AvP

[smilodon]

Fox have allowed vast numbers of dross films to be made, most recently...

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Speed 2, Planet of the Apes, Men of Honor .
Big films, big stars, big budgets, big piles of crap. So they are quite capiable of allowing AvP to be rubbish.

The difference in the number of people who play a popular PC game compared to the number needed to make a Hollywood movie viable is huge. That the game is popular does not even begin to guarantee sufficient box office sales.

Arnie isn't in AvP, in fact no real A List stars are. Both franchises were heading south as far as box office and quality were concerned.

This has cash in written all over it. The studio will not allow the film to be too dark or complex. Big hype, big bangs big scares and not much else. Had Ridley Scott, Michael Mann, John McTiernan, Jon Woo etc. etc. been on board then it would have my attention.

So no real director, no real stars, no big production company and a studio quite capiable of allowing utter dross to be made ?
Like I said...... it will stink.

[ChimpBoy]

I see your point smilo, but this is also a studio that in the recent past has made some very good and interesting films such as:

X-Men
X2
The TV series 24
Fight Club
Tiger Land
28 Days Later
Donnie Darko
Phone Booth

Again, the studio isn't really a reason that ensures the film will suck

Your point on video games not being big enough to generate a movie audience is also a little off imo.  Example would be Tomb raider -   Popular video game spawns awful film that did well at the box office (plus an equally awful sequel that was a huge flop).  AVP isn't an idea origianlly from a computer game - it's simply an extension of a very successful and hugely influential set of films.

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by ChimpBoy@Nov 7 2003, 10:24 AM
I see your point smilo, but this is also a studio that in the recent past has made some very good and interesting films such as:

X-Men
X2
The TV series 24
Fight Club
Tiger Land
28 Days Later
Donnie Darko
Phone Booth

Again, the studio isn't really a reason that ensures the film will suck

28 days later was really good the first 25 minutes ... then it just went downhill very fast!  

[ChimpBoy]

True Sadako - the london bits were very impressive, especially from a "british" film.  The bit in Manchester is less impressive, but still a good film imo

[smilodon]

Originally posted by ChimpBoy@Nov 7 2003, 09:24 AM
Your point on video games not being big enough to generate a movie audience is also a little off imo. Example would be Tomb raider -  Popular video game spawns awful film that did well at the box office (plus an equally awful sequel that was a huge flop). AVP isn't an idea origianlly from a computer game - it's simply an extension of a very successful and hugely influential set of films.

Nope.

Tomb Raider the game didn't generate that much  initial box office for the film. It was Lara Croft the Media Icon and large breasted female fantasy figure that did it.

And Tomb Raider was SIX games and three expansion packs, released across three gaming platforms. It sold millions of copies world wide compared to AvP and AvP2 which sold far less combined than even the first Tomb Raider game sold.

The games will add almost zero interest in the film. Fox Films will obviously be leveraging off the previous film franchises and not the games. As the films time line is the present, specifically a few years post Predator 2, neither of the AvP will directly affect the script either.

And both Tomb Raider films were crap....as AvP will also be.

[Gh0st Face Killah]

They are also making Resident Evil 2 now as well.

[Zok]

Originally posted by Gh0st Face Killah@Nov 8 2003, 03:45 PM
They are also making Resident Evil 2 now as well.

if its as good as the first one i'll be happy

[ChimpBoy]

New internet trailer here with actual footage this time.....

AVP Internet Trailer

Looks pretty cool   and also has Ewan Bremner in it

[smilodon]

Now I'm curious.

AvP, like ST2, has all the hallmarks of being a pile of tat.

Two films both cashing in on their originators.

Two directors, one that has produced nothing that could be remotely considered quality with the possible exception of Event Horizon (although that was a cinema flop), and another that has produced nothing...at all.

Two writers that produced nothing of merit other than the 1st Starship Troopers and maybe Robocop.

Two cast lists of absolute nobodies.

Their only difference seems to be that one is attempting a cinema release and one isn't.

So I'm interested to know what else suggests AvP will be good and ST2 will stink?

[ChimpBoy]

Not biting Smilodon  I think it looks very promising, and Event Horizon, flop or no flop, was a good little sci-fi horror film.

And you can't say "maybe" to Robocop - a truly fantastic film that goes far beyond the simple action films of the '80s.  All that stuff between the lines on "Yuppies" and materialism, the shortcomings of Corporate America, keying in to growing fears of global dominence by Japan, American media's fascination with violence, the effect of technology on mankind, and growing unease over privatisation of public services, to name but a few.  Truly astounding film when you consider it was viewed as a "simple" action movie blockbuster upon release.

