Slashdot Mirror
James Cameron Commissions Submarine To Visit Challenger Deep
frank249 writes "In January, on the fiftieth anniversary of the Trieste descent, the X Prize Foundation announced a $10 million prize for the first privately funded craft to make two manned descents to the bottom of Challenger Deep, the deepest surveyed point in the oceans. Now, James Cameron has announced he has commissioned a submarine capable of surviving the tremendous pressures at a depth of seven miles, from which he will not only try for the X prize but also shoot 3D footage that may be incorporated in Avatar's sequel."
Oh no.
Smurfs underwater?
*Ducks*
Now I know the sequel is going to take place underwater. You fuckers ruined it for me!
Will it actually have a story this time?
But if James Cameron is on board, Adrian Grenier better be too.
Titanatar 2
"God Himself could not sink this tree!"
When you're seven miles deep, isn't it, y'know, dark? Maybe you could bring some insanely powerful halogens to illuminate a foot or two, but have you ever taken a photo of someone with the flash held too close to their face? Not something I'm dying to see in IMAX. Stupid idea all around.
To clarify: I find it a bit sad that humanity just isn't capable of building on pre-existing accomplishments, solutions and ideas. The Trieste has already achieved this goal 50 years ago, as the summary states, so why would this be such a difficult challenge? We had the technology half a century ago, and it worked perfectly well.
Sort of like the Apollo program - almost half a century after, we are not capable to go to the moon - we simply and stupidly "forgot" how to do it. The great designers and engineers left and/or died off, and we, as humankind, went on with out collective dicks in our collective hands.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
I'm afraid that's what happen to anything transparent.
also shoot 3D footage that may be incorporated in Avatar's sequel.
I think that it would be better to film for a sequel to Das Boot. We could watch the nervous faces of the crew look around as the metal hull of the submarine makes sickening groans under the increasing pressure. Every so often, a pipe would spring a leak and a burly guy in a tank top would have to tighten it with a huge monkey wrench. Then more guys would have to use sledge hammers jam wooden timbers into bulging bulkheads. Finally there would be life-and-death drama when the ballast fails to release at the bottom of the trench. That would make for a riveting thriller.
"also shoot 3D footage that may be incorporated in Avatar's sequel."
The April fools jokes are getting earlier and earlier each year, come on!
Sorry, buddy, but I have not seen James Cameraschlock's Space Smurf Pocahantas and I never will. There are plenty of us who actually, really and truly do not like crap Science Fiction, will not see it, will not buy the Blue-Ray and won't mention it until some idiot tries to defend it or imply that, actually, I really really like it but I'm too much of a snob to admit it.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Oh, this guy just wants to have an adventure and take the cost of it out of his taxes. I doubt he'll get any usable footage, but the expedition will qualify nonetheless.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
i have to say, yeah, this is a spectacular piece of news for cameron and a great promo for his next film. "i want to shoot for the stars" is a great thrill, but the fact of the matter is, a submarine capable of withstanding 8TPI of seawater pressure is not the same as say, commissioning a rolls royce with a custom paint job. That is, just because you say it needs to happen, and you might throw "lots" of money at it, does not mean it will even get off the drawing board. The Soviet military once built a submarine called Komsomolets capable of a 1000 meter dive, but thats still roughly 8000 meters short of the target depth our television director wants.
Good people go to bed earlier.
"We're gonna re-re-re-re-remake Avatar right there (pointing at globe). No, not in the ocean, inside the ocean, in the heaviest, deepest, most brutal part - the MARIANA TREEEEENNCH! We're gonna call the sequal Avatar 2: BLOOOOD OCEAN!"
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096754/ is the kind of movie requiring some real submarine footage. The other one's Smurfahontas in CGI (quite an accomplishment nonetheless - that should be spared the sad sequel fate of Highlander) - so why would anyone risk their life (and/or sub) for what they could so convincingly render in 3D anyway?
meaning: the guy is not a hollywood idiot
i mean shape memory alloy turned into a villain in t2? or superconducting islands of rock in the air? the man is a true science geek in the vein of anyone else writing here on slashdot
so if anyone is going to get this thing built, with the money cameron has, he's going to do it, because he most certainly understands all of the objections you raised in your post. he is also diving fanatic, he got cameras to the titanic site, his technical and science acumen is outstanding
a science geek and an extremely successful movie director. frankly, cameron makes me completely jealous
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
trashing the career of one of the most successful directors in hollywood
(rolls eyes)
frankly, your post is nothing more than jealousy. you stand on a soap box of imagined authority to pass judgment on the man based on nothing but empty spite
you're just sour grapes. maybe it makes you feel better about your own failure to trash successful people, but the idea of losers pulling down others to their level is a social phenomenon as old as loser teenagers being angry at their peers who try to better themselves
you're just pathetic
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Is it safe to assume James Cameron and the crew will be placed on the infamous dead pool? I'll put $1000 bucks on it.
