Copypasta from my blog.
Who better to rehash an old story and veil it in needless 3D? James Cameron, that's who. After the extremely successful release of
Pocahontas Avatar, Cameron decided to live the true American dream by making money without actually doing anything. What I'm saying is this man has a considerable amount of cash for not having an original idea since True Lies (1994). And even that's a stretch, considering how original it is for Arnold Schwarzenegger to shoot lots of bad guys. Oh yeah,
and True Lies is a remake. That puts his last piece of complete originality at 1991's Terminator 2. Yes, it's been 20 years since this man came up with something on his own.
So what's this bad news? As you may have heard by now, Titanic (now in 3D) will be re-released into theaters in 2012. The good news? Next year, Darwinism will prove itself true when re-enacting idiots start falling off boats again. I can guarantee you this: the theaters will be packed with teen girls who fancy Twilight-esque romances (read: no substance) and teen boys who have a chance to see Kate Winslet's boob in 3D. "But the 3D adds realism!" you might say. No, it doesn't. Dropping buckets of ice on the audience and then flooding the theater would add realism. I might even buy a ticket if the theater staff managed to pull that off.
Now, to be totally honest, Titanic isn't that bad. It's akin to any other typical disaster movie with a love story shoved down its throat (I'm looking at you, Pearl Harbor). However, does it need a re-release? I guess that's kind of like asking "Does Police Academy need another sequel?" If you answered yes to either question, you're a horrible person. Apparently, Cameron justifies it by saying the movie was made to look even clearer than the original during the restoration and conversion process, which may or may not entail turning DiCaprio and Winslet blue.
I guess it's only a matter of time before we find out if this 'sinking ship' is a metaphor for James Cameron's career.