WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

Jason Reitman Hates 3D and Thinks "Avatar" is Goofy

Posted: December 6th, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
Jason Reitman Hates 3D and Thinks "Avatar" is GoofySubmit Comment
MovieRetriever sat down with director Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You for Smoking) to talk about his new movie, "Up in the Air." During the conversation, the two covered many different topics, including 3D and James Cameron's "Avatar."

"First off, I hate 3D," Reitman said about Hollywood's latest favorite technique. "After about 20-30 minutes, I'm always like, 'Okay. I get it.'"

He then went on to say that after all the hype, he was very disappointed by the "Avatar" trailer. "I have to admit that I don't like the new 'Avatar trailer," he revealed. "Everyone likes the new one. It's the one everyone gets excited about. I'm like, 'I want to love this movie SO bad.' I'm the biggest [James] Cameron fan. I love every one of his films. I read all this hype about the new trailer. I went and watched and I was like, 'Oh. It still seems pretty goofy to me.'"

Reitman added that it's because Cameron is such a good director, that the trailer felt so average. "But, if it said, 'A new film from Paul W.S. Anderson (Resident Evil, Alien vs Predator).' You wouldn't be like, 'Wow. This looks like the best Paul W.S. Anderson film of all time.'"

And even though he didn't like the trailer, Reitman will still give the 3D movie a shot. "But I don't like 3D. I'm almost apt to see the movie in 2D," he stated.

Source: MovieRetriever


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 65 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 8:13:52 AM

The guy is smarter than he looks.
Freudian_Nightmare writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 8:22:36 AM

It's funny he totally outed his feelings for Anderson. And if it was Anderson that made the film, chances are that it would be his best movie ever, since the bar isn't very high
SpookyCupcakes writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 8:46:01 AM

Well, I just got a new favourite director.

He was one Lohan joke away from making me suspicious of being a WP member.
lost_addict writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 9:11:14 AM

f*ck juno
BigUnit writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 10:42:06 AM

lol he just bashes anderson like that lol his movies werent that bad
BigUnit writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 10:50:47 AM

and AVATARS going ro be SICK our generations star wars!
johnny_boy writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 11:08:09 AM

when us guys get really horny they call it blue balls.since avatars are already blue what term do they use?
johnny_boy writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 11:11:49 AM

im sure dandy would know since he is the c*ck sucking master.
TheStig writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:02:35 PM

our generations Star Wars? Really? Our generation will have NOTHING that comes close to the SW phenomenon...there is no way that Avatar has anywhere near the groundbreaking revolutionary power of SW...



And I LOVE how we still just destroy Dandy even though "he" hasn't been heard from in forever hahahahaha
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:07:14 PM

Star Wars is vastly overrated. Nuff said.
MoneyHayabusa writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:10:41 PM

Well Coraline looked awesome in 3D, so I don't really give a sh*t if he hates it. With a lot of stuff its pretty gimmicky but there are places where it is really effective.
MoneyHayabusa writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:11:58 PM

^Haha, you know, I sat down with my brother to watch the original trilogy over a couple of days a few years back. I fell asleep during every one!
KirkLazerus writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:24:45 PM

@Mink- hahaha hell yeah that sh*t is overrated
theslayer writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:50:14 PM

hey james camersh*t eat sh*t and drink piss and then die, ok
Lister writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:52:29 PM

"there is no way that Avatar has anywhere near the groundbreaking revolutionary power of SW"

Oh please, Avatar is just as groundbreaking as Star Wars was. All Star Wars did was use models differently. The only thing revolutionary about it was that it thought outside the box, and it's hard to say a movie about 10 foot tall blue people on a planet with floating mountains and bioluminiscent jungles doesn't do the sae.
Lister writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:52:45 PM

*the same.
TheStig writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 12:57:55 PM

i'm not talking about technique...im talking about completely transforming a generation and an industry...
rabid writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:11:23 PM

Opinions are like *ssholes. Everyone has one and they all stink.
Reitman doesn't make sci-fi films, but he's willing to bash people who do. If he made sci-fi films, he'd probably be checking out ways to push the envelope like Cameron. When Reitman's films take place on another planet, then he can insult a filmmaker's methods of immersion.
Tizzle writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:14:32 PM

I don't know, I think this movie looks like Delgo meets Fern Gully. It's been done before. Sort of. I do like James Cameron though, I'm just not impressed yet.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:14:37 PM

@ mink:
"Star Wars is vastly overrated"
- Tell it to the idiot virgin nerds who invented Jediism!
But its merit IS, in fact, exaggerated.

