Film Junk » Gossip

William Shatner and Carrie Fisher Start YouTube Feud Over Star Wars vs. Star Trek

Sean — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 14:28:09 +0000

Long-time Film Junkies will remember that we settled the Star Wars vs. Star Trek debate a few years back (with Reed Farrington's first appearance on Film Junk, no less), but now it appears that the age old argument is being brought back into the spotlight by none other than William Shatner and Carrie Fisher. Shatner threw down the gauntlet back in September when he dismissed Star Wars as being derivative of Star Trek and nothing more than special effects. Carrie Fisher apparently took offense and responded with a video of her own, defending Star Wars and even calling out Shatner for the fact that he once auditioned for the part of Darth Vader. Shatner has since come back with a more personal retort aimed at Fisher's weight, and while it's kind of sad to see these two washed-up stars demeaning each other and making a desperate grab for publicity, I suppose the discussion itself is still a worthy one. It's even more interesting now that Star Trek has successfully relaunched a new movie franchise. Check out the videos after the jump and let us know where you stand on the great Star Wars vs. Star Trek debate!

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Brett Ratner Bows Out of the Oscars

Sean — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 01:08:22 +0000

Well, that was quick. In the span of just one weekend, director Brett Ratner has somehow managed to unleash a P.R. nightmare of epic proportions, instantly turning most of the internet and Hollywood against him. (Well, okay that's not true... the internet was already against him.) After some questionable comments about his personal life on G4's Attack of the Show and The Howard Stern Show, the thing that really set people off was a homophobic remark made during a Q&A at the AFI Film Festival last Friday. When asked if he often rehearses scenes with his cast before committing them to film, he responded, "Rehearsal's for fags." He issued a public apology on the following Monday, but that didn't stop people from calling for his immediate dismissal as a producer of next year's Academy Award ceremony. Academy president Tom Sherak said that he would not be fired, but apparently the pressure was too much: The Rat has decided to step down himself. He has released the following statement:

Dear Colleagues, Over the last few days, I’ve gotten a well-deserved earful from many of the people I admire most in this industry expressing their outrage and disappointment over the hurtful and stupid things I said in a number of recent media appearances. To them, and to everyone I’ve hurt and offended, I’d like to apologize publicly and unreservedly. As difficult as the last few days have been for me, they cannot compare to the experience of any young man or woman who has been the target of offensive slurs or derogatory comments. And they pale in comparison to what any gay, lesbian, or transgender individual must deal with as they confront the many inequalities that continue to plague our world. So many artists and craftspeople in our business are members of the LGBT community, and it pains me deeply that I may have hurt them. I should have known this all along, but at least I know it now: words do matter. Having love in your heart doesn’t count for much if what comes out of your mouth is ugly and bigoted. With this in mind, and to all those who understandably feel that apologies are not enough, please know that I will be taking real action over the coming weeks and months in an effort to do everything I can both professionally and personally to help stamp out the kind of thoughtless bigotry I’ve so foolishly perpetuated. As a first step, I called Tom Sherak this morning and resigned as a producer of the 84th Academy Awards telecast. Being asked to help put on the Oscar show was the proudest moment of my career. But as painful as this may be for me, it would be worse if my association with the show were to be a distraction from the Academy and the high ideals it represents. I am grateful to GLAAD for engaging me in a dialogue about what we can do together to increase awareness of the important and troubling issues this episode has raised and I look forward to working with them. I am incredibly lucky to have a career in this business that I love with all of my heart and to be able to work alongside so many of my heroes. I deeply regret my actions and I am determined to learn from this experience. Sincerely, Brett Ratner

So there you have it. There has been no word on a replacement as of yet, but all eyes are now on Eddie Murphy as we wait to see whether or not he will remain on board as this year's host (Ratner was the one who originally recruited him). What do you think, did Ratner make the right decision here or did the situation simply get blown way out of proportion?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Frank Oz Does Not Approve of the New Muppets Movie

Sean — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:17:59 +0000

With the release of The Muppets now less than a month away, it feels like Disney and Jason Segel have done a very good job of relaunching the property and staying true to the characters while also updating them for a new audience. If all goes according to plan, it will be a pretty big hit over the holiday season and a successful reboot of a franchise that has been around for over 40 years. Unfortunately, not everyone is quite so optimistic about the film. Word is starting to trickle out that many of the veteran performers who worked on the movie are not very happy with the final product, and one of the most well-known puppeteers of them all, Frank Oz has broken his silence on why he was not involved in the flick. Hear what he had to say about it after the jump. In a recent interview with Metro, Oz reminisced about his time working with Jim Henson before addressing the reboot:

"I turned it down... I wasn't happy with the script. I don't think they respected the characters. But I don't want to go on about it like a sourpuss and hurt the movie."

