The Titanic by Jamesesheims Cameron, when adapted to inflation, is one of the highest gross movements of all time and is only overcome by the characters of Cameron's own "avatar" and the epic pro-confederation of Victor Fleming "passed with the wind". However, even when they are not adapted to inflation, the Titanic is still there at the top, behind only the first two films of Cameron Avatar and "Avengers: Engers: Entony Rousseau's End". Even The animated Chinese mega-hit-hit "NO HAA 2" did not overcome Cameron's romantic EP at the box office during writing.

Those who watched films in 1997 and 1998 remember the huge phenomenon. "Titanic" lasts an incredible 195 minutes, but still various people watched it over and over in cinemas. It engulfed the Academy Awards, winning 11 of its 14 nominations. His soundtrack was huge. "Titanic" opened on December 19, 1997 and was #1 The box office every week until the release of "Lost in Space" ... Next April. The world would not see anything as huge until Cameron's next film in 2009. You can no longer talk about the "Titanic" without mentioning how overwhelming it is. For many years, it stood as the highlight of a certain kind of pop Hollywood films.

It is then difficult to imagine that the Titanic was expected to become a huge bomb during its production. The film, as many know, was the most expensive film ever made at the time, with its budget balloon of already giant $ 100 million by the then unbeaten $ 200 million. Even the notorious expensive tentpole since the 1990s "Waterworld" wasn't that Expensive. The film was so too much budget, in fact, that Cameron recalled his career planning, while he was still in the middle to do so, convinced that the Titanic could never become profitable. With pure happiness it became a phenomenon he made, eventually earning over $ 2 billion to the global treasurer.

Indeed, Cameron mentioned many times, including in a video interview with You -N -N To mark the 25th anniversary of the film, that he didn't even think the film would break evenly. "Titanic" was the largest cube in Hollywood to this day.

In an interview in SI -N -N, Cameron was Frank, reminiscent of the bow of hopelessness that the film's crew felt during production:

"We didn't think he was going to make money. Honestly. We got into it, and we (...) went from" We'll never work again "to" We'll probably come to work again, until we make another movie like "Titanic".

Cameron was similarly honest when he spoke Wired In 2009. He, along with everyone else who followed the development of the Titanic, remembered the stable inflated budget and the missed deadlines. It is true: "The Titanic" was initially due to be a summer release, but returned to return in December 1997 to give Cameron enough time to finish filming and editing the film. Meanwhile, Cameron was just as worried as the financiers of the film, worried what makes a movie that can't sell tickets. As the legend goes, Cameron kept a blade with a razor in his office, completely with a gloomy attached note that states: "Use only if the film stinks." This was not a sign of a depressed idea, but it was an indication that Cameron was facing some serious deposits. As he said:

"When we filmed" Titanic "(...), we were just trying to find out how much money we would lose.

Everything that costs so many these days is usually considered a "safe thing". When the movie "War of the Starwives" or the Marvel movie costs $ 200 million, it is considered a relatively low risk investment, as those films have generally made a profit (at least in the past decade). However, when Cameron was doing "Titanic", that kind of film spending was unheard of. The Titanic had to be a hit, otherwise the careers will end up and the business entities will be closed.

Over $ 2 billion later, the risk was absorbed.

In particular, a Washington Post The article published in May 1997 quoted several 20 -century Fox executives cautious about the Titanic. The article noted that Paramount (who handled the home distribution of the film) and Fox (which handled the international part), had to stand by Cameron at that stage. After all, $ 200 million was far from the point "cut and running". Tom Jerak, the fox's head at the time, even became existential about the "Titanic", saying:

"The bottom line is, no one wants to spend this kind of money, but that's the way it turned out. Should it be done? '

The Titanic proved to be epic, but the question remains: is it too much money? The post, back in 1997, has already noticed that Hollywood is accepting a "bigger" mentality. This was a year in which the huge blockbusters of the day include "the lost world: Jura Park", "Men in Black", "Air Force" and "Liar Liar". The films were becoming increasingly expensive to make, but the "Titanic" seemed to cross the line. If only the directors of the studio at that time could notice the overwhelming part of the late 2010 and early 20s. Just look for budgets for the Jurassic World films somewhere. Or the newer films "War of the Starvers" and "Starwater Trails". Or the fifth film "Indiana Onesons". Hack, look Non-hits of garbage like the movie "Netflix" by Roussos "Electrical State". Or expensive bombs As the continuation of Todd Phillips "Joker: Foil for Two". The money is burned regularly.

Can a line be crossed? Hollywood seems to be trying to prevent spending, as even the movies of the superhero and the films "War of Starwelles" are no longer hits. But the industry will only continue to be encouraged to be irresponsible if even one of every 10 mega-budget races came out in black. 1997 was just the beginning. The present is much larger.