|
Isn't Blart 2 a moderate success? Double it's budget back on just the domestic market alone seems like for any other film it would be viewed as pretty good even if it did less business compared to the original. Add into that, it probably moved a lot of DVDs and had the TV rights bought up pretty quick.
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:25 |
|
|
For years, I'd always heard double the budget. That would be enough to figure in marketing and associated costs and give even allow for enough profit at the very end to keep the machine running or break even. Also, you have things like product placement that might offset the costs of the film. Merchandising, too. I sort of never figured the craze of stuff like Anchorman and Old School being thrown onto school school supplies in the last few years at Wal-Mart.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
I think the important thing is Valentine's Day is just around the corner and this is the last, best chance for them to milk some more money out of Paul Blart with some cards. "You've won my BLART", "You're such a BLARTbreaker.", "I (BLART) you.", etc. Comparatively speaking, I sort of think there is probably more disappointment in Pixels than Blart on more levels. It seemed like a movie that felt like it was really screaming out to be a big enough hit that it could get all sorts of merchandising stuff churned out for it eventually in addition to what was sold at Hot Topic and Gamestop. I was sort of thinking it had the highest hopes for a short-run animated series, a limited edition PS4/Pixels bundle for the 2015 holidays, maybe some Funko figures, etc. edit: Of course, the Sandler/Sony situation probably had deteriorated so much I don't think they were going to do much more for the film after it was done.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
The mention of replicating a shot from Ghostbusters made me think of this: Someone apparently driving through the long-closed The Dixie Square Mall from Blues Brothers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHJNr81kAVY I wished they'd done a better job of trying to frame shots to look like the original, though. (Apparently from a documentary called "Return to Chicago")
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:I was just thinking about the Narnia films the other day, and how that whole series turned out to be such a complete non-starter. I sort of wanted to start a thread on this, but it seemed like such an amorphous topic that it could be sort of generic. Film franchises that failed to take off. They maybe get their one film and nothing else ever develops. There seemed to be a lot of movies that they either are based off a pre-existing property (book, movie, comic, TV series) that get their rights purchased and just about everything seems like they have the highest hopes for not just a single film, but a series. Something like that Eragon movie of about a dozen years ago. It sold a lot of books, there was a lot of hype over the film/books and planned sequels, and then almost instantly all the talk of both just vanished. Then you get other planned franchises that have their film rights bought to a series, all sorts of announcements made, and just sit never even getting made until eventually the rights someday revert back to the creator. edit: Or even original IPs that has producers talking series/sequels/franchise even before the first film is even done, endings set up for sequel stories that never get made, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
I would say yeah if you feel it was a legit teaser for a planned sequel. But since the success of Harry Potter and the rebirth of comic book movies in since Blade/Spider-Man/X-men, there have been so many IPs that either from the source material, the tone of the film/marketing or the plans of the filmmakers themselves seem to indicate they weren't just going for a one-and-done film, but actually an idea that THIS is going to become some hugely popular frequently revisited franchise, but it never happens. I think maybe the most notable ones are the YA novels like Golden Compass or A Series of Unfortunate Events, for example, that seem like they were expecting sequels and to become the next Potter or LOTR, but nothing ever came of either. (According to Wiki a SoUE Netflix series is/was in development for this year?) Or something like the original IP of Cloverfield were there was talk of planned sequels being made while filming and even talk of a stylistically much-different sequel that maybe felt like it was hinting at wanting to do more than a single sequel. (Of course, there's sort of sense anymore that if you're successful enough to do a single film to justify doing a sequel, you need to just out and out make it a trilogy.) If anyone wants to make such a thread, please do so with my blessing. I think the only reason I never did was because I figured it'd probably be too generic and would probably need a good enough first post to sum up a number of notable projects that failed, failed to even get made, and the sort of Hollywood hubris that had hopes that the project was destined to be the next long-running cinematic/merchandising franchise, previously established IPs with rights that have been caught up unmade film projects for years, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
This MIGHT be the thread http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3568142
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