Oz is known for voicing such characters as Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Animal and Sam the Eagle, but in the new movie those characters are performed by Eric Jacobson. It makes you wonder if there was something specific in the new movie that he had a problem with. Could it have been... Fozzie's fart shoes? The Hollywood Reporter has a similar story about complaints from the older Muppets crew members, and they seem to really take issue with the fart jokes. One anonymous commenter said, "We wouldn't do that; it's too cheap... It may not seem like much in this world of [Judd] Apatow humor, but the characters don't go to that place." Another worries that "They're looking at the script on a joke-by-joke basis, rather than as a construction of character and story," and that the script "creates a false history that the characters were forced to act out for the sake of this movie." Sounds a little bit like sour grapes to me. After all, if it weren't for Jason Segel, The Muppets wouldn't even be getting a comeback. What do you think? Is it possible that this movie is not respecting what came before or do you think a few changes were necessary in order to revitalize the franchise?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Man Files Lawsuit Claiming The Hangover: Part II was Based on his Life

Sean — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:25:58 +0000

It would appear that last week's outlandish lawsuit against the distributor of the film Drive has brought even more crazies out of the woodwork. This week Warner Brothers is being sued by a man who claims that The Hangover: Part II was based on his life story and that a script he wrote about his own nightmarish honeymoon was the true inspiration for the film. Michael Alan Rubin says he married a Japanese woman back in 2007 and went on a honeymoon in Thailand and India where "differences started arising over Rubin's financial condition." As a result, his wife refused to share a hotel room with him. Wow... sounds pretty similar, right? He's not just suing for copyright infringement, however. He's also claiming misappropriation of publicity rights and defamation, since the movie resulted from "exploitation of the private real life of Plaintiff in an insulting manner." Apparently Rubin feels that the filmmakers were taking a shot at him by suggesting that he was "under the influence of drugs when he ditched his girlfriend and proposed to a male-to-female transexual prostitute." Uh... what? Maybe this is stuff you don't want to be admitting in public. Strangely, this isn't the first lawsuit to come out of The Hangover: Part II as Mike Tyson's tattoo artist previously sued because they had reproduced his copyrighted work of art. That case was settled, but there is still another outstanding lawsuit from a stunt man who sustained a brain injury during the shoot. Still, something tells me both of those suits have a little more substance behind them. I suppose this is just one of the unfortunate side effects of making a movie that earns $581 million worldwide.

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Steven Soderbergh is Retiring from Film to Become a Painter

Sean — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:06:08 +0000

There has been a lot of talk over the past year about Steven Soderbergh's intention to retire from filmmaking. Aside from his upcoming films Contagion and Haywire, he has only three other movies that he intends to shoot before calling it quits: an adaptation of the '60s spy series The Man from U.N.C.L.E., a Liberace biopic starring Michael Douglas, and Magic Mike, a movie about the world of male strippers based on Channing Tatum's own experiences. Although he seems pretty focused on sticking to that schedule, it's never been very clear what he might do after retirement. With the recent news that he is working as second unit director on The Hunger Games, some thought that he might continue to work in the industry, just not directing his own films. Now, however, he has revealed that he will leave it all behind in order to embrace a brand new career. Apparently Steven Soderbergh has plans to work with a different kind of canvas... that's right, he's taking up painting. In a recent interview with the New York Times, Soderbergh confirmed that he wants to become a painter. He actually conducted the interview from his office space in Manhattan, which is already being turned into a painting studio. A number of pieces were spotted around the premises including "a pair of striped canvases in red and gray hues and a portrait of the abstract painter Agnes Martin." Soderbergh, however, didn't completely rule out the possibility of returning to movies at some point:

"I'm interested in exploring another art form while I have the time and ability to do so... I'll be the first person to say if I can’t be any good at it and run out of money I’ll be back making another Ocean's movie."

