Watch James Cameron and David Fincher Talk Filmmaking in SIDE BY SIDE Outtakes

     August 21, 2012


More clips from Keanu Reeves’ film vs. digital documentary Side by Side have landed online, and though I’m incredibly excited for narrative features like Django Unchained and Les Miserables later this year, I’m becoming increasingly convinced that Side by Side will be the most fascinating film I see in 2012.  We recently shared clips of people like Martin Scorsese and The Wachowskis discussing the moviemaking process, and today we’ve got two bona fide titans: James Cameron and David Fincher.  Cameron raves about how much more active the brain is while watching 3D films as opposed to 2D, while Fincher discusses the crux of his job as a director.  They’re both incredibly interesting clips, and if this is the stuff that ended up on the cutting room floor, I can only imagine how in-depth the full film will be.

Hit the jump to watch the clips.  Side by Side hits theaters is currently playing in limited release and is now available on VOD on iTunes.

Clips via The Playlist.


  • Zswick

    I could listen to Fincher talk film for hours.

    • Rick

      Same here

      • Strong Enough

        not here

  • Rick

    I’ve never seen Fincher so laid back.

  • arya

    Babies, Mr. Cameron, seriously? We\’re watching movies by paying tickets, taking a seat in the movie theatre, then putting a 3D glasses if it\’s one of your ooh-its-probably-real 3D movie. We KNOW it\’s not real. Film is never supposed to test our state of consciousness or perception of reality. I think it\’s more about emotional perception, how we\’re terrified by a CG liquid metal, or cried when a volleyball went away. I think stuffs like those have got less to do with whether they\’re 2D or manipulative 3D picture, than with the tensions, characters, and emotional connections that filmmakers (including you, Mr. Cameron, masterfully) successfully build. If anything, a pair of glasses projecting dimmed images is what often take me out of those moments.

    • JandS

      Very well said.

    • Ceridius

      Agree whole-heartedly and have said this many times as well.

  • Chris

    Cameron, although he wants to test it, comes to a conclusion when it’s just a hypothesis. Plus we’re not babies, when we watch a movie everyone knows its a movie. It’s not about being in the film, it’s about being a voyeur to these characters lives. Cameron sees film viewing at a more interactive point of view and he’s free to do that, but for us to think a movie is real we would need our memories wiped of what a movie is, what a movie theater is, how we got to the theater, and it make it a more singular experience. Digital may be the future, but 3D does not work unless it’s an interactive medium not voyeuristic.


    Cameron……shut up, stop trying to sell 3D, its getting old, you sound desperate

  • Action Movie Fanatix

    So UCLA wants 2 million to run this test that James Cameron thinks is so important yet he won’t cough up 2 million bucks when the guy made more than that off of his worst performing movies. Its more proof that this guy is completely full of crap. 3D movies are only the future of film if popup books are the future of literature. I can’t wait until we can stop talking about the gimmick of 3D.

  • amac

    All you guys railing on Cameron, you should really watch this documentary. His vision is defended pretty well by the other filmmakers in this movie. Cameron pushed the technology farther, because the technology did not suit his vision for Avatar properly. Cameron’s definitely a showman.

    I should also say that a lot of the filmmakers in the movie sounded really positive about the prospects of digital, even Scorsese.

    • Action Movie Fanatix

      and Avatar was film making at its finest…

      Mind you I don’t necessarily hate digital film making. I just don’t find it necessary to have new technology constantly pushed down the throats of failing movie theaters (as well as us filmgoers). I can’t stand 3D. That is my biggest complaint about all of this. It is a fad that will pass but it is being sold as if it is the wave of the future. Just like it was the wave of the future in the 70s.

    • Ceridius

      Just because a product or approach is being pushed by someone who has done ‘some’ great work in the past does not make the product or approach great itself.

      This is not an endorsement from the God of Film-making because there are no gods, not definite ones anyway. Everyone is fallible and successful at points during a career.

      While digital film doesn’t actually make much of a difference (other than to the purists) 3D in it’s current format is actually just an awkward, cranky pubescent phase towards the ACTUAL goal here which is complete simulation/assimilation- and at that point its about being in a story rather than following a story (videogames are paving the way for this revolution, despite all the shitty press) than following a story (which is a storytelling format that cannot be substituted lightly).

      • Ceridius

        Bah typos. Anyway in summary. Films and simulations are not the same thing. Films are not evolving into simulations, games are. Cameron is not the jesus of film. 3D is awkward and infantile — which under someone else’s retarded logic would make Cameron awkward and infantile too, but he’s not – he’s a good filmmaker; good, not great.

  • MadMatt

    Badass Digest ran a review of this and said basically it’s an interesting half-hour discussion, but not worthy of a feature-length documentary.

  • Pingback: Keanu Reeves Talks SIDE BY SIDE, MAN OF TAI CHI, BILL & TED 3, and POINT BREAK LIVE | Collider

  • Pingback: Watch James Cameron and David Fincher Talk Filmmaking in SIDE BY SIDE Outtakes