How to crush LotR and SW Trilogies!

Mouseferatu said:
Never seen Meet the Feebles. Avoided it like the plague. :)

I kinda liked The Frighteners, though...

In any event, I suppose anything's possible... But Uwe's got a lot to answer for. I don't know if I can ever forgive him for Alone in the Dark, no matter how good his future movies are. To take one of the most atmospheric, creepiest computer games and turn it into a D-rate action flick is a crime against humanity. (And yeah, I know he's not the only one involved in that, but the buck stops with the captain, and it's certainly not an isolated incident where he's concerned.)

It's true that the director is the one who takes both the praise and the heat. And I'll just add that while i loved Dead Alive and Heavenly Creatures, I LOATHE Meet the Feebles, and the Frighteners was so-so. So, yeah, Uwe has a lot to prove, but i don't see how he keeps getting so many films thrown at him by Hollywood??? It must come down to quick production turnaround, and compatibility with writers and producers. Maybe he's just a really nice guy to work with.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

jdrakeh said:
and just wrapped Bloodrayne, featuring A-List actors such as Ben Kingsley

'Cause if it's got A-list actors it's probably gonna be good! ;) I think Kingsley's one of the finest actors alive, and he has made some beautiful, terrific films, but he's also made some real dogs. To quote Michael Caine: "I haven't seen Jaws 4, but I've seen the house it built, and it's beautiful." :)

jdrakeh said:
now that the man has some money and talent to play with (two things that he's never had at his disposal before), I'm willing to wager that he can crank out something watchable

You've got more faith or forgiveness than I do. I'd pay to leave an Uwe Boll movie if I stumbled into the theater by accident while drunk.

Which is also how I feel about a Dragonlance movie. So, Joshua Dyal, if you're still reading, there ya go: the inflamatory statement I refrained from making earlier. :)

Is it time for coffee yet?

Warrior Poet
 

HeapThaumaturgist said:
Looking through that list of "bombs", quite a few of them were films I actually LIKED ... like the Final Fantasy movie (thought it was fun, different, a little weird, but a style I'd like to see again) and Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow ... which I LOVED. I also notice the D&D movie was on there (no surprise) and our own Jonrog1's "The Core", which I actually liked in spite of itself (and I like to credit to his pithy writing and ear for dialogue).
That's a pretty dumb list, IMO. It includes "bombs" that actually made a profit, sometimes significant. If you add up the production costs and marketing costs and it's less than the worldwide box office take, that's hardly a bomb. And it doesn't even take into account video and DVD sales, where a lot of movies make a really significant amount of revenue too. Just shows to go you that Wikipedia isn't always the best source.
 

Where to Go...

Okay, when I saw this thread...and the subject title. I was ready to blow a gasket. But...I detain the rumblings.

It will not happen...because the D&D franchise is a victim of its own success. Too many much material to use. Fan-base is divided, and everyone wants to see their special favorite.

And not insult anyone...ye all know, that anything coming from the books, will not translate well to the screen. Unless, you have people like on the LOTR crew, that had the books on the set as a bible guide. You had one of several folks, who are fans of Tolkien's works. That helped a lot. And plus, the books have been around for a half century or more. And also, many people around the world know the material as well. Star Wars fits into this as well.

With Star Wars, a one man vision, that was supported and approved with the use of novels, comic books, toys, comic strips in newspapers. All exploded from the late '70s...and has been going through the channels every since.

D&D...Greyhawk, novels and a cartoon *the D&D cartoon*.

Forgotten Realms, novels, two comics books series. And yes, from the Commodore days, Pool of Radiance and the Curse of the Azure Bonds.

Dragonlance, possible comic book, saw the early reference somewhere. From the Commodore, Champions of Krynn. And of course...novels.

Between all these, then came some PC games, like Baldur's Gate series, Planescape for the PC, NeverWinter Nights *FR related* for the console Dungeon & Dragons Heroes, and the action hack and slash updated on others who I can't recall right now.

And please keep in mind, this is just an outline. All of this stuff, has been spottie, for the last 30 years. And the during the early days of D&D, the religious furbars were high back then.

In other words, to get the public interest, you must have to a constant reminder product, in the people's eye. For a long time, to maintain its presence.

LOTR and Star Wars has a 80+ year run on this...combine.