While there may be a little bit of self-deprecating humour in that statement, I am also detecting a grain of truth to it. What are the odds that he will also be able to make a comfortable living as a painter? Even if he is really talented, it's a difficult profession to break into (granted, he has the advantage of already being famous). I just don't understand why he can't simply take time off to do some painting on the side. Why does he have to formally retire from Hollywood? It seems like a bit of a front to me, but I guess we'll find out how serious he is about it. What do you think, do you respect Soderbergh's new career path and do you think we'll see him directing any other films after the next three?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Tom Hanks Refunds Moviegoers Who Didn’t Like Larry Crowne

Sean — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:04:40 +0000

Well it's not too often that you read a tabloid story that actually portrays a celebrity in a good light, but I suppose sometimes Hollywood actors can be humble, down-to-earth people too. According to the National Enquirer, Tom Hanks was recently filling up his car at a gas station in Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles, when a couple spotted him and decided to strike up a conversation. They mentioned that they had just seen his most recent film Larry Crowne, and so naturally he asked what they thought of the film. The husband told him "it wasn't very good," while the wife responded, "Actually, it wasn’t that bad, we were just expecting it to be a lot better." So what did Hanks do? He apologized and immediately refunded their money out of his own pocket. I always knew T Hanx was one of the good guys! While I'm not entirely sure I believe this story (because, let's face it, who would actually tell a Hollywood star that their movie sucked?), it's worth noting that Hanks did co-write, direct and produce Larry Crowne in addition to starring in it, so perhaps he felt even more personally responsible than usual. It does make you wonder what the world would be like if Hollywood stars had to answer directly to the public a little more often, or if moviegoers could always get their money back if they didn't like a movie. Would the same bloated blockbusters still be topping the box office every week? At any rate, if Tom Hanks really did this, it was a pretty clever P.R. move. Now can we all get our money back for Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code too?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Arnold Puts Acting Comeback on Hold to Focus on Personal Matters

Sean — Fri, 20 May 2011 12:53:53 +0000

Just before Lars von Trier put his foot in his mouth at Cannes a couple of days ago, there was another big scandal developing over in Hollywood as Arnold Schwarzenegger revealed the real reason why he and Maria Shriver had decided to separate. The L.A. Times broke the news earlier this week that Arnold had fathered a child with a former family staff member over a decade ago. Now Schwarzenegger has decided to take some time to focus on his personal life, and has put his acting career on hold once again. His lawyer, Patrick Knapp, issued the following statement:

"At the request of Arnold Schwarzenegger, we asked Creative Artists Agency to inform all his motion picture projects currently underway or being negotiated to stop planning until further notice. Governor Schwarzenegger is focusing on personal matters and is not willing to commit to any production schedules or timelines. This includes Cry Macho, the Terminator franchise and other projects under consideration. We will resume discussions when Governor Schwarzenegger decides."

I guess his triumphant return to the big screen will have to wait just a little bit longer. Although Schwarzenegger made it sound as though he and his wife were still attempting to work through their marital problems, it now appears that this may not be the case. Shriver claims to have been unhappy for years, but waited until after he was out of office to make her move. In a way, it's pretty amazing that they managed to keep all of this under wraps for so long. The big question here is whether or not the scandal will hurt Arnold's image or his career, but somehow I doubt it. If someone like Mel Gibson can still maintain public favour after all of his mistakes, it seems like this will be nothing more than a small speed bump for him. If anything, it might just make him appear "cooler" to his predominantly male audience. On the other hand, The Governator comic book and animated series may have a harder time presenting him as squeaky clean superhero. What do you think, could this derail Arnold's comeback and does it make you any less interested in seeing him back on screen again?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Quentin Tarantino Suing Alan Ball Over Screaming Birds

Aaron — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:05:02 +0000

Despite reports that Quentin Tarantino's upcoming western is coming together nicely, not all is well in the director's world. Apparently, Mr. Tarantino is suing his neighbor, who happens to be fellow Academy Award-winning screenwriter Alan Ball, due to the noise caused by his exotic birds. The Pulp Fiction director claims that ever since Ball installed an "exotic bird menagerie", he's been forced to listen to a stream of "obnoxious pteradactyl-like screams" for seven to eight hours a day. Naturally, the noise has caused Tarantino considerable trouble when attempting to write at home. Now he wants those birds silenced once and for all. Are a bunch of squawking birds delaying a new film by Tarantino? If so, that's a true crime against humanity! The actual lawsuit itself is an amusing read and can be viewed here. The style of writing makes me wonder if Tarantino himself actually had a hand in drafting it. Here's one of my favorite bits:

"Though one might assume that, as a fellow writer, Mr. Ball would understand and respect a writer's need for peace and quiet while he is working, that assumption would be wrong."

