P R O D U C T I O N S
 
 FAQ 
 Search 
 Memberlist 
 Usergroups 
 Register 
 Profile 
 Log in to check your private messages 
 Log in 

Conan
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nuclear War Now! Productions Forum Index -> Main
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dalecooper



Joined: 26 Jan 2008
Posts: 3373
Location: Athens, GA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ximénes de Cisneros wrote:

Nope. Cost alone is only half the equation - the thing that matters in the end is net profit, and as long as gross profit exceeds cost, these people get what they want. A new idea means you have to attract customers based on nothing - there's no preceding interest because there was nothing to be interested in before, it didn't exist. Using an old idea is guaranteed $$$, and the more popular that old idea was, the better the guarantee. People weren't interested in the Transformers movie because of how high its budget was, they were interested in it because they already liked Transformers and wanted to engage in nostalgia.


That's exactly right. Remakes, reboots, sequels and adaptations are all tapping into existing fan bases which is why we get so many of them. They think they can have an assured hit by exploiting a proven market, and for the most part, they're right. As for why they don't spend the 90 mil of Conan on several cheaper original movies - 90 mil is a fairly low price tag for even a pseudo-blockbuster nowadays. Sure the original cost 20 million, but that was in 1982. The new version is more expensive mainly because of inflation and changes in the movie business - they surely weren't shelling out all that much cash for a nobody who was best known for appearing in "Game of Thrones." The big original, on-the-cheap hit of recent years is probably "District 9," which still cost 30 million and is surely on the low end of what is possible for a big effects movie nowadays.
_________________
http://unspeakableaxerecords.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
HotBlack



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 2547

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Everything mainstream is determined by complex profit forecasting algorithms these days.

edit:


"data-based decision making is on the rise all around us”

"the art of quantative prediction is reshaping business and government”

_________________
Myths (Vinyl) - click me
Cassette tapes = using nostalgia to polish turds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
N.



Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Posts: 1196

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Atommächt wrote:
wirelessbanality wrote:
Wilhelm wrote:
hellmask wrote:
So...can anyone think of a remake that was actually better than the original? Off the top of my head, Scarface and Cape Fear are the only ones that come to mind.


Can't think of a single one.


Carpenter's The Thing


The Fly
Invasion of the Body Snatchers


Agree with the 70's remake of Body Snatchers, great movie!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Demoniarch



Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 10621
Location: The Temple

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The general masses probably liked the film unfortunately.

It's getting strange when TV shows like Game of Thrones are far better than the movies. Kinda like a complete switch has occured.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Morbid69



Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 1604
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ximénes de Cisneros wrote:
Morbid69 wrote:
Yeah obviously. That's not what I was getting into at all. You were saying they don't want to risk investing in new ideas - so $90 million into some shitty Conan movie is a smart move? Surely investing $20 million - the cost of the original - into something fresh would be much better.

Nope. Cost alone is only half the equation - the thing that matters in the end is net profit, and as long as gross profit exceeds cost, these people get what they want. A new idea means you have to attract customers based on nothing - there's no preceding interest because there was nothing to be interested in before, it didn't exist. Using an old idea is guaranteed $$$, and the more popular that old idea was, the better the guarantee. People weren't interested in the Transformers movie because of how high its budget was, they were interested in it because they already liked Transformers and wanted to engage in nostalgia.

This has been going on for at least a couple of decades, though. It's only the last few years that REMAKE REMAKE REMAKE has been the case, but before that it was PREQUEL MADNESS. And before that, SEQUEL MADNESS. But even before that, there's hardly been a good movie that was 100% its own concept - almost every good movie I can think of was based on a book. Movies cost a LOT of money ($20 million is nothing in film budget terms btw) so making one based on original material, that doesn't already dip into the existence of some other already-established franchise, is a high-risk venture. If I recall correctly, this was one of the reasons Inception took so long to make. But, movies are also gobbled up by the masses, so if you CAN tap into such a franchise -no matter how small- you know with absolute certainty you're going to make at least some return.


All I am saying is that it's interesting to see how in the 70s, 80s & 90s there were heaps of fresh ideas, new classics, etc and virtually none now - while the cost making movies skyrockets. It seems like the only "fresh" movies to get green lit are those featuring a well known director or leading actor eg. There Will Be Blood or The Departed.
_________________
Good traders: Professor Black, Golden Bull, Albin, TheUnborn, knochen, Valgrinder, Sv., dangerass, dalecooper, s.charlach, into the pit

Mr_Belvedere wrote:
I rather prefer playing with my girlfriends pussy instead of nerding around in a virtual hell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GoldenBull



Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 8136

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Everybody harps on this point about movie studios being unwilling to take risks nowadays, but since when is making a multimillion dollar movie not a risk? I know the economy is shit but damn, the economy has been shit at least once a decade since I was born. Don't see why studios would think churning out bullshit like this is a good idea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
profanation



Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 272

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Thing isn't really a remake of The Thing from another world...
It's just based on the same story.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Demoniarch



Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 10621
Location: The Temple

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Remake of The Thing is sure to stink. It will have a cooler looking Thing probably all modern and intense in design, but the story and acting will be shitty, and the right atmosphere that existed in the original is probably impossible to recreate.