The Purge reminds me of a short story I read that I think I've mentioned before: A month-long white vs. black war in America where anything goes until the buzzer goes off. Gradually, though, it fragments as women on both declare war between men and women. Then it continues to fracture even further until its a free-for-all. The month ends and the survivors end hostilities until they are greeted by a 'kindness cult' that successfully encourages mass suicides because the only people that people have left to hate is themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:There's also the shot in the trailer where Superman is kneeling before Lex but I guess that could be part of the 'Lex kidnaps Lois' subplot It looks like Lex has his hand wrapped up in that scene, so I'm sort of also leaning towards him replacing the traditional Kryptonite Ring thing with an embedded kryptonite chunk of some sort.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
J.A.B.C. posted:I can see why they chose Bohemian, but between the trailer's tone and the song choice, it's dissonant. Then again, I still see Wayne rocking out in his little car when I hear the song, so I might not be worth saving. They should have used Ballroom Blitz. Nobody remembers that from Wayne's World.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
SciFiDownBeat posted:The most fun I've had watching a bad movie was when I saw R.I.P.D. and the only other people in the theatre were three loud black guys. Made what would've been a boring movie experience thoroughly enjoyable. I watched about 10 minutes of RIPD on TV and didn't hate what I saw, but I get the feeling that if it had been an identical Japanese/Korean supernatural action-comedy it'd have some cult following going on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
That's probably where I get the feeling, as well as how the CG effects have this strange 'pop' to them that looks like they're trying to be more over-the-top than they should be.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:I'm wondering what might be the widest recognised secondhand film reference. Possibly "I think I hear banjos" or "Squeal like a pig!" from Deliverance? Part of me has always sort of leaned on something like the horror movie motif of Jason Voorhees' hockey mask. Just about any form of media, when they wanted to showcase a scary boogieman figure, could have a random character a hockey mask and it's there. The Jason look is just sort of 'gotten' as a reference to horror even by people who've never seen any of the movies, even for kids who see it in referenced in a cartoon or something.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
I do think one issue that comes to non-traditional race/gender/sexuality casting and characterization is how it's possible for something that would have been ignored otherwise to become an unintended major, controversial talking point on a film, tv series, etc. in the internet age.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
effectual posted:That does not sound like a good fit with his talents. Does to me, if they make it a plot point that they have to cover his face with about 10 lbs of make-up for him to appear 'visible' in scenes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Optimus Prime extended two burning hot hooks from his hands, dug them into a bad robot's face, and tore it in half. The little red dot set in grey a little above the center is one of its eyes. A dude being turned into red mist, as in Transformer 4 and Man of Steel, isn't quite the same thing. Transfomers Movies: They can change their appearance to be just about anything they want on the fly, even while driving down the road. However, they cannot choose an appearance that is recognizable by the audience.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:Their designs have actually became more cartoon human as the series progress. I can only recognize them by what color they are. God help us if they ever get more than one yellow or green on on screen at the time that are about the same size, because I'll never figure it out. The only way I knew it was Shockwave was his head was so distinctive.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
I could have sworn I heard something that a lot of the Cage film choices for the last handful of years has been directly to settle his debts, but the other story I'd heard was that circa Left Behind that he'd finally gotten out from under those obligations and was free to do more films by choice. WB really needs to figure out a place for him in their DCCU films. He sort of looks like the early versions of Black Adam. Nic Cage vs. The Rock. Make it happen, DC.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I haven't seen Evolution in a while but I remember it being decent. I don't remember why it never caught on though, other than a cartoon spinoff. It didn't do super well at the box office, if I recall. One of the backstories to the movie, if I remember correctly, is that it was changed a lot from its original story which was supposed to be more of sci-fi horror film but later they turned it into a comedy. I sort of wonder what reception to it as a sci-fi horror would have been, though. It seems like a lot of those kind of movies ended up getting eventual DTV lower-budget sequels around that time even if the first film didn't do super well. If it had stayed horror, it might have become a cult classic, gotten revisited on video a few years later, etc. One thing that sort of creeped me out when I heard of an original draft of the script, when it focused on horror, was that I think one of the creatures were supposed to be calcium-eating bacteria that was eating away at a character's skeleton.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 09:16
|
|
|
