CRITIC EXPRESSES SURPRISE AT CAMERON'S ATTACK {Turan ends up poking Cameron once too often} : LUSENET : TitanicShack : One Thread


Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan said that he was "astonished" when he read director James Cameron's lengthy attack on him in last Saturday's edition. "Usually, these people are surrounded by handlers who try to calm them down," Turan told today's (Tuesday) New York Post. The Post also quoted an unnamed insider as saying that Cameron's attack on Turan, along with his "king of the world" speech at the Oscars, "have reminded everyone of the magnitude of his ego. ... It all underscores an old Hollywood axiom: Never hire a director who's just had a big hit."

I just read some comments in a a Canadian magazine about how much Leo and Kate hated Cameron for his ego and perfectionism. Kate reportedly felt verbally abused by Cameron, while Leo "had enough" of Cameron and refused to go to the Oscars. They both did not receive yet their promissed $1 million bonus for the great movie. I wonder if anyone else read anything similar about this.

-- Dan Draghici (, March 31, 1998



Kate and James Cameron get along well now, she realized he was stressed from ~5 hours sleep a night and he dedicated three years of his life to a movie filmed in eight months.

Leonardo snubbed the Oscars because he wasn't nominated for an award personally (or so he says.)

If Kate and Leo are to get bonuses, it's not Cameron's decision, it's the movie studios. They're both smart enough to know who to whine to.

-- Cindy (, April 01, 1998.


Actually, if you ask me Cameron has good reason to carry around an inflated ego. Nobody ever said the industry was easy to be involved in, and Kate and Leo have had nothing substantially bad to say about their experiences with Cameron. Nor surprising, I would imagine. I wonder if Cameron had temper fits with Arnold? Hehehe, "Uh oh... my eyes! De goggles do nothing!"

-- Dave Phillips (, April 01, 1998.


I think that Cameron had every right to go make his King of the world speech at the Oscars. It was kinda corny but I think if I'd spent three years on a project and then everyone liked it and thenI got this HUGE award I'd probably feel like the king of the world too, or actually the Queen:) I also can see why Cameron would have gone off on some of the critics. I mean I didn't even help make this movie and after I saw it I couldn't stand to have anyone say anything bad about it. One of my friends actually pissed me off one day because of her comments during and right after seeing the movie. Again if Id spent three years on a project like this and only a handful of people hated and kept on and on about how horriable it was I'd probably go off and let them have it too. People seem to think that those in the public eye can never really be human because everyone can see them. I also have to agree that Kate and Leo are both smart enough to know who to go to if they don't get their promised million.

-- Miranda Swearingen (, April 01, 1998.

Wanted to add that last I heard, though this was several weeks ago, Cameron too hadn't gotten the millions of dollars to which he normally would have been entitled had he not forfeited his directing fee. Supposedly the studios did plan to pay him though. I assume that Leo and Kate get a percentage of all the film's revenue; isn't that the way it works, especially for a couple stars who had previously gotten Oscar nominations? This isn't to say that I don't think that the $1M each has been promised should be paid immediately. Regarding Cameron and the alleged ego, I agree with the folks above. For many months, he faced a level of adversity as few other directors have, and I applaud him for being honest about feeling like the king of the world (though I too thought that statement was corny). Finally, I thought all the speeches made by Titanic awardees (incl. Cameron) were great - concise and heartfelt.

-- Bob Gregorio (, April 04, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