The only thing that is even close to the Star Wars phenomenon in recent times, is the Matrix trilogy. And even that is far from having the same impact as SW had.

"Reitman added that it's because Cameron is such a good director, that the trailer felt so average."

- He forgot to say that it's also because it cost roughly a billion dollars. If the movie had cost 3 times less, it would have looked just fine.

It's like when you pay a whore 100 bucks for the full service. In the end, you just come all over her face like usual and you're like "I could have gotten the same thing from any street $10 whore! Hey, whore, why did you charge me 100 bucks again?"

People will watch Avatar and wonder the same thing... more or less...
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:19:07 PM

And now Dandy's thinking:

"There are prostitutes that charge $100? f*ck, I'M CHEAP!!"

And yes, Dandy still reads this stuff. Sometimes he logs in as dandythep*ssy, sometimes as Vin12, but I'm pretty sure he's around...
TheStig writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:26:30 PM

"It's like when you pay a whore 100 bucks for the full service. In the end, you just come all over her face like usual and you're like "I could have gotten the same thing from any street $10 whore! Hey, whore, why did you charge me 100 bucks again?"

well put haha
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:29:26 PM

@ TheStig:

Thanks! I thought it would be a good analogy! lol
rabid writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 1:35:31 PM

by that logic, just save yer theatre money and stay home with a Uwe Boll rental
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 2:01:41 PM

"by that logic, just save yer theatre money and stay home with a Uwe Boll rental"

I wouldn't go as far as saying that. But when people say a certain movie will change the movie industry forever, you can't help but to feel disappointed when they fail to live up to the expectations.
Money and special FX alone don't make a movie. Bold statements regarding its merit don't either.
That was the logic in my previous post.
Jedimax writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 2:13:20 PM

Hmm lets see, A) thats really funny what he is saying about 3D cause i do feel the same way. I mean I think Avatar is going to be a lot of fun, and not use it as such a gimmick, (cause you know... i got bored of ducking my head when something flies straight towards your face when I was 10.)

Second, all things considered sounds like Reitman is being a little c*cky, but hey! guess you can do that when you just made one of, if not the, Oscar Front runner of the year, and Avatar is not going to be able to strip that title away.
Vin12 writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 2:58:47 PM

You know what pete u really need to get off the computer and get a life its really sad.
Spankfish writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 3:14:16 PM

Im a big Star Wars fan, but i dont think they changed the movie industry. They just tapped into a trend that was popular at the time and helped people escape from cold war angst.

They created a long line of "copy cat" type films that tried to cash in on the interest that was around in sci-fi after.

Hence "Moonraker" being rushed out, "Alien" being popular as it was sci-fi for adults with brains being eaten(fantastic film in its own right though).

We have the sci-fi trend in the late 70's, the action hero in the 80's (Sly, Arnie, Bruce), The sh*te teen movie either comedy or slasher/horror in the 90's, "LOTR, Potter and Twatlight" in the 00's.

Now it looks like we will be bombarded with sub-standard 3D/CGI fantasy/sci-fi, whatever, for the next few years after "Avatar".

Just expect every movie studio to throw loads of cash at any CGI movie idea that anyone comes up with for the next few years.

Its going to be comic book films ALL over again.

N.B. I'm willing to wage 50 that within the next 6 months, a CGI sci-fi/fantasy film will come out labeled by the media as "The new/next Avatar" or "A film that Cameron would make/be proud of" etc...

Any takers?
Spankfish writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 3:19:30 PM

Oh, and Cameron is going to be richer than god renting office space in his new CGI company to fools making crap, hoping that a little of his success rubs off on them.

The best was to fill a need is to create it yourself, then sell your wares to the addicted public. Thats how drug dealers do it.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 3:29:25 PM

@ Vin12:
In case anybody still doubted you're dandythep*ssy, you've just cleared that one out.

You know what's sad? It's you being such a faggot coward f*ck that you come here with another username, not having the intelligence nor the character to stand up for your opinions posted as dandythep*ssy. Now THAT's sad.

