayers screaming you down.

          Well, it's not a very popular opinion. The original was a creepy, atmospheric, suspense/horror movie. The audience never even gets to see the alien through most of the movie, just quick flashes that leave the impression or something horrible lurking just slightly out of sight.

          By comparison, the sequels - all of 'em - were run-of-the-mill action flicks. The suspense that made the original so great was gone, and in its place was buckets of gore. They wouldn't have done too badly on their own, but as sequels they were disappointing. I suppose it was inevitable - the original was a *very* tough act to follow, and splatter flicks were making big bank at the time.

          Still, I don't think the "flamebait" mod was warranted, and I hope your comment gets modded back up. Lots of folks might disagree with your opinion of Aliens, but I don't think you intended to pick a fight by posting it. And, you made a very good point - we should recognize a director for his best work, which is not necessarily the same as his most profitable work.

          • Re:James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:5, Informative)

            by mav[LAG] ( 31387 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @08:58AM (#10863466)
            I have points but I'd rather reply here.

            Well, it's not a very popular opinion.

            It is a very popular opinion and with good reason.

            The original was a creepy, atmospheric, suspense/horror movie. The audience never even gets to see the alien through most of the movie, just quick flashes that leave the impression or something horrible lurking just slightly out of sight.

            Agreed 100%.

            By comparison, the sequels - all of 'em - were run-of-the-mill action flicks.

            I disagree about Aliens. Aliens not only is a worthy sequel precisely because it didn't try to remake the original, but is probably one of the finest action films ever made. Here are some of my reasons:
            • The pacing is perfect. Act I sets up the story, pulling quite a few disparate elements together successfully, Act II is mainly action combined with suspense and Act III is the race against time. And Act IV is a genuine shock when the mother is revealed to be still alive. There's good sub-plots too - Burke's real motivation for one.
            • Cameron manages to resolve Ripley's fate from the last film, and incorporate the Alien species into the new one in a believable way while giving his audience more of a look.
            • The Marines are real characters who engage you and you can care about. I can't name any prisoners from Alien 3 but I can reel off all the characters from Aliens (and Alien).
            • For 1986 the effects are stunning (and almost all physical). Even the best CGI films of today can't compare with that fight between Ripley and the queen.
            • It's well-acted and well-directed.
            • It's genuinely scary.
            • The score is at least the equal of Alien's.


            It's no accident that its rating is so high on IMDB nor that its technology and memorable quotes have had such a lasting influence on fans.

            The suspense that made the original so great was gone, and in its place was buckets of gore.

            Aliens has far less gore than the two that followed it. Also remember the first Alien has two of the most gory scenes of all.

            I suppose it was inevitable - the original was a *very* tough act to follow, and splatter flicks were making big bank at the time.

            I don't know where you get this from. And anyway, Cameron's intent was most certainly not to make a splatter flick and he succeeded.
            • I disagree.

              The directing, especially the camera work, is pretty bad. For instance, far too much time is spent in the beginning showing off those mechanical cargo-moving whatevers.

              The first time I saw the dang thing, I was saying to myself why are they showing me this? Oh, that must be what she kills the last alien with. The point gets over-established.

              The acting is pretty bad. 'Game-over man!' The Marines are, to me, complete stereotypes. Comic book figures driven completely by machismo. You know immedia
              • The directing, especially the camera work, is pretty bad. For instance, far too much time is spent in the beginning showing off those mechanical cargo-moving whatevers.
                The first time I saw the dang thing, I was saying to myself why are they showing me this? Oh, that must be what she kills the last alien with. The point gets over-established.

                Mmm, yeah all 30 seconds of a scene which establishes a) Ripley did in fact have a job as a loader in the docks b) she's as strong and independent as ever c) she's goi

          • Re:James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:1, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            "The suspense that made the original so great was gone, and in its place was buckets of gore"

            Sorry, but first of all by the end of the first film, we'd seen what the Alien looks like, so ergo, there's no point in re-creating that suspense in the next film, since everyone already knows about them. (duh). Secondly, the sequel ALIENS was in fact suspenseful in many parts. i remember nearly peeing my pants in the scene where they are in the lab and this face-sucker suddnely jumps within one of these big glass

      • Re:James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Wolfbone ( 668810 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @05:24AM (#10862889)
        Well it could've been a lame blood-n-guts sequel - and superficially it even looks like one - but I don't think it was. I watched all four in a row recently and "Aliens" came across as an alternatively styled work, complementary to the original: a beautifully detailed and fast-paced sequel to Alien done in the 'action' style of sci-fi films, not an inferior movie at all.