They need to make movies the exact way they did back in the late 70 and early 80's, same feel and look, but just utilize the modern ability to make the beasties look real. But the 70's film grainy color style helps create the atmosphere.

I've found this to be more enjoyable, every moden movie I have downloaded and watched via a camera recording has given that nostalgia feel of watching a old movie but with modern perfect effects, it has been quite enjoyable actually. The glossy feel is tarnished and it felt like being 10 again a few times. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Wilhelm



Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 1489

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They should have cast Craig Sielski as the new Conan.

He would have read the script, freaked out over its complete lack of cult and went on a rampage smashing & destroying everything in Hollywood.
_________________
lurking fear wrote:
CrucifixionWounds wrote:
Bolt Thrower didn't hold up well at all for me... no desire at all to ever listen to this band again.


Go brush your doll's hair.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
probert



Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 7070
Location: stankonia

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

its not a remake its a prequel with the norweigan team that was there before the americans arrived.

i dunno, itll probably be a 6/10.
_________________
format your doormat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
profanation



Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 272

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

At least it's a lot more promising than the conan movie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ximénes de Cisneros



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 208

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Morbid69 wrote:
All I am saying is that it's interesting to see how in the 70s, 80s & 90s there were heaps of fresh ideas, new classics, etc and virtually none now - while the cost making movies skyrockets. It seems like the only "fresh" movies to get green lit are those featuring a well known director or leading actor eg. There Will Be Blood or The Departed.

But neither of those movies are really fresh :p There Will Be Blood is based on an Upton Sinclair novel, and The Departed is an Americanized remake of a Japanese movie.

The three decades you mentioned were better overall for pretty much any sort of art. I mean, just compare the innovations of '70s and '80s music versus those of... now. You can can see this even in the small niche of underground metal, with the emergence of black & death metal in the '80s and '90s. I don't know what it was, but I imagine it was a confluence of things that made people generally more adventurous then than now. The die-off of the hippie movement, the emergence of the Cold War, serial killers gaining a lot more attention in mass media, and god knows what else. Those are just three things that come to mind right away, it's certainly not an exhaustive list. Nowadays most (Western) people's lives are defined by social media - blogs, Facebook, bla bla bla. The biggest threat we have is terrorists. Which, insidious and inventive as they are(because frankly they have to be), is nowhere near as kafkaesque a threat as several thousand nuclear warheads set to go off at any time. Plus racism is such a taboo that it's unlikely that Islam/Arabs will ever take the role of absolute villain.

Rambling, I know. But I find these sorts of connections between things very interesting, and a few beers makes me more likely to verbalize that interest. Going back to the movie issue - the cost has increased, but like someone else pointed out inflation is responsible for a LOT of that. $90 million today isn't that big of a difference from $20 million three decades ago. I'm sure the money put into movies has risen, somewhat, but so has the profits made from them. Hollywood cinema became a lot less profitable after its golden years when it was putting out numerous epics like The Ten Commandments. And even though it now has to compete with well-produced TV shows, mainstream interest in underground niches like indie films and comic books, and filesharing networks, they can still make a good amount of cash if they play their cards right; maybe that's why the remake is so popular now. It's a way of counteracting those competitors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Demoniarch



Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 10621
Location: The Temple

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

probert wrote:
its not a remake its a prequel with the norweigan team that was there before the americans arrived.

i dunno, itll probably be a 6/10.


Ahh, that just made it a little more interesting actually. Mind you it is kind of pointless. What happened to the Americans in the first movie was literally exactly what happened to the Norweigans anyways, find something, thaw it out, oh fuck, and basically madness...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
probert



Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 7070
Location: stankonia

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Demoniarch wrote:
probert wrote:
its not a remake its a prequel with the norweigan team that was there before the americans arrived.

i dunno, itll probably be a 6/10.


Ahh, that just made it a little more interesting actually. Mind you it is kind of pointless. What happened to the Americans in the first movie was literally exactly what happened to the Norweigans anyways, find something, thaw it out, oh fuck, and basically madness...


yeh i was under the assumption it was a remake until i read up about it "a little more interesting" was basically my thought too along with the thought that once the origin is explained or whatever its probably just going to be exactly the same only filmed worse. its by a first time director too so theres another wildcard, could make it amazing or horrid. im pretty much counting on a solid 6, like i mentioned.
_________________
format your doormat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
probert



Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 7070
Location: stankonia

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

just gonna post this here, looks to be a good one i just started watching.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RWGB5UZA
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337117/

larry cohen is the man
_________________
format your doormat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nuclear War Now! Productions Forum Index -> Main All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 11 of 13

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group