So tell us, what really happened after you got arrested at your "New Moon" birthday party?
Made a lot of new boyfriends in jail?
Lister writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 3:38:24 PM

"He forgot to say that it's also because it cost roughly a billion dollars. If the movie had cost 3 times less, it would have looked just fine"

Well considering the actual budget has been revealed to be $237 million dollars, I think it looks better than fine.

http://www.thewrap.com/article/true-cost-and-consequences-avatar-11206
Ranger writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 3:59:27 PM

@VintheDandy - in your own words... stick to the topic at hand (and no... that's not meant to be a masturbating reference).
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 4:04:21 PM

@ Lister:

"cost roughly a billion dollars" - my bad there, I meant roughly HALF a billion dollars.

In my opinion, the keywords in that article you mention are: "Fox spokesperson".

Cameron HIMSELF said just a few weeks ago the movie isn't finished, there was still half an hour of movie to do. So Fox's account department STILL has numbers to crunch.

Also, the FINAL cost of the movie involves promotion costs as well, so, at the very least, it'll be close to the $400 million mark.

And EVEN if the movie ended up costing "only" $237 million, it still doesn't look like much so far.

But I'm waiting to see for myself when it gets released. I'm not an "Avatar" hater, but I'm definitely skeptical.
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 4:38:43 PM

So, vin12 is DandyTwat? Oh, that's original. Another nick. Come on, you little c*ck-slurping Navy toy (instructions I'm sure you've heard before), just post in your own damned name. We all know sailors park their battleships in your Batcave of an ass, so just come out of your little closet and post under the right name.
Spankfish writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 4:40:10 PM

@ Peter and Lister

After reading that article, i think the "Fox spokesperson" was intentially playing down the costs by being vague.

If you were spending HALF a Billion on a film, would you openly tell everyone? No, you'd hide costs, move stuff around, make it look like its close to budget.

Would you really want to be the studio that paid the national budget for Luxemburg, all for James Camerons dream? You would be a laughing stock within the industry.

Whatever the true story, this film WILL make profit. The studio will tell you so.
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 4:41:02 PM

I hear dandy's name around town is the 'Homosexual Masturbator'. He's seen more c*ck than Tyson Foods.
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 4:43:13 PM

Ummm, people? Avatar did NOT cost half a billion. Just so you know. A little more than 200 mill, not half a billion.

God, I really hate the internet. It spreads rumors like dandy spreads herpes. Well, dandy just spreads, period.
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 4:45:44 PM

And yeah, promotion adds to the cost of making and selling a film, but that's true for almost all films, so when you consider that all other films require additional costs, it doesn't really change anything.
TeemSelami writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 5:20:18 PM

gayson reitman is a fag. avatar looks way better than that george clooney turd floating in theatres
vwkombi writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 6:18:53 PM

@ Bigunit
We lost all hope for a this generation Star Wars when Firefly was cancelled and Serenity underperformed.

@ Peter_Parker
2012 had a budget of around 200-260 million and the CGI sucked more ass than Dandy in a room full of transexual Thai hookers. Avatar had a budget of 200-500 mil and it looks far superior to 2012.
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 6:49:21 PM

According to BO Mojo, 2012 had a production budget, that's to make the film, of about 200 million. The 260 mil figure I cannot find a source for, just a loop de loop around Roalnd Emmerich's name.

But I'm not looking that hard. Its 2012, so like I care. But its made an est 600 mil worldwide, but only a 150 mil domestic. Those aren't best numbers.

Not sure why the sudios keep giving Emmerich money. He must make something back at the end of the day.
Ranger writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 6:56:20 PM

'...a room full of transsexual Thai hookers.'

Nice!
WannaSeeDatThong writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 6:58:07 PM

This guy is awesome.
Ranger writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:00:02 PM




Thank you.



Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:47:01 PM

@ vwkombi:

I don't even call it "2012" anymore, I refer to that movie as "that movie that sucked".

"... and it looks far superior to 2012."
- ANY movie can be better than "that movie that sucked".

But again, this takes back to the initial question, FX and money don't make a good movie. They may have some impact at the box office, but nowadays, that's not saying much...

... and that's why I'm still being skeptical about "Avatar".
ksplatt writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:52:22 PM

looks like nick cage in the photo haha
Peter Parker writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:52:23 PM

* takes US back to the initial question...