        The third one was where the deterioration began, though it's not really that bad and compared to "Resurrection"... well - all I can say is that Jeunet should be burnt at the stake for having made a complete mockery of the Alien series: The pantomime General, stereotypically drawn scientists, arty-farty, technologically empty sets and a time-serving support cast of art house cinema poseurs (Winona excepted).

        When the alien hybrid made those sickeningly twee babyface expressions I felt like crying.

      • I think we can all agree here.

        Less James Cameron and more Ripley [bluecherrydoughnut.com]

        I feel hair growing on my palms-err knuckles already.

    • Re:James Cameron is the director of Aliens (Score:5, Insightful)

      by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @07:44AM (#10863187) Homepage Journal
      "I think you should mention a Director's most accomplished work, rather than his biggest grossing."

      Are we going to split hairs about what 'most accomplished' means? Wouldn't biggest grossing imply most people seen/enjoyed? What about the great deal of effort that went into making that movie? Isn't that quite an accomplishment compared to Aliens or Terminator(s)?

      Titanic isn't my favorite of his movies, but I have no issue with calling it "most accomplished" on several levels. This is especially true considering that Titanic is probably the one he's the most proud of. He really loves that ship.
      • .... biggest grossing is meaningles to qualify the importance of an artist.

        In the time of Mozart of Beethoven there were many musicians that were more estimated by the public, today musicologists may struggle naming a few of them.

        Heck, Stravinky's premiere of Rite of Spring in Paris was an scandal and no popular at all.

        Most people seeing or enjoying something means squat since by definition somebody popular has to pander to a minimum commun denominator.

        Some filmakers manage to do both, but as I believe
    • I won't read Wired because of their tobacco advertising, and James Cameron.

  • huh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by ebilhoax ( 609649 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @04:22AM (#10862762)
    This special issue of Wired is about honest-to-God, two-fisted, hairy-knuckled exploration.

    ok.. I know what gives you hairy palms.. but wtf gives you hairy knuckles?!

  • Dark Angel? (Score:4, Funny)

    by chrysrobyn ( 106763 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @04:35AM (#10862787)

    That's great! Will he tell us why Dark Angel [imdb.com] jumped the shark late in the first season?

    The premise was good SciFi fare. Genetically enhanced superhumans using today's ultra-hip-lingo as if it would never go out of style. One of these, Max, is determined to find her brothers and sisters and not have a relationship to the handicapped guy to whom she is desperately attracted. Then Cameron had to introduce mutants that messed up all the "almost believable" part.

    • ...why Dark Angel jumped the shark late in the first season?

      Because the man is a plagerizing hack who's work can never compare to the original [geocities.com]

      • Re:Dark Angel? (Score:3, Informative)

        by fenix down ( 206580 )
        Yeah, but he bought the movie rights to the original about halfway through the first season of Dark Angel. I think they've gotten as far as doing some effects test reels.
        • Ya know, this was widely speculated for a time. But even with conformation by the original manga artist, there hasn't been much of a splash splash. There has been rumors of a Gunnm movie for years. The regulars at alt.comics.gunnm are so jaded by this kind of news now everyone is taking a what-else-is-new attitude. Some worry that Gunnm will be dumbed down and americanized by Cameron's hands. But even though there is some trepidation, it's not quite as adverse a reaction as the announcement of the live
  • He was on NPR today talking about this and how he's applying the underwater technology to his new hollywood style movie which'll feature an all CG main character....I'm hoping it's better than Jar Jar.

    He also mentioned this underwater movie is in 3D, and I hope it comes to my town.

  • Not what I expected... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 19, 2004 @04:47AM (#10862809)
    ...when I typed "honest-to-God, two-fisted, hairy-knuckled exploration." into my search engine of choice.

    Oh well, the search continues...