In the realm of celebrity feuds, this could be one of the odder cases I've heard of. And not to make light of the situation too much, but the idea of two Academy Award-winning screenwriters fighting with each other over birds is kind of humorous. Here's hoping that this issue will be resolved quickly and that everyone can live peacefully with each other. My solution: Tarantino should get his old buddy Samuel L. Jackson to intervene, paraphrasing his signature line from Snakes on a Plane. "Enough is enough! I've had it with these motherfucking birds in this motherfucking aviary!"

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Black Swan Shooting: Latvian Man Gunned Down in Theatre for Complaining About Loud Eater

Sean — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:41:01 +0000

There have been a growing number of cases of movie theatre rage over the past couple of years, and my guess is that it's only going to get worse. Over the weekend, a moviegoer was reportedly shot dead in Latvia after a screening of Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan. The shooting was a result of a disagreement when one man told another that he was eating his popcorn too loudly during the movie. Although it was initially reported that the complainant was the one who did the shooting, it has since been clarified that the man eating the popcorn waited until after the movie to pull out a legally registered gun and fatally wound the other. Audience members then overtook the shooter and detained him until the police arrived. Now clearly shooting someone over such a thing is absolutely ludicrous, but did the victim have a right to complain about the popcorn muncher in the first place? I think we can all agree that disrupting a movie by talking and using your cell phone is unacceptable, but when it comes to eating, the rules are a little less clear. Movie theatres do sell popcorn, and eating food during a movie is a commonly accepted part of the experience. Some people eat more loudly than others, but should they be ejected from a theatre for it? You'd hope that people could work it out amongst themselves with a little consideration for their fellow moviegoers, but I think we all know that's a pipe dream. Perhaps ushers need to start packing heat as well. The sad thing is, unfortunate incidents like this will make people think twice about telling an annoying or disruptive person to shut the hell up, and maybe even force them to watch movies at home instead. Why do all the idiots have to ruin it for the rest of us?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Kevin Smith Lashes Out at Film Critics (Again)

Sean — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 22:55:37 +0000

As many people know, Kevin Smith has just wrapped production on his latest film Red State, and although he is still a ways off from actually releasing the film (it doesn't even have a distributor yet), he is already proving to be very vocal about his plans for promoting it. He seems dead set on handling the majority of it all himself in a very controlled, grassroots fashion... without the help of any other media. Earlier this year, as Cop Out was being raked across the coals by the vast majority of film critics, Smith condemned them for being essentially stuck up assholes who are no more qualified to talk about movies than anyone else. What really seemed to anger him the most was the fact that they get to see their movies for free. He vowed never to let another critic see one of his movies without paying for it, and he seems to be sticking to his word for Red State. Clearly he is well within his rights to do this (assuming the distributor agrees), but is this really worth taking a stand over, or is he only hurting himself? Last week Smith appeared on The Dean Blundell Show on 102.1 The Edge in Toronto, and launched into another rant against film critics, explaining that the publicity they provide is essentially useless to him since he already has 1.7 million followers on Twitter. While it's true that Cop Out is the highest grossing movie he has ever made despite the bad reviews, it seems a little short-sighted to think that reviews in major newspapers and on major TV networks didn't help raise awareness of it. Smith insists that he would rather hold an advance Red State screening for 100 fans and post their reviews than let a bunch of critics see it for free. Is it just me or does this sound a little hypocritical? He's trading one biased audience for another. I wouldn't mind so much if he just said, "Critics unfairly bash my movies so I'm not letting them in anymore," (studios already do this for plenty of movies) but he tries to justify it with this idea that critics should have to pay to see movies. Who cares if they're paying or not? It's a part of their job. Either way, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out for Red State. Download the MP3 of his radio show appearance and see what you think.