The idea of a son of Indy could maybe work if he was maybe done in a way that could reflect the changing 1950s-1980s cinema in a way that Indy couldn't. Indy Jr. in the late 60s/early 70s researching a Native American archeological site and fighting a corrupt and evil Billy Jack and his satanic cult. Indy Jr. in the late 70s vs. drug dealers destroying South American artifacts smuggling drugs who might be summoning the wrath of ancient gods. Indy Jr. in 1980s Japan doing something, maybe trying to stop a Japanese cult from reviving an ancient monster that isn't Godzilla.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
It's a thing I've said before, but it's sort of like an episode of Chopped. You can have all these great ingredients, but if they don't get put together right you're left with a bad product, if you screw up one thing you've screwed up the whole thing. For all the talk of how some movies are secretly great because they have great elements or really intelligent elements that the audience doesn't get, they're just not handled well enough or in the right way to make it work for the intended audience, you're ruined all of it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Why don't they just do a shared universe Avengers-style with all the other Troll films and their (surviving) protagonists?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:I always found the people saying this to be especially silly. It was clear Gaiman and Rowling were working from a lot of the same templates that were pretty well established and worn by the time both of them got to writing their respective works. I seem to recall there was a period of time when Gaiman was addressing this and folks were accusing him of being bought out by WB in order to not make waves with the company.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
Jose Oquendo posted:It better culminate in Wacky Races parts 1 and 2. The spoiler warning for the end is the 'winner' of the Wacky Races wakes up from a cryo-pod surrounded by seemingly hundreds of well-known and generic H-B characters. They walk down a seemingly endless and repeating corridor of status pods, some with skeletons in them, until they find an ancient, shriveled bear at the helm a gigantic console. He tells a story of how the Earth became too polluted, too overcrowded, to drained, too much war and poverty, not even a single picnic basket or park remained. Something drastic had to be done... Everyone has been frozen in a cryogenic matrix virtual reality, adrift in space as they lurch slowly towards a new world, in this: Yogi's Space Ark. As the winner, it's up to Shleprock to serve the sleepers and keep them safe from now on. The bear is too old to continue. "Yogi? No... I'm Boo-boo. Which is more amusing, Shleprock? My name means 'accident', yet I should be condemned to spend my existence making sure everyone else is safe... While you, your one bit of good fortune in winning my race, has resulted in a lifetime of suffering in solitude and responsibility the likes you cannot imagine. Time to hibernate, one last time..."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
A stupid thought, but I'd almost like to see a River City Ransom movie done that was 1/3 Scott Pilgrim, 1/3 1980s Cannon action film and 1/3 The Warriors.The MSJ posted:Haha, don't be silly. It's obviously a space bridge. Perhaps to a planet where robots transform into dragons (a somewhat popular transformation in the franchise). Don't the Transformer folks now also have the Gobots (and I assume the Rock Lords) characters to use now? Stonehenge is going to open up the Rock Lords into the franchise. Tagline: "Rock and Roll Out"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:The entire premise is a guy pretending to be gay so his landlord will let him live with female roomates, which seems so hopelessly quaint now. I don't even know if they could address a 'pretending to be (blank) sexual identity/orientation' in this day in age without it coming across as generating a lot of negative buzz right off the bat. If anything, they'll probably just ignore that and go with with something else. I'm sort of guessing they could move the concept to a college setting or something where you can still have an environment like on-campus co-ed housing MIGHT have some specific rules set up to address this or something and you can have it create a plot point of people who are pro-and-con about mixed gender on-campus housing arrangements, younger actors, etc. If they'd still want to do something with anything of the sexual orientation thing, I seem to recall there are some schools that have LGBT-centric housing, so they something where Jack is still pretending to be gay, but only so that he can live in the same housing unit as his two gay or lesbian friends or something. Maybe they flip it around where Jack is actually gay and pretends to be straight so he can live with two other men/women because their landlord is a homophobe or something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
Maybe they do a Three's Company still uses the sexual orientation aspect, but there's no pretending this time around. People are gay, straight, lesbian, whatever. The new gimmick is that due to the super expensive San Francisco housing market, three friends are 'hot bunking' in a single studio apartment and each of the characters is trying to downplay and hide how many of them are sharing the same small space using by using rotating work schedules.