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*
Titanatar 2
"God Himself could not sink this tree!"
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.
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.
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?
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.
Um, not to disagree or anything, but how do you know it's crap if you haven't bothered to watch it?
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
As I wrote in another post, most of today's films have a plot that can be traced back to other films/stories/myths/legends. Does that make them all necessarily bad? I think not. Most of them are, but some are pretty good, although you can figure out the basic gist of the plot after 10 minutes. Sometimes it is the way things are told, rather than only what is told, that makes the difference.
As an a example, think about cover versions of songs. Most are a waste of pressure waves, but some (e.g. Nothing compares 2 U - Sinead O'connor; Take me to the river - Talking Heads) can become classics in their own right.
I don't know what you will think about Avatar. Maybe you will hate it, but writing a "review" such as yours, without seeing the movie, is akin to commenting w/o reading TFA (yes, yes, I'm new here).
Whenever in an argument, remember this.
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
I'm imagining a 5 year old at the dinner table, making faces and sticking out his tongue
I hate broccoli!
How do you know if you haven't tried it?
Broccoli is yucky!
How do you know its yucky if you haven't tried it.
I'm not going to try it because its broccoli and broccoli is yucky!
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
I'd bet Spun also doesn't like broccoli. When the Broccoloid Menace invades, he won't be doing his part to save Townsville, that's for sure.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Tomatometer: 83
Average Rating: 7.4/10
Critic Reviews: 268
Fresh: 222 | Rotten: 46
You have to be pretty damn selective to find a group of critics who didn't like Avatar... which I have no doubt you are. I'm sure you're attracted to like-minded critics. That's understandable, but realize that it is a flaw when you come to believe that's representative of actual critical acclaim. It's like reading nothing but Daily Kos, and thinking that's normal and representative political discussion.
Please, are you really claiming anything Cameron has done is art?
Of course it is. Opinions may differ on whether it's GOOD art, but of course it's art. There isn't a threshold of quality that determines whether something is art. "Twilight" is art, just crappy art. So are my son's crayon drawings.
Fair enough, although having seen both, I don't think equating Dances with Wolves vs. Avatar makes a lot of sense. The plots are fairly similar, but so what? Rocky and Raging Bull could both be called boxing movies, does that make them similar? Compared to Dancing with Wolves, Avatar had a lot more fantasy and action, including plenty of Tom-Clancy-style technology fetishism (even though you were lead to root against the machines - but whoever designed and animated that machinery was clearly into it (and had clearly played Halo...)) I liked how Gaia was implemented on that planet. And, yes, the visuals were awesome, and yes, largely because it was in 3D (which isn't a draw in your case). Who's to say that grand spectacle is artistically invalid?
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.
I wouldn't say that he's a crap director, just that he's not very ambitious. You aren't going to get any surprises from his movies, you see the trailer and you know what to expect.
But he does deliver on what you're expecting. From Avatar I expected pretty CGI, the noble primitive blue people to triumph over the greedy technologically advanced humans, and thats exactly what happened. Its not challenging, but it was well executed for what it was trying to do. Yeah it wasn't trying to do very much. But it didn't fail.
Hating on James Cameron movies is snobbery. No one's telling you its going to be Citizen Kane. Its entertainment, don't read too much into it. Complaining about a James Cameron movie being shallow and predictable is like complaining about poor acting in a porno. Is it really that important that you believe that the wife has an inattentive husband and the man is really a pizza delivery guy? Is it that important that the plot be original when the audience is there to see pretty 3-D animation?
People seem to forget that most historical art was commissioned, not born from some great artistic vision.
People who can only enjoy beauty in "high culture", don't enjoy beauty at all; they enjoy being part of the "high culture" crowd.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
It's the only way to be sure.