James Cameron Praises "Star Trek"

[Devon]

This was posted on the official Star Trek forum, figured I'd repost here.

In an interview with the L.A. Times, James Cameron gave his thoughts of Hollywood going back to old stories and discusses Transformers and Star Trek, both written by Orci & Kurtsman.

Here is the excerpt.

GB: Or Joseph Conrad…?
JC: Yes, exactly. And I think returning to classic tales is a powerful thing. Look, right now is a special time because we can basically do anything we imagine. I mean you have to work hard at it, and you’ve got to have the technique and you have to be willing to throw money at the problem. Sometimes you have to be a little bold and go out on a limb. But if you can imagine it, you can do it. That’s why we’re seeing this renaissance of visual imagination. It’s just a growth. Films look better now than they’ve ever looked. Sometimes they get a little lost in it though. I’ll go to a “Transformers” film for the fun of seeing the spectacle but, personally, my soul craves a little more story, a little more meat on the bone and characters and that sort of thing. Look, I think it's about finding a balance between story and all of this gimmickry. I think I veer toward classicism, being solidly rooted in the classic stuff. I mean really old-school science fiction. This is a movie I would have loved to have seen when I was a 14-year-old kid in 1968.

GB: Well, certainly, that’s why it's reassuring for anyone to see movies like “Star Trek” and “Up,” which might be my two favorite films this year, because both are examples of technology and craft achieving the fantastic but in service of great storytelling.

JC: Right, “Star Trek” -- look at that. That is a great example of a complete reinvention. Really, it’s beautifully done, really. Bravo. And I loved the first season of “Star Trek” back in 1965 or 1966 or whenever it was, it grabbed me as a kid, but I drifted away from it over time. And this was such a great way to see it come back as re-imagined. What fun.

You can read more here (though that was all that is mentioned on Trek):
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/her...ek-rocks-but-transformers-is-gimcrackery.html

 

[miraclefan]

I just hope Cameron really liked ''TREK'' and is not just saying kind words.

 

[JarodRussell]

I don't think Cameron would talk bad about another director's work, whether he really hated it or not.

This nuTrek certainly doesn't qualify for Cameron-esque standards of storytelling. No Star Trek movie does.

 

[barnaclelapse]

This was posted on the official Star Trek forum, figured I'd repost here.

In an interview with the L.A. Times, James Cameron gave his thoughts of Hollywood going back to old stories and discusses Transformers and Star Trek, both written by Orci & Kurtsman.

Here is the excerpt.

GB: Or Joseph Conrad…?
JC: Yes, exactly. And I think returning to classic tales is a powerful thing. Look, right now is a special time because we can basically do anything we imagine. I mean you have to work hard at it, and you’ve got to have the technique and you have to be willing to throw money at the problem. Sometimes you have to be a little bold and go out on a limb. But if you can imagine it, you can do it. That’s why we’re seeing this renaissance of visual imagination. It’s just a growth. Films look better now than they’ve ever looked. Sometimes they get a little lost in it though. I’ll go to a “Transformers” film for the fun of seeing the spectacle but, personally, my soul craves a little more story, a little more meat on the bone and characters and that sort of thing. Look, I think it's about finding a balance between story and all of this gimmickry. I think I veer toward classicism, being solidly rooted in the classic stuff. I mean really old-school science fiction. This is a movie I would have loved to have seen when I was a 14-year-old kid in 1968.

GB: Well, certainly, that’s why it's reassuring for anyone to see movies like “Star Trek” and “Up,” which might be my two favorite films this year, because both are examples of technology and craft achieving the fantastic but in service of great storytelling.

JC: Right, “Star Trek” -- look at that. That is a great example of a complete reinvention. Really, it’s beautifully done, really. Bravo. And I loved the first season of “Star Trek” back in 1965 or 1966 or whenever it was, it grabbed me as a kid, but I drifted away from it over time. And this was such a great way to see it come back as re-imagined. What fun.

You can read more here (though that was all that is mentioned on Trek):
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/her...ek-rocks-but-transformers-is-gimcrackery.html

Good quote, good answer.