ghosts of the abyss, aliens of the deep... now avatar ii
frankly, james cameron is a deep sea diving enthusiast who made the mistake of having a career as a successful movie maker
its almost like he chooses his movies just so he can play with deep sea diving equipment. and the whole "making massive amounts of money with extremely successful pop movies" is an afterthought to his real passion in life. bizarre
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
according to you? who the hell are you?
there is only one OBJECTIVE determinant of quality: box office business. everything else is subjective and therefore flawed
therefore, based on the only objective measure of quality we have available, james cameron is a quality film maker. this is an objective fact
money coming in=quality. you disagree with this definition? ok. show me another OBJECTIVE measure of quality and you will prove me wrong. can't do it. sorry
to imagine that you somehow speak for what quality film is, based on nothing but your own delusions of importance, is a commentary on your own psychological defects, and nothing more
pop wins. snobs lose. sorry
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
But as soon as you reach any depth considered the Challenger Deep, it would already be pitch black, right? Would they use infrared? And they plan on doing 3D? Maybe they will just use regular light. If nothing else they will see new creatures.
Plop is a funny word.
Wasn't what made the magic of Avatar that it isn't there, nor actually anywhere?
because while i was editting it, i watched it, and it sucked. no one else saw it except me. i am my own worst critic. maybe if i let other people watch it, they might say its not all that bad. but i'm not ready for that. someday. maybe you can be the first to see it. i'm sure you will give it the care and fair appraisal you are obviously so full of (rolls eyes)
i am not bitter about the experience. i tried to make a movie. it didn't go very well. oh well. all you can ask out of life is to try: it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. how about yourself? have you ever tried to do something with your life? or are you afraid and scared in your basement, and find solace for doing nothing at all by picking apart people who actually do do something with their lives... the career of one of the most successful people in hollywood history, for example. pfffft
"I'm just saying, being a failed artist is probably why you hate critics."
there's nothing wrong with criticism. for example: i think the basis on which you judge cameron is baseless and lame. see? that's called criticism. can you handle it?
"People like you, on the other hand, just want the kind of blind adoration you will never, ever get."
projecting much? you wear your psychology on your sleeve friend. i do not need or want blind adoration. but ultranegative criticism of others, especially successful people, speaks of narcissism. you are not a critic. you are mindlessly negative narcissistic nobody. your criticism of one of the most successful men in hollywood offends me because it is completely without merit. you are completely without merit, and you think you have merit, merely because you criticize. no, this merely means you don't know how to do anything else except egotize your relationship with the world: "this man's successful offends me, because i am not successful. so i must tear him down"
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
http://www.ted.com/talks/james_cameron_before_avatar_a_curious_boy.html
Instead of being a bunch of old irrelevant old farts.
cameron, because he is a science geek, injects the genuinely science-minded idea of shape memory alloy prominently into the plot of a wildly successful piece of pop movie making. no one but a genuine science geek would do this
but this is not good enough for you. he also has to abide by the rigid rules of physics
which is why you are not fit to judge cameron. nor ST:TOS. nor any piece of entertainment. because the point is to ENTERTAIN, not accurately describe how you turn a shape memory alloy into an evil robot!
and ST:TOS is about sexy green alien chicks you can flirt with and seduce and a guy who can grab your shoulder and make you fall down. its obviously complete bs. at the same time, its wildly entertaining. so if you are going to sit there and pick apart why it isn't real or physically plausible, you're merely undertaking a giant exercise in pointing out the fucking obvious that everyone already understands. you honestly believe a lack rigid adherence to scientific and technical accuracies is some sort of revelation of yours? you honeslty believe pointing out that science fiction on movies and tv is not possible? what part of "fucking obvious" do you not understand?
"Cameron's not a science geek, he's a science fanboy."
no: cameron is a science geek and an entertaining film maker. you are a science geek who doesn't even know what entertainment means
"he can't or won't apply the necessary rigor to apply them sanely"
NO ONE is going to do that, or has ever done that, EVER. because to do that, you are making a sleep-inducing technical training film, not a piece of entertainment
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
i have to say, yeah, this is a spectacular piece of news for cameron and a great promo for his next film. "i want to shoot for the stars" is a great thrill, but the fact of the matter is, a submarine capable of withstanding 8TPI of seawater pressure is not the same as say, commissioning a rolls royce with a custom paint job. That is, just because you say it needs to happen, and you might throw "lots" of money at it, does not mean it will even get off the drawing board. The Soviet military once built a submarine called Komsomolets capable of a 1000 meter dive, but thats still roughly 8000 meters short of the target depth our television director wants.