  • laying low (Score:4, Funny)

    by hthb ( 798809 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @05:03AM (#10862846) Homepage
    I think James Cameron has been laying low since he made an ass of himself with the "I'm the king of the world" comment on the Oscar nominations. That's why he hasn't been making movies lately ;)
    • I don't know...but this guy seems a bit too much into himself really.

      I mean, watching the making of Titanic they showed that the underside of the dinner plates had the same stamp as the ones on the real Titanic. Um...ok...but you never saw this in the movie, so why even do it? Attention to detail is one thing, detail that's not even seen is another. An wow, they wonder why this movie cost over 200 million to make. Granted they made a huge profit, but still could have cost less to make.

      Another little thing
      • I thought his excuse was that it was cheaper to film it than to use CG. I don't know if that is true, but it sounds likely.
      • Another little thing that bugs me is that Cameron had to go down to the real Titanic to get shots for the movie...again, why?

        Actually, reading through the piece he wrote for Wired, it seems that he actually came up with the idea for making a Titanic movie so that he'd have an excuse to have someone pay for him to go down in a submersible to the actual Titanic. ;)

    • Re:laying low (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mfg ( 16466 )
      I think James Cameron has been laying low since he made an ass of himself with the "I'm the king of the world"

      Considering what he'd been through over the previous couple of years, I think he was fairly restrained. After a long, hard shoot with nearly constant rumours that the movie was going to be one of the most expensive disasters in history, he's standing there in front of the entire entertainment industry with a couple of Oscars and a box office take heading for a billion dollars. In his place I'd pr

  • Interesting time to be subscribed to wired (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jason1729 ( 561790 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @05:04AM (#10862852)
    Last month the WiredCD [itallconnects.com] and this month another novel idea.

    (do I get bonus points for an on-topic link to a site I host? :) )

    Jason
    ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
    • "(do I get bonus points for an on-topic link to a site I host? :) )"

      Giving bonus points to someone for self-slashdotting, even on topic, is like giving bonus points to a cow getting squished in a stampede, even if it's running in the same direction. :)
      • My extra bandwidth usage for the 12 hours since I posted it was only about 1 gig, hardly getting squished in a stampede :). I think the only sites that have a problem with slashdotting are people running it at home on their cable modem or university connection.

        I'm just curious why someone modded me off topic, especially since it's an ad-free site to what I think is a generous service.

  • Just editing??? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mikerich ( 120257 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @05:11AM (#10862862)
    Don't you mean conduct the interviews, reluctantly agree to be interviewed, write the articles, do the fact-checking, throw out the facts, draw the diagrams, re-draw the diagrams in an incomprehensible but oh-so-hip fashion, take the photos, dick around with the photos in Photoshop until they look like something in a psychology test, fetch the coffee, take the coffee back because it actually tasted of coffee, have the requisite magazine editor nervous breakdown, shout at the printers, go grovelling to the printers so they don't print the whole magazine in mirror image on fluorescent stock - hold on lose the mirror image keep the fluorescent paper, glue on the commemorative CueCat(tm) - then edit the magazine?

    And still have time to throw in one ludicrously bad special effect?

    • Re:Just editing??? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Vollernurd ( 232458 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @06:25AM (#10863011)
      I stopped reading Wired when I realised I didn't like Absolut Vodka. Or Gucci underwear. Or indeed anything I might actually be able to afford.

      Or something funny.
      • I think you missed something - if you search hard enough, Wired mag occasionally slips articles in-between the ads (I mean, the ones that aren't blatant ads themselves). I think they start on about p.55 or so.
      • Was Wired always such a superficial, up-its-own-arse, US-biased, advert-bloated business magazine?

        Yeah, "Business Magazine". The first issue I bought was in 2000, and all of them seem to have focused more on the business aspects than any actual science.

        And even though the mainly scientific articles are quite lengthy, somehow when you get to the end, you realise you've learned nothing of substance.

        Worse, if you read it in the UK, you can't get a cheap subscription (presumably because the advertising f
        • I really like Wired. :)

          -Well, that was all. Just wanted to say that.

          PS.
          Absolute, isn't that a Swedish brand?

        • Yep (Score:2)

          by yem ( 170316 )
          It's running on reputation alone now.

          Not sure when Conde Naste took over. Was it around 2000/2001? I think they switched editor. That's when I cancelled my sub.

          It became politicised, military, airhead blather. Maybe it was just reflecting American media at the time (Bush, 9/11).

          "tech mag turned fashion rag" as another slashdotter once put it.
      • Wired Magazine used to make pretty good toilet reading, and the $12/year subscription price seemed like a no-brainer. However, when I got a wireless card for my laptop, that became a thing of the past.

  • For Mr. Cameron (Score:3, Interesting)

    by snarkfinder ( 832586 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @05:13AM (#10862865)
    Heard you and Dr. Ballard on NPR today. Good show (I directed such for 8 yrs. Taught physics courses too.) How could we /.ers help get more real science into fiction, and less crap ideology? Any plans to make a sci/drama about evolution? How about a real life of Darwin? Let's smack that creationist nonsense down. Good science displayed well and brought to the masses can lead.
  • "Apart from making blockbuster films, Cameron explores the depths of the oceans and is a member of the NASA Advisory Council and the Mars Society." And dont forget...He's also the self appointed "King of the World" ;-)

  • James Cameron? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The dude from Growing Pains?

  • WOWSA! A real man's man. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Sai Babu ( 827212 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @07:05AM (#10863106) Homepage
    Do you think Cameron or Wired might be interested in sponsoring a visit and video interview with a family of head hunters who, now that head hunting is unlawful, have taken to fighting chickens instead. I'm serious. It will only take a few days of trekking through the jungle, once the road ends, to reach their village. We could knock the whole thing out in about three weeks. It might be incorporated into a wider study global interest in chicken fighting.

    Yes, I know this is a shameless plug for project funding, but one has to arget every portential source (/.ers maybe?).

  • "Mars"? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Interesting that Kim Stanley Robinson is a contributor. I remember reading (shortly post-Titanic) that Cameron had acquired the rights to make a mini-series of Robinson's Red/Green/Blue Mars trilogy - but nothing ever seemed to happen with that. Was he having too much fun making films about diving?

  • Sci-Fi series (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    As far as I know James Cameron owns the film rights to Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. I wish he would hurry up and make it into something along the lines of the Sci-Fi channels Dune adaptions, or even better perhaps?
  • ...to dump your first wife for the star of your movies, then dump her for the star of your NEXT movie. Yeah, he's a great guy. Cock-sucking teabagger.

  • Why is Cameron on the NASA advisory board? (Score:3, Funny)

    by HuguesT ( 84078 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @08:24AM (#10863303)
    This is suspicious. Are they going to pretend to go to Mars then? I suggest they use OJ Simpson on the cast. It would improve ratings.
    • You mean like how they faked the moon landing?

      That's just a joke (and my favorite part of the movie Sneakers), but I can gaurantee you that once we do land on Mars, conspiracy theorist will be coming out of the woodwork making the same point the parent is making.
  • Lets see...

    Alien Movies... Cool!
    Terminator Movies... Cool!

    uhmmm, hmmm.

    Titanic... Not so cool man.

    Should we let him into our clubhouse?

    We'll see I read the Wired mag.
    • Why? Are you a neoconservative Evangelical ayatollah, or a bit of romance in the middle of a very well presented catastrophe movie a bit too much for an impresionable geek like yourself?
  • Didn't he want to do Battle Angel Alita? Where's my James Cameron directed Motorball sequences? Yukito Kishiro has even said he'd dig it someone did an Alita film that focused on those issues.

    Get thee to a studio, James!

    • I interviewed Cameron about a year and a half back, and one of the things I asked him about was Alita and motorball. Bad news for you: he said that if motorball was going to feature, it would have to be in a sequel.

      Fascinating guy, though. It was meant to be a 40-minute interview, but it ended up being over an hour and a half!

  • Cameron's undersea adventures are documented in IMAX. If you want to see an hour and a half of James Cameron looking out the porthole of a submarine in 3D, I highly recommend it. If you don't like looking at James Cameron's face 6 stories tall for such a long period, however, well... not so much.
  • ..from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Domain:

    Digital Domain is a computer graphics company that provides special effects for films. It is owned by director James Cameron and is located in Venice, California.

    The company began producing special effects in the early 1990s, its first three films being True Lies, Interview With a Vampire and Color of Night in 1994. It has produced effects for more than 40 films including Apollo 13, Armageddon, The Fifth Element, How the Grinch Stole Christmas, O Brother,
    • Yeah - go DD. Titanic was the first small rattling of stones in 1996 that became the avalanche of Linux in movie CGI, and employer of Darryl Strauss [linuxgames.com], the man who brought 3d hardware acceleration to Linux users. He also wrote relevant rebuttals [linuxmafia.com] to NT fanboys. Titanic is quite a nasty thorn in SCO's side since the 100-odd Alpha boxes used for rendering were most certainly an enterprise-class use of Linux before IBM came long.
      • that became the avalanche of Linux in movie CGI, and employer of Darryl Strauss,

        Bah - this should say DD was the employer of Daryll Strauss although I'm sure he felt like the film was his employer for a while :)

  • NASA Advisory Council? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Pedrito ( 94783 ) on Friday November 19, 2004 @11:17AM (#10864744)
    Apart from making blockbuster films, Cameron explores the depths of the oceans and is a member of the NASA Advisory Council and the Mars Society

    I'm sure James Cameron is a smart guy and everything, but I'm curious what makes him more qualified to be on the NASA Advisory Coucil than say, 50% of Slashdot readers who I'm sure are just as scientifically knowledgeable, if not a few hundred times as knowledgeable on the topics important to NASA. I mean, other than his bucket-loads of money, of course.

    I'm not saying NASA should come recruit their Advisory Council on Slashdot, but I would certainly question the quality of the advice when movie directors are providing it. I mean, check out his resume [nasa.gov] on their site. It's a good resume for a movie director, but for an advisor to NASA?

    And don't get me wrong, I don't think someone should be excluded because they're in a profession. I mean, I'm sure Asimov, Clarke and some other Sci-Fi authors would be able to provide valuable advice in the area of space exploration because, if nothing else, they tend to spend a lot of time thinking of the realism of the ideas in their books (something movie directors aren't particularly noted for).

    I mean really, go look at all the resumes of the members on the site and then play the Sesame Street game of "Which of these things doesn't belong?"
    • I'm sure Asimov, Clarke and some other Sci-Fi authors would be able to provide valuable advice in the area of space exploration because, if nothing else, they tend to spend a lot of time thinking of the realism of the ideas in their books (something movie directors aren't particularly noted for).

      Asimov is dead, and it's hard to sit up at advisory council meetings when you're dead. They have to nail you to the chair, and it gets messy.

      Clarke is a British citizen, IIRC. He lives in Sri Lanka and is wheelc
      • Asimov is dead

        Perhaps I should have been more clear. I'm aware that Asimov is dead. I meant to imply authors of their stature.

        That's his only real qualification, and it's enough for what basically is an honorific post.

        An honorific post? Really? Do you actually know anything about the NASA Advisory Coucil? Are you aware that it's the senior external advisory source to NASA? Senior. That means they trump EVERY outside advisory source. That's a bit more than honorific.

        If there were several hundred memb
        • An honorific post? Really? Do you actually know anything about the NASA Advisory Coucil? Are you aware that it's the senior external advisory source to NASA? Senior. That means they trump EVERY outside advisory source. That's a bit more than honorific.

          There you go, making me look like an ass for making assumptions. =)
    • I think Cameron's experience as director makes him very valuable to NASA. One of the largest problems that NASA faces is to make their efforts interesting and sexy to a generation of people where space exploration is a de facto part of life. Without popular support, NASA has found itself without the budget to do the things us geeks would like it to do. Cameron has proven with his movies that he knows what appeals to the public.

    • I'm sure James Cameron is a smart guy and everything, but I'm curious what makes him more qualified to be on the NASA Advisory Coucil than say, 50% of Slashdot readers who I'm sure are just as scientifically knowledgeable, if not a few hundred times as knowledgeable on the topics important to NASA. I mean, other than his bucket-loads of money, of course.

      Have you actually seen his non-fiction stuff or any of the "making of" specials about his movies? He's quite intelligent, is both a visionary and detail-

Slashdot Top Deals

Someday somebody has got to decide whether the typewriter is the machine, or the person who operates it.

Close