Robocop is a fantastic film on all levels showing just what promise Verhoeven had until he screwed it up.  Starship Troopers is a poor second to it, although it has many of the same or similar wit and social commentary when you look at many of the themes in it.  ST was so much more than an action film, but so few people saw that at the time resulting in a spectacular flop.

[smilodon]

Originally posted by ChimpBoy@Mar 31 2004, 06:49 PM
Not biting Smilodon

Sorry but it's a serious question.

You argue that Robocop, written by Ed Neumeier was a great film. Fine, but he also wrote ST2 which you suggest will be poor.

Peter Briggs wrote AvP and all he has done is write the as yet unreleased Hellboy. Other than that he's written zip! Doesn't this suggest ST2 has the better writing credentials?

On the other hand Phil Tippett who directs ST2 has directed nothing before that. All his previous fim work has been as a stop motion animator.

Paul Anderson on the other hand directed Event Horizon, Kurt Russels Soldier, Resident Evil and Mortal Combat; before he had a crack at AvP. None of these are good films (including Event Horizon that began well but ended in a complete mess) but he at least has some directing experience.

So both films have little to recommend them other than ST2 has a writer of some merit, and AvP is hoping for a cinema release.

My point still stands - what is it about AvP that suggests it will be far better than ST2.

That no writer, director or actor of any note agreed to get involved in either film suggests both films will be dross and we'll probably all die in a nuclear accident or meteor strike or something,
 :eyebrow:

[ChimpBoy]

Originally posted by smilodon+Mar 31 2004, 11:06 PM-->

[smilodon]

Originally posted by ChimpBoy@Apr 1 2004, 08:39 AM
Ewan Bremner?

Exactly. Hardly A list is he?

I like a lot of what he's done, but I'd still suggest he's not quite in a position to pick and choose his roles. If his agent gets him the gig, then I'd argue he'd take the money good film or bad.

And Robocop isn't defacto a great film. Kurtwood Smith was a truely rubbish bad guy. I could have beat the crap out of him without the need of a metal exo skeleton. In fact his whole crew was more or less forgetable. Ronnie Cox can do Corporate B'stard in his sleep and looked like he did just that in this film. Paul Weller and Nancy Allen are unremarkable actors, who both went on to nothing much at all. The film needed actors of greater weight. Alan Rickmans Die Hard or Robin Hood is a good example of how far Kurtwood Smith missed the mark. Michael Keaton's Batman or Robert De Niros Neil McCauley (Heat) shows how the laid back laconic approach can work. Weller just seemed flat in comparison.

Some like it, and some like me think it was a good idea not quite realised. The Corporate America run wild has been done many many times before and much much better in some cases. Bladerunner is a case in point. You see that the world has gone to rats without having the point shoved down your neck as was the case in Robocop. In fact Starship Troopers made a much superior stab at it, with is "Do you want to know more?" beating "I'll buy that for a dollar" hands down.

Much of the plot is stupid, like the police going on strike and the streets falling into Anarchy. What about the National Guard?

The fim did have some great touches though. The building of Robocop shown through Murphy's eyes as the scientists turn him on and off was great. The visit to his old home was moving and the " You have 20 seconds to comply" scene is a piece of cinema hostory.

Robocop was a great idea, made on a budget, that didn't quite hit the mark.

[ChimpBoy]

I hate to let this rumble on    But.....

You said there was no actor of note - I simply replied that there was an actor of note in the form of Ewan Bremner.  Also Lance Henriksen (but given his somewhat hit n miss career I didn't bother, knowing you would shoot it down:) )

I really disagree bout Robocop, but seeing as I get the impression you simply posted to wind me up I won't bother condemning your short-sighted and sometimes irrelevant and spurious comments too much  :narnar:

[smilodon]

Your paranoia is worrying young padawan. I'm not trying to wind you up at all. Although I admit I have something of a healthy track record in baiting and this is 1st April, I'm being truthful.

Ewen Bremner is not a particularly well known actor. I doubt anyone who has been sad enough to follow our thread will recognise the name (although his face is a bit more familair). I don't dispute his talent but he's hardly Brad Pitt or Tom Hanks.

My comments about Robocop are genuine. Obviously it's all a matter of taste. They tell me there are 16 million people somewhere who watch Eastenders three times a week. Hard to believe I know. The point is that while I think it's a pile of dross millions don't. And while I think Robocop is a 'so so' movie (and have explained why) you don't. There's no right or wrong...just opinion. Except  Ann Robinson and The Weakest Link of course, that really is crap, no matter what anyone says

I liked Robocop but didn't think it was a great film in the way I think Bladerunner is a great film or The Godfather is a great film.  So there ya go