BTW: I've seen "Avatar" trailers both at home and in theaters. I think it has enough elements to result in box office success.
Now, whether it's a good movie or not, that's something entirely different.
FFantasy1984 writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:54:02 PM

I have to admit, Avatar looks like it might be good. But I'm not sure about it. I like the idea behind it. And I hate 3D movies, I will not go see a movie if it's in 3D. It gets annoying and can give me a headache.
FFantasy1984 writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:55:32 PM

mink- I agree that Star Wars is overrated. Glad to hear someone else say it!
minkowski writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 7:57:36 PM

thank you, FFantasy.
wonderBOY writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 8:18:25 PM

if by goofy he means a rip off (fern gully and dances with wolves ) then yeah but im still going to watch it at imax in sydney the largest screen in the world
vwkombi writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 9:19:19 PM

@ Peter_parker

Yep, 2012 really sucked. But it was made for 200mil and still looks like the sh*t that a dogs sh*t sh*ts.

Seeing the Avatar trailer at the movies showed what could be done with a supposed 200mil budget. I have to say that it looked quite good.
bacci40 writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 11:30:43 PM

i really love you punk ass kids "star wars is overrated"

really

as most of you were born 10 to 20 years later...wtf do you know?

you are all so f*cking jaded...
Ranger writes:
on December 6th, 2009 at 11:40:19 PM

Just my opinion... not picking sides.

Star Wars 1977 - looking forward... it was ground-breaking. The robotics used to move the filming cameras over models. And Star Wars WAS 'character driven' - most people of the time had their favorite (in later years when dandy was spawned... he didn't have a fav. because he sucks... everything).

Were the same Star Wars to be released today... with THAT acting?! Sure... it would get bashed all to hell. But back then it was nice to see more space stuff after Star Trek was on TV years earlier. And John Williams music... always top notch.
Last Acting Hero writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 5:47:46 AM

@KirkLazerus .. you like scrubs...what the hell do you know?
RickyGabrielBird writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 7:33:46 AM

Return of the Jedi was on telly the other day and it is amazing to think how well the films still hold up compared to todays visuals. Maybe its because this CGI lark looks way too fake still.

Should of left it with the original trilogy fat f*ck Lucas.

As for Reitman. Well said.
TRUEMAN writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 7:49:33 AM

i have a question:
How the Avatars reproduce i havent see reproductives organs? Oral sex? f*ckin SAM W.? i dont know!
TheStig writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 9:25:05 AM

Thank you Bacci! Thank you!
thedudeman69 writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 11:12:43 AM

*golf claps*

good job Jason, I agree.
Aaron writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 8:29:27 PM

Not to point out the obvious, but the first starwars was pretty f*cking bad. I mean.. watch it - it's an awful movie.
Aaron writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 8:38:01 PM

- Agree, the score was pretty good.

And Bacci - I'm 26, so yes, star wars was just before my time, but my two favorite movies: Lawrence of Arabia, and Gone with the wind.

Star wars was bad.

I get that you have to take the period into consideration and what came before and after..
This might be a ridiculous comparison but - La Voyage Dans La Lune: Brilliant film.

Starwars: sh*t.

THx 1138: brilliant. (or thereabouts)

Empire Strikes back/Return of the Jedi: great fun.

A new hope: sh*t.

Okay, I'm done.
Captain Wow 110 writes:
on December 7th, 2009 at 9:50:56 PM

Finally, someone who shares my feelings. This 3D craze is ridiculous. And I'm sorry, Avatar does nothing for me.
Evil_Disco writes:
on December 8th, 2009 at 6:41:08 AM

Hollywood can take their 3D and shove it far up their asses!
dukduk writes:
on December 9th, 2009 at 3:31:32 AM

nobody can say star wars sh*t or sth like that, jus bcos don like it. Personally i hate SW bcos is lame n old, n definitely best sci-fi movie to me is 2001: a space odyssey. But star wars very character driven n i think gud story at that time. Now evrybody still remember the characters which is masterful for a movie, though personally i think most of them useless to the plot.

They succeed in creating boundaries for sci-fi action-advnture, and avatar now is in more advanced world n more capable in techno, so if theyr jus gud enuff theyr nothing near star wars. Theyll be just gud scifi dats all, but who can guess until de movies out? Reitman do got brains, he agree cameron is a very great director seeing most of his movies but avatar don look best, at least in de trailer, definitely
seveltoto writes:
on November 11th, 2017 at 1:26:00 AM


There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved