James Cameron thinks 3-D will save the movies

**nova** · **03-31-08, 10:18 AM**

I agree, rather than give these actors/actresses 15-30 million up front, give 'em a modest salary and take the big payday on the back end,... Makes one wonder, if the actors did not get the huge guaranteed paycheck before the film even starts shooting but had to wait and get payed based on how well the film does,... would that influence the quality of the film?

**Richard W. Haines** · **03-31-08, 10:24 AM**

Nova,

I think it might. What's the incentive to give a good performance if their getting so much
off the top. They can slide by with mannerisms or bits of business from past performances.
It's unlikely they'll take any chances.

**Zembonez** · **04-02-08, 07:13 PM**

I think Nova gives way too much credit to the actor's ability to really influence the outcome of a film. Sure, their performance is a key part of the production but post production, direction, scripts, distribution, and influential financiers that don't have any film knowledge are still huge factors in the success / failure of a film...

I also agree that 3D will never have any chance of saving the film industry. I love a good Imax presentation for the 20 - 40 minutes it runs, but that isn't a movie in any real sense.

I say give us good quality movies instead of the overtly commercialized garbage that comes out of Hollywood now and we will pay up and watch. Forget about dredging up that next old TV show and come up with an original idea...

**nova** · **04-03-08, 09:37 AM**

I don't give them credit for the out come but, for 30 million up front, does the actor really care if he/she makes a good film? My thought was, if you don't get a big check unless the film is a success, then maybe the directors, actors, producers, etc. would choose their movie material more wisely.

And maybe, just maybe they would not churn out garbage film after garbage film.

**Richard W. Haines** · **04-03-08, 10:56 AM**

Rumors are SAG may go on strike next. That will undoubtedly make the problem worse just
as it did with the Screenwriter's strike.

I'm so glad I'm non-union and don't have to deal with these entities. I couldn't. They'd put me out of business the first day of the shoot. And, I get very good actors who really give it their best shot. I have worked with stars before including Adam West and the late Viveca Lindfors but I lucked out and they were very nice and cooperative even thought they cost a lot.

We've all read horror stories about movie stars driving the director nuts or forcing a film to go over budget due to indulgence and other factors. "Waterworld" comes to mind. Not a terrible movie but it cost one hundred million and none of it's on screen. All of the waste was behind the scenes.

**CompguyRG** · **07-08-08, 11:58 AM**

Though this thread did start with the, in my opinion, less than promising 3-d enhancement to a cinema experience, I personally think that the video quality or uniqueness of the video's display is half the battle. The theater should be an experience as a whole. Standard movie theaters have less than desireable seating, a lackluster soundsystem, and mediocre screens. I say, instead of trying to invent a miracle catch-all to save movies, fix what we have first. Put sound systems in that the most obsessed audiophile would be jealous of. Toss us some nice seats with a decent view. Lower the price of the *****in popcorn. (I wish) Make the theater a place where people look forward to going to, not just for a new movie release, but for the experience. Ultimately people want to be entertained. While a great movie can do it, even mediocre movies can be enjoyed if the surroundings are exciting.

Just my 2 cents.

-CompguyRG

**Citizen** · **07-08-08, 03:15 PM**

Quote:

CompguyRG wrote:

Though this thread did start with the, in my opinion, less than promising 3-d enhancement to a cinema experience, I personally think that the video quality or uniqueness of the video's display is half the battle. The theater should be an experience as a whole. Standard movie theaters have less than desireable seating, a lackluster soundsystem, and mediocre screens. I say, instead of trying to invent a miracle catch-all to save movies, fix what we have first. Put sound systems in that the most obsessed audiophile would be jealous of. Toss us some nice seats with a decent view. Lower the price of the *****in popcorn. (I wish) Make the theater a place where people look forward to going to, not just for a new movie release, but for the experience. Ultimately people want to be entertained. While a great movie can do it, even mediocre movies can be enjoyed if the surroundings are exciting.

Just my 2 cents.

-CompguyRG

+1 for this comment.

Best way to get people back in the theaters is to focus on quality of product. Get the sound systems above par. Add a crap load of butt kickers in the seats. That would rock (literaly). I went to see this years July 4th's block buster and the sound was really low. Sound is half the movie if not 3/4.

And for god sake, restrict toddlers or babies in a theater. Why not have cell phone jammers. Works for churches why not theaters. I love the theater but I limit my purchases due to rude partons. Had a chick sitting by me one time eating smelly chinese food. Theaters may be losing thier regulars to appease the "once a month" customer. lol At least I dont see laser pointers on the screen anymore.

All this will never happen but it felt pretty **** good to get it off my chest. ****.

Advertisement