If you want to gain the people's interest again, or capture the next generation. Do the one thing, that will be neutral and will end the great cries, of who should be doing what to, to what film, who should be the actor.

Too much of an headache. And expectations will be too high. A nice setup for disappointment, for when and if, it bombs.

Solution...take the D&D cartoon, from the early '80s. Update it to reflect the changes on the product, but kept the original premise intact.

No one has to been paid great royalties fees *expect of course, those who hold the licenses*, no need to use a world of a known place, the setting will be generic, but useable, none the less. With animation, you can make anything ten times better, than making a live set, or using CGI (yeah...it could help with the art, or background fillings). That is one way of doing it.

And of giving the Brand, as Charles Ryan likes to say. The recognition needed (and still needs it, the current D&D movies are not helping). If you want to educate the masses, start from the beginning. Not from this corner, or that corner, or in the middle. The beginning. And it could get better, by that the same cartoon mentioned here, updated and all...go for as a series on TV.

But again, there is no thinking on that. Haven't seen it, yet.

The beginning, and until someone realizes that. Don't ever expect to see a piece of material from a D&D franchise to beat LOTR or Star Wars for the almighty dollar or the instant recognition.

That is what these heavy hitters did. And they has been steadily moving up, for years.

But...before someone comes back on me for this, saying, well...they are doing that now...yes, they are. But they are facing stiff competition from other sources, who are also trying to capture the masses attention as well.

My response to that possible reply, would be this. If they said right now, that the D&D cartoon will be back, updated and will run as a story for a few years or so...as long a season or two, or three is done.

Can you imagine, how many people will pay attention, if the proper care is given.

Just imagine.

LOTR will not be doing that. Lucas is, with a live action and anime shows. There is room out there, so why, isn't anyone taking the space?


*Climbing out the pit...sorry for the commentary and rant. :o *
 

If they said right now, that the D&D cartoon will be back, updated and will run as a story for a few years or so...

So...

Wizard will reveal that he is a she (explaining the whole Uni the Unicorn thing) and then lose her virginity, causing the (now older) Uni to leave the party?

Ranger will look less like Leif Garret of then and more like Leif Garret today?

Cavalier will be fending off accusations of impropriety?

Thief will be doing time?

Acrobat will be a stripper?

Barbarian will be a frat boy with a drinking problem?
 

Altalazar said:
Your grocery list? Its that sort of thinking that shows you think the same as the studio suits.
Stop trying to use that as an insult. Actually, how about you stop trying to insult people who disagree with you on this thread?

Guess what - they are wrong, and not just by a few percentage points and not just a little bit of the time. Many many films fail to make any money at all. And most of them are NOT films that were expected to be losers.
Cite specific examples.

In fact, suits expect ALL films to make money, with very few exceptions.
No, they don't. They expect to get their money out of their investment, which is a totally different thing. Michael Bay will make the studios money, even if "The Island" wasn't going to. But making "The Island" kept Bay happy and guaranteed he'd be making money in the future for them.

The notion that they predict the profit of most films down to a few percentage points is pure studio suit fantasy.
No, it's not. It's how they can afford their own private airplanes, second homes in Malibu and all the rest.
 

jgbrowning said:
Any movie that failed to generate more money than it cost to make would be an example of one that failed to measure up to studio predictions.
Not true. Studio politics are a huge portion of what gets greenlighted and what doesn't. The movies that we all say "huh?" to all have reasons that they're made.
 

jdrakeh said:
The first Dungeon Siege movie (based on the video game of the same name) is in post production at the moment. It is apparently four hours long and recreates large swaths of the first PC game - it also has some great actors like Ron Perlman, Ray Liotta, Burt Reynolds, and Leelee Sobieski on board. The next Lord of the Rings? Probably not, but it should easily be the next fantasy blockbuster.
Neat. I loved that game, and it had a great atmosphere and was a nice handling of the classic farmboy-becomes-a-hero storyline.
 

jdrakeh said:
Apparently, Uwe Boll has some talent that he hasn't yet been able to showcase - note that he's also been tapped to direct Hunter: The Reckoning in 2007, and just wrapped Bloodrayne, featuring A-List actors such as Ben Kingsley and Michael Madsen, as well as a handful of well known B-List actors (Billy Zane, Meat Loaf, etc).
Unless his talent is pitching movies.
 

Remove ads

Top