I'll have to go read the whole interview now. I imagine he'd be a really good subject to speak to, insightful, funny, all that good stuff.

 

[Yug]

The guy who designed the NuEnterprise and a lot of the films look (Church) is doing all the design on Avatar, Jimmy's next megawork. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

 

[M'Sharak]

...Johnny's next megawork.

Johnny?

 

[Yug]

Johnny?

Oops, meant Jimmy... jumped right on that didn't ya?

 

[Devon]

I just hope Cameron really liked ''TREK'' and is not just saying kind words.

Well he was sorta critical against Transformers so I have to imagine he isn't being bound to some "favor." Especially when they are the same writers and studio on both!

 

[trevanian]

I don't think Cameron would talk bad about another director's work, whether he really hated it or not.

This nuTrek certainly doesn't qualify for Cameron-esque standards of storytelling. No Star Trek movie does.

Doesn't want to alienate Saldana from doing press for AVATAR prob'ly. He had problems like this on THE ABYSS with seriously disenfranchised actors.

He didn't stint from bitching about how Verhoeven 'borrowed' from TERMINATOR for ROBOCOP, though there is clearly a doublestandard at work, given how liberally he pinched from other sources for TERM. Of course, I recently read a synopsis of AVATAR that sounded more than vaguely like a couple of OUTER LIMITS episodes ... (cue Shirley Bassey with 'a little bit of history repeating!')

 

[JarodRussell]

Well he was sorta critical against Transformers so I have to imagine he isn't being bound to some "favor." Especially when they are the same writers and studio on both!

Yeah, he was terribly critical about Transformers with "I’ll go to a “Transformers” film for the fun of seeing the spectacle but, personally, my soul craves a little more story, a little more meat on the bone and characters and that sort of thing."

It means it's fun but not Shakesspeare. That's not critical. That's stating the obvious.

 

[Devon]

Yeah, he was terribly critical

My words were "sorta critical." Not sure what you are going on about.

 

[Joker]

"Star Trek was great. By the way, I have a film coming out soon too..."

 

[Too Much Fun]

"Star Trek was great. By the way, I have a film coming out soon too..."

Haha, that's just like when Shatner was shown the trailer for Star Trek. "Looks great. I just wrote a book..."

 

[Rackon]

I don't think Cameron would talk bad about another director's work, whether he really hated it or not.

This nuTrek certainly doesn't qualify for Cameron-esque standards of storytelling. No Star Trek movie does.

No, thank goodness - zounds, I thought the damned boat would never sink. If Billy Zane twirled his mustaches one more time I was gonna throw something at the screen.

All this to say...sorry, I don't think James Cameron is my idea of a great storyteller. He certainly knows what buttons to push though, both on the screen and in the audience. He has advanced the cinematic art technically. But rgeat storyteller...nope. I'd much rather watch TWOK or XI than Terminators 1 or 2, Titanic, Aliens or True Lives. (The Abyss was fairly good, I'll grant you.)

Still, it was nice to hear him compliment Trek.

 

[Sagart]

Why wouldn't he like Trek '09? It's a great movie.

I'm hoping that Avatar will put him back into my good graces of 'Shite-anic'.

 

[cooleddie74]

Cameron's right. And the man, though he's made a couple of boring/crappy films over the years, is for the most part a pretty solid filmmaker who delivers good stories. He's one of the small handful of directors' opinions I value in Hollywood alongside Tarantino, Kevin Smith and Spielberg.

 

[davejames]

Cameron's right. And the man, though he's made a couple of boring/crappy films over the years, is for the most part a pretty solid filmmaker who delivers good stories. He's one of the small handful of directors' opinions I value in Hollywood alongside Tarantino, Kevin Smith and Spielberg.

Same here. He's one of the few directors who can make a mainstream movie that isn't completely brain dead, and actually has some heart and intelligence in it.

I take him at his word that he enjoyed the movie. He probably didn't see it as a very deep or complex film, but then neither did I. It's just a fun thrill-ride with engaging characters and a lot of heart, and that's good enough for me.