Seriously? What is this, the call of the /. alpha nerd? "I am a scientist/engineer/IT guy, and these non science/engineer/IT people can't possibly understand the things I understand."
You're pontificating over the nigh-impossibility over something that was done fifty years ago with much cruder materials and fabrication techniques. And as far as the Russians go, MIR-1 and MIR-2 are capable of 6,000m and have been operational for over 20 years.
i stopped reading here. could you please, OBJECTIVELY, substantiate how the story sucked
i am going to say the story is fantastic. i am going to OBJECTIVELY substantiate that claim by pointing at the box office returns
if you find some other OBJECTIVE way to gauge quality in a film, do get back to me. until then, you're just a mindlessly negative asshole, who criticizes without merit, like the other guy i'm responding to
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
... it gets dark pretty quick down there. Even at 100ft/30m you've lost a lot of the color spectrum. So they'll take a lot of lights with them. Okay, fine. Don't expect any sweeping vistas -- the background's going to be black.
What are they going to film for Avatar 2 that they can't film a few thousand feet shallower? Neat rock outcroppings? The only thing I can think of are bizarre critters, which will be done in CGI anyway.
I'm all for exploring the depths, but whoever said the Avatar 2 angle is a tax write-off was dead on.
i won't be one either
to me it seems that confusing popularity with quality is less problematic than confusing your own opinion or the opinion of your clique with quality (THAT is sophistry). and yes, i will agree with you that $ from a film is not a completely accurate translation for what quality is. it is however, the most OBJECTIVE translation we have. box office success is therefore the only valid way we have to measure quality, as imperfect as it is
what i am saying is that for all the problems you can point out with simple box office returns=quality, every other method for judging quality is worse. and so box office returns is not perfect, but its the most valid of all the ways you can try to judge quality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
To clarify: I find it a bit sad that humanity just isn't capable of building on pre-existing accomplishments, solutions and ideas..
What the hell are you talking about? What do you think fuels our continuing huge advancements in science, and well, everything from manufacturing technologies to medicine? Building on pre-existing accomplishments, solutions and ideas, that's what.
Sort of like the Apollo program - almost half a century after, we are not capable to go to the Moon - we simply and stupidly "forgot" how to do it. The great designers and engineers left and/or died off, and we, as humankind, went on with out collective dicks in our collective hands.
When you hear stories talking about how we lost the technology to rebuild the Saturn V rockets that were used last time, it's absurdly shortsighted to interpret that as meaning that humanity can't go to the Moon. We are sending unmanned missions there all the time; the only thing keeping manned mission from returning are other budget priorities.
Yes, we would probably have to relearn some of the manufacturing steps involved if we wanted to recreate the original rocket designs exactly, but why the hell would we want to do that? It's 50 year old technology that we no longer care about. We also can't build giant stone pyramids as well as we used to be able to, but does that stop us from building modern cities?
Take your hands out of your pants and go get an education.
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
You should read the book "The Case for Mars". It does a really good job about laying out all of the issues and technologies related to establishing a manned presence on Mars.
To summarize one of the points; there is no reason to go to the Moon first as a staging ground for Mars. Quoting from the Wikipedia article:
"In the same chapter, Zubrin decisively denounces and rejects suggestions that the Moon should be used as waypoint to Mars or as a training area. It is ultimately much easier to journey to Mars from low Earth orbit than from the moon and using the latter as a staging point is a pointless diversion of resources. While the Moon may superficially appear a good place to perfect Mars exploration and habitation techniques, the two bodies are radically different. The moon has no atmosphere, no analogous geology and a much greater temperature range and rotational period. Antarctica or desert areas of Earth provide much better training grounds at lesser cost."
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cameron although he started as a physicist, he never completed it. I dont fault the sentiment though (i certainly root for the guy in his quest,) but there are some fundamentally insurmountable challenges he has yet to address or even expound upon for that matter. Alas, dreamers dream is my point i think.
Good people go to bed earlier.
You too should read "The Case for Mars". There are many reasons for colonizing Mars, not the least of which is as an offsite backup for humanity.
Other reasons range from the practical; with Mars as source of rare elements not available in sufficient quantities on Earth, to the esoteric, with the new Mars frontier providing the challenge that humanity needs to hone its pioneering edge.
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
I think the problem that a lot of people have with Avatar is that it follows a well-known theme (or meme) that has been pretty much completely explored. There isn't a lot of new traction you can get with this sort of story.
Except, moving it to an alien environment you can get some really slick graphics.
Yes, the story is familiar. Most stories are going to be for people over 12 years old. If you cannot appreciate the way a familiar story is played out I guess Shakespear is an utter failure as well. Not that Avatar is comparable to Shakespear, but a familiar story line has been used by playwrites for centuries.