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Someone please explain "hot bunking" because there is no loving way I am googling that term. TIA I think it's popular from use in the military and I think it also even ended up being used in Depression-era sleeping arrangements. Multiple people share a single bed/bunk at different times through a rotating schedule. Essentially, the bed is almost always in use and is still 'hot'/'warm' from the previous sleeper when you get your turn to sleep. edit: beaten edit2: I think some city tried to pass a law a while back, for example, that you could only sleep on a 'bed in a dedicated bedroom' because renters there were having an issue with tenants having a lot of unlisted inhabitants sharing units by sleeping on couches, cots, sleeping bags, etc. in non-bedroom areas. There was also that news story a few weeks ago of a guy who built a private sleep shed in his friend's apartment living room. JediTalentAgent fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Apr 21, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:There is zero chance that this will be a good movie, but I want it to be an absurd, cheesy, playful movie about two ghosts getting into a If you've not seen Robo-Vampire, you might get something close out of that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Cardboard Box A posted:Mel Gibson should have been in Fury Road. He would have made for a fantastic Immortan Joe. Over in another thread, I sort of contended that Fury Road was perhaps intentionally made so that if at the last minute they wanted to bring Mel back into the franchise, they could. Given the focus on Furiosa, the subtitle of the movie and never mentioning Max's name until the end, I could have seen this as a thing where WB/Producers/Miller could have maybe done a this as sort of the start of a shared Mad Max-universe or something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
Chairman Capone posted:He says his name in literally the first sentence of dialogue, plus it's then in the opening credits. I must have forgotten that, but don't they make a point to have him go through most of the film not telling anyone his name, though? It seems like a very few easy edits could render him nameless the entire film. I still stick by my theory, though, admittedly for dumb reasons. There is something about the film that feels like the way the story is told allowed them a lot of room to edit a last minute inclusion of Mel Gibson. If in early production they didn't want this to be THE Mad Max movie reboot, it's now a new IP called Fury Road that is loosely set in the Mad Max universe. If Mel Gibson suddenly said he wanted to come back and do a final Mad Max movie with Max as an old man, they could put him in in some way to cover that. Also, the timeline of Fury Road seems to be a bit unclear and you could be treating this like a new reboot/reimagining of the original franchise or you could even have it as a continuation of the series. Original Mad Max still has a functional civilized society going on, but by the events of Fury Road it feels to me almost like an entire generation has been born and grown up almost entirely in the post-apocalypse. At one point there was talk of a Mad Max movie about 10-15 years ago with the plot being Mel Gibson's Max only being in it a very short period of time and getting killed, with his son (also named Max) going off to get revenge. If there was a post-credits reveal like the Max from the film was actually the son of Mel's Max and Mel had a cameo killing some guy in the desert for his car and was tracking him down or a prologue scene in Fury Road Max interacting with an Mel Max, I don't think it would have felt out of place. JediTalentAgent fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Apr 25, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
And I get that aspect of the films, too. Would that mean the events of Fury Road are actually more focused on Furiosa as the lead because its a retelling a legend of her by the people of the watertown rather than Max?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
At about a 1:20 into the video, I'm unconsciously shouting "EDF! EDF! EDF!"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Holographic Jem and the Holograms doing all their greatest hits from the 80s cartoon.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I wouldn't be surprised if, in my lifetime, they just adapted all seven books over again. I've said that Harry Potter, unlike a lot of franchises, has the benefit of the first few films being considered the 'lesser' ones of the franchise. They were made before the book series was done, I think there were a lot of complaints over cut material, they were done by a director not a lot of people liked the way they handled the film, they have issues with effects from the early 00s, etc. When/If they finally reboot, so long as the performers are good enough, I don't think they're going to have as many issues with fans over a remake since those would naturally be the first few they start with and they'd have a few films to get familiar with audiences before they started remaking the more popular ones, Rowling might take the opportunity to write or approve minor changes to the early parts of the story to give everything a new direction as the rest of the series progresses, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
I didn't like Transformers 3, but I was bored by Transformers 4. It's sort of strange that a film that has so many action scenes that should be at least interesting to watch end up feeling tedious. Maybe this is in part due to the sheer amount of rampant robot death in TF3 that by the time we get to TF4 there's so few of them still running around that I hardly felt like any were in real danger because either if they die, they'll just get replaced in another film with more robots or there were so few that they weren't going to kill any of them off too quickly because they're going to need to have all of them there for the final act.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:25 |
|
|
sbaldrick posted:Its mostly a direct ripoff of a comic called the book of magic down to character design and origin story. I think Neil Gaiman himself said something about the controversy as far back as 1998... quote:Thursday, March 19, 1998
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2016 05:56
|
|