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Quentin Tarantino Accused of Favoritism at Venice Film Festival

Sean — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:00:30 +0000

Sofia Coppola's Somewhere is one of the more anticipated fall/winter indie releases that, for whatever reason, did not end up playing at the Toronto International Film Festival this year. It did, however, premiere at the Venice Film Festival last week, where it ended up winning the festival's top award: the coveted Golden Lion. The second place Silver Lion went to Alex de la Iglesia's Balada Triste de Trompeta (The Last Circus), while Vincent Gallo won the Best Actor award for a dialogue-free role in Essential Killing. Many of the award winners came as surprises, particularly to local film critics, and now the festival's jury president Quentin Tarantino is coming under fire for potentially showing favoritism in his selections. But is there any truth to this? As some people may know, Quentin Tarantino and Sofia Coppola used to be an item back in in the mid-2000s, and although Coppola is now married to Phoenix frontman Thomas Mars, some people are using this as ammunition against QT's decision. Tarantino's friend Monte Hellman was also given a special career award. The general feeling seems to be that most of the films and performances that critics praised were not the ones that ended up getting recognition (such as Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan). While I don't doubt that there is politics involved in handing out awards at some of the bigger festivals, I also have a feeling that here it's more a case of Tarantino's taste in film being on a slightly different wavelength. Besides, if you're going to pick jury members at film festivals who work and have friends in the industry, these kinds of conflicts of interest are going to be hard to avoid completely. Do you think Tarantino is in the wrong here? He has denied the accusations (obviously), but it's unfortunate that something like this could tarnish Coppola's win. All I know is that I'm now even more psyched to see it.

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!

Piranha 3D Producer Responds to James Cameron’s 3D Rant

Sean — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 13:34:46 +0000

Earlier this week, some choice comments from James Cameron in Vanity Fair sparked debate over the reputation of 3-D films and the best use of the new technology. Cameron criticized Piranha 3D for cheapening the medium and using it as nothing more than a gimmick, claiming that the "biggest and the best" films are now also being made in 3-D. Well, now, in an effort to stand up for his movie (and sensing an opportunity for more publicity), Piranha 3D producer Mark Canton has bared his own teeth and fired back a passionate and long-winded statement of his own:

"As a producer in the entertainment industry, Jim Cameron's comments on VanityFair.com are very disappointing to me and the team that made Piranha 3D. Mr. Cameron, who singles himself out to be a visionary of movie-making, seems to have a small vision regarding any motion pictures that are not his own. It is amazing that in the movie-making process - which is certainly a team sport - that Cameron consistently celebrates himself out as though he is a team of one. His comments are ridiculous, self-serving and insulting to those of us who are not caught up in serving his ego and his rhetoric. Jim, are you kidding or what? First of all, let’s start by you accepting the fact that you were the original director of PIRANHA 2 and you were fired. Shame on you for thinking that genre movies and the real maestros like Roger Corman and his collaborators are any less auteur or impactful in the history of cinema than you. Martin Scorcese made Boxcar Bertha at the beginning of his career. And Francis Ford Coppola made Dimentia 13 back in 1963. And those are just a few examples of the talented and successful filmmakers whose roots are in genre films. Who are you to impugn any genre film or its creators? Having been deeply involved, as either an executive or as a producer, on Tim Burton’s original BATMAN and the first MEN IN BLACK, as well as 300, and now IMMORTALS, one of the things that has been consistent about all of the filmmakers involved in these landscape-changing global films is that, in each and every case, all of the directors were humbled by their predecessors, their colleagues and by their awareness of the great history of film that came before them. The enjoyment and the immersion of an audience in a movie theatre, as they had and will have with the above-mentioned films, and as audiences are experiencing with PIRNAHA 3D now, comes from the originality and the vision of the filmmaker, and not just from the creation of the technology. You as much as anyone certainly knows that there are many pieces to the puzzle. Going to the movies still remains, arguably, amongst the best communal experiences that human beings can share. My sense is that Mr. Cameron has never seen PIRANHA 3D...certainly not in a movie theatre with a real audience. Jim, we invite you to take that opportunity and experience the movie in a theatre full of fans - fans for whom this movie was always intended to entertain. Does Mr. Cameron have no idea of the painstaking efforts made by the talented young filmmaker Alex Aja and his team of collaborators? Clearly, and this one is a good bet, he has no clue as to how great and how much of a fun-filled experience the audiences who have seen the film in 3D have enjoyed. Those of us who have tried to stay in touch with the common movie audiences - the ones who really matter, the ones who actually still go to the theatre, put on the glasses, and eat the popcorn - take joy and pride in the fact that movies of all kinds, including PIRANHA 3D, have a place in filmmaking history - past, present and future. 3D unto itself is not a genre Jim, it is a tool that gives audiences an enhanced experience as they experience all kinds of movies. I believe Mr. Cameron did not see PIRANHA 3D either with any real audience or not at all. On opening weekend, I was in a Los Angeles theatre with a number of today’s great film makers including JJ Abrams, who actually had nothing short of the fabulous, fun 3D experience that the movie provides. I am fortunate enough to have worked on, and continue to work on, evolutionary movies in all formats from just simple good story telling, which still matters most of all, to CG movies to tent-pole size 3D movies, and genre 3D movies like PIRANHA 3D. What it comes down to, Jim, is - that like most things in life - size doesn’t really matter. Not everyone has the advantage of having endless amounts of money to play in their sandbox and to take ten years using other people’s money to make and market a film….like you do. Why can’t you just count your blessings? Why do you have to drop Marty Scorsese’s or Tim Burton’s names, both gentlemen who I have personally worked with, and who have enjoyed great joy and success with movies of all genres and sizes well before the advent of modern 3D? Then as now, they were like kids in a candy store recognizing, far beyond your imagination, the possibilities of storytelling and originality. For the record, before you just totally dismiss PIRANHA 3D and all, in your opinion, worthless genre movies that actually undoubtedly gave you the ability to start your career, you should know that PIRANHA 3D had an 82% "fresh" (positive) ratting on Rotten Tomatoes on opening day - a web site that all the studios, filmmakers and the public use as a barometer of what makes a quality film. We know that PIRANHA 3D has not achieved a boxoffice that is on the level of many of Mr. Cameron's successes. To date, PIRANHA 3D has earned over $30 million around the globe with #1 openings in several countries. And, as the "fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes indicates, critics and many, many others have embraced and celebrated PIRANHA 3D for the fun and entertaining - and even smart - movie-going experience that it is. Let’s just keep this in mind Jim….you did not invent 3D. You were fortunate that others inspired you to take it further. The simple truth is that I had nothing but good things to say about AVATAR and my own experience since I actually saw it and didn’t damn someone else’s talent publicly in order to disassociate myself from my origins in the business from which we are all very fortunate. To be honest, I found the 3D in AVATAR to be inconsistent and while ground breaking in many respects, sometimes I thought it overwhelmed the storytelling. Technology aside, I wish AVATAR had been more original in its storytelling. We have to inspire, teach and mentor this next generation of filmmakers. It is garbage to suggest that any film or any filmmaker who cannot afford to work to your standards should be dissuaded from following his or her craft by not making 3D movies or not making movies like DISTRICT 9, for example, which probably cost the amount of AVATAR’s craft services budget, but totally rocked it in the movie theatre and in the marketplace. In that case, it was not a 3D movie. But had it been, it certainly would not have been any less original or impactful. The enormous worldwide success of AVATAR has been good in all respects for you, your financiers, your distributors and the industry, as well as for the movie going public. Jim, there is a difference between Maestro which is a word that garners respect, and Dictator or Critic which are words better left for others who are not in our mutual boat or on our team. You are one of the best, it is reasonable to think that you should dig deeper and behave like it. Young directors should be inspired by you, not publicly castigated by your mean-spirited and flawed analysis. While we are all awed by your talents and your box office successes - and I compliment you on all of them - why don’t you rethink how you address films with which you are not involved? You should be taking the high road that is being travelled by so many of your peers, and pulling with them to ensure that we, as an industry, will have a continuum of talented filmmakers that will deliver a myriad of motion pictures both big and small, with 3D or any other technologies yet to come that will entertain audiences throughout the world. That is the challenge that we face. That is the future that we should deliver."

Oh, snap! Man, I love Hollywood beefs. The funny thing is, if Cameron hadn't said anything, Piranha probably would have just quietly disappeared from theatres in another week or so (okay, maybe it still will). But now he's drawn a lot of attention to it, and given people something to talk about, which is probably the opposite of what he wanted to accomplish. Well done, sir. Does Canton's statement ring true for you, or is it just another sales pitch?

FOR MORE DAILY MOVIE GOODNESS, VISIT FILMJUNK.COM!