Avatar was also (hopelessly) mired in the idea of the soulless American corporation. Short term profits and a complete disregard for anything else. Considering this was supposed to be a couple hundred years in the future I would think things would have moved past that or we wouldn't be exploring planets around other stars.
How is that a prize? And why reward someone for that? Honestly, anyone who is capable of having a submarine, let alone one that can go that deep probablly wipes their ass with thousand dollar bills already. For cameron he probablly has 10 million stuffed in his mattress already. Only rich people can win that contest. What a waste of 10 million dollars.
A few preview clips and the description of the plot was enough thanks. The odd thing is it was being reviewed along with Jane Campion's "Bright Star" which actually had far better dialogue - give her the money, point her at the SF genre and it would have been a far far better movie - or even just get someone like her to write the dialogue instead of whatever clown did it in Avatar. The only reason Avatar succeeded in my opinion is that it was the biggest circus in town bringing the 3D gimmick back with more money spent on advertising than gets spent making most movies. Give someone like Ang Lee a similar SF project and budget and we'll be looking for Avatar discs in the discount bins instead of raving about it.
Video games have more plot these days.
you honestly believe this is some sort of insight? you honestly believe this is the merit on which you are able to criticize? really?
are you that daft and desperate to be seen as edgy that you lob that simpleminded a softball of criticism at that fat and easy of a target?
whoa dude: avatar is a derivation! no freakin' way! whoa! totally missed that! what a massive thunderbolt of criticism!
pffffffffft
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I was surprised (naive, I know) that the link in TFS was not to the X-Prize website, so I went looking for it.
It turns out that deep ocean exploration is only one of several contending future exploration X-Prizes.
Is this an attempt to stack the deck in Cameron's favor by forcing the competition choice through publicity as if it's a forgone conclusion, and meanwhile he has maybe a six month head start on the competition?
And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
the Triest got to 10,900 meters.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The previous X Prize challenges have all been in areas with obvious practical benefits. For instance, private space flight will open up a lot of industrial applications. High fuel efficiency cars are clearly of great benefit.
Are there any known expected benefits to a private vehicle that can reach the Challenger Deep, or is any benefit purely speculative? Considering that this will be one of the more dangerous X Prize challenges, I'd hope they have some serious benefits in mind.
So he stole the story of Pocahontas for the first Avatar movie, and now he's clearly stealing the story if The Little Mermaid for the sequal to Avatar.
said the random troll who's mindless negativity makes him an authority on something, somehow
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Science geek he may be, but history buff he's not
There are not a lot of covers that beat the original, for sure Jimi Hendrix - All Along the Watchtower, has to be at the top of the list. Johnny Cash - Hurt, Jeff Buckley - Hallelujah, Judas Priest - Diamonds and Rust. Unfortunately for every one of those are there are 10 that try but fail and another 100 that should never have been recorded ever. For try but fail see Pearl Jam - Last Kiss, Metallica - Astronomy, GNR - Live and Let Die. For should never have been recorded see Brittney - Satisfaction, Limp Bizkit - Behind Blue Eyes, Celine Dion - You Shook Me All Night Long (fucking hilarious or excruciating earache - you decide), and any hip hop cover that samples the first 2 lines of some seventies pop song and then lurches suddenly into somebody rapping something completely unrelated. Um....what were we talking about again?
avatar 1 - dances with wolves
avatar 2 - the abyss?
Damn you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yp4sjNdhaU
Now I know why they say that curiosity killed the cat.
Whenever in an argument, remember this.
It's the only way to be sure.
If Cameron dies at the bottom of the ocean, by definition, it will be BEFORE he makes avatar II. Just saying is all.
He means not just to pay for the effort. James Cameron intends to go down into the deep with this thing, himself personally.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Both the Trieste and the Apollos were high-risk operations with insane costs to prove something could be done.
Today, it is proven. This radically changes the cost/benefit calculations. Should we go back there? Yes. Should we push as hard as back then? No.
I'd like to point out that box office returns are not a measure of how much the people liked the story after they have watched the film. In my part of the world, people generally pay before they get to watch the film. The decision to pay, and therefore increment the box office return value, hangs upon factors such as word of mouth, critic reviews, marketing, exposure, curiosity about new technology, graphics fidelity (as seen in marketing materials), admission price and affinity for popcorn. The story is just a sub-factor of word of mouth and critic reviews.
May the source be with you.
You can't use what it made in the box office to say whether of not the story sucked. I mean didn't Sex in the City do good in the box office? And Milk didn't do that good at all. And of course there is Borat...
Aquatar!
But I'm positive that beast never swam in terrestrial waters until a week ago.
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
accepting competing bids to not bring him back up?
If so, we should take up a collection.