Yet at the point studios were trusting him with bigger budgets for his projects, he duly spent it.
You could hardly say he wasted it, either.
Say what you like about Cameron and his films, but his dollars go on the screen.
Four times hes broken the record for making the worlds most expensive film.
Terminator 2was the right sequel at the right time.
In all,Terminator 2cost just over $100m to make.
Cameron, though, handsomely won his gamble.
For $100m, it all looks a bit of a bargain.
20th Century Fox must have thought so too, as it subsequently entered into a development deal with Cameron.
The first Cameron film that Fox backed?
Sure, Schwarzenegger had stumbled significantly at the box office for the first time with 1993sLast Action Hero.
ButTrue Lieswould see him very much back on home territory.
He thus made the most expensive movie in history again.
He toyed withSpider-Manfor a while, and was also developingStrange Days, that Kathryn Bigelow would eventually direct.
Writing work ensued, and production itself kicked off in August 1993.
So what cost the money?
Well, take the washroom sequence for an example of how things escalated.
It was half a script page in the originalTrue Liesdraft.
Further contributors to the extended bill?
Schwarzenegger was late on set one day, after taking an impromptu tour of Washington.
But more practically, Cameron wanted his action sequences to look and feel real.
The third act sequence with the Harrier jet, therefore, wasnt staged against a green screen.
The crane involved was then hit by lightning.
Again, though, Camerons gamble paid off.
In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, though, Cameron abandoned his sequel plans.
Here, then, is the wildcard.
But on top of that came a new computer-generated Terminator: the T-1,000,000.
The technical presentation ate up a good chunk of cash too.
Thats before the assorted other effects.
The stories of the making ofTitaniccould and have filled a book.
But it would be fair to say the journey to its release was a bumpy one.
It cost at least $200m to realise the negative, dwarfing the production budget even ofWaterworldthe year before.
Again, Cameron figured his new film would be a more modestly costed one than his previous ventures.
The greenlight was given.
What could go wrong?
He agreed a summer 1997 release date, but the costs and delays mounted up.
Even following photography, the substantive post-production work gobbled time and money, and Fox was alarmed.
Camerons next non-documentary feature,Avatar, would be an expensive challenge too.
With the upcomingAvatar 2, though?
