Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Robocop Reboot 
Author Message
Official forum cat lady
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
Reply with quote
I still point blank refuse to watch 99% of remakes. Older films like The Philadephia Story / High Society I love but modern films no.

I'm also trying to avoid the super hero and 'let's make a naff version of a cartoon' films. Garfield??? Noooo that wasn't Garfield! Yogi Bear?

*stomps off*

_________________
Still the official cheeky one ;)

jonbwfc wrote:
Caz is correct though


Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:34 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
oceanicitl wrote:
I still point blank refuse to watch 99% of remakes. Older films like The Philadephia Story / High Society I love but modern films no.

I'm also trying to avoid the super hero and 'let's make a naff version of a cartoon' films. Garfield??? Noooo that wasn't Garfield! Yogi Bear?

*stomps off*


You didn’t see the Top Cat movie then?

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:35 am
Profile
Official forum cat lady
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
oceanicitl wrote:
I still point blank refuse to watch 99% of remakes. Older films like The Philadephia Story / High Society I love but modern films no.

I'm also trying to avoid the super hero and 'let's make a naff version of a cartoon' films. Garfield??? Noooo that wasn't Garfield! Yogi Bear?

*stomps off*


You didn’t see the Top Cat movie then?


;)

_________________
Still the official cheeky one ;)

jonbwfc wrote:
Caz is correct though


Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:55 am
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm
Posts: 12143
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
paulzolo wrote:
I’m not sure this is all “stop raping my childhood” as he says, though. A lot of criticism is levelled at the failure of studios to take chances on new ideas, preferring to plunder the past and look for easy to update properties they already own. It’s economics driving this rather than creativity a lot of the time.
I'm sure commercial reasons are the driving factor behind the decision to do all these remakes.
Take the very original spin on an old tale The Cabin in the Woods. That languished at the studio for three years because funding wasn't available to complete it, and in that time how many remakes and reboots came to bear?
The film cost a reported $30 million to make and more than doubled it's budget on worldwide box office takings, and then there's the John Carter's of the world that get lavished with money but simply fail (in monetary terms) at the box office.
It's not a nice business, the film business, but I guess it's called a business for a reason.

Mark

_________________
okenobi wrote:
All I know so far is that Mark, Jimmy Olsen and Peter Parker use Nikon and everybody else seems to use Canon.
ShockWaffle wrote:
Well you obviously. You're a one man vortex of despair.


Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:58 am
Profile WWW
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
timark_uk wrote:
paulzolo wrote:
I’m not sure this is all “stop raping my childhood” as he says, though. A lot of criticism is levelled at the failure of studios to take chances on new ideas, preferring to plunder the past and look for easy to update properties they already own. It’s economics driving this rather than creativity a lot of the time.
I'm sure commercial reasons are the driving factor behind the decision to do all these remakes.
Take the very original spin on an old tale The Cabin in the Woods. That languished at the studio for three years because funding wasn't available to complete it, and in that time how many remakes and reboots came to bear?
The film cost a reported $30 million to make and more than doubled it's budget on worldwide box office takings, and then there's the John Carter's of the world that get lavished with money but simply fail (in monetary terms) at the box office.
It's not a nice business, the film business, but I guess it's called a business for a reason.

Mark

Simple idea for the studios, stop paying stupid money to actors/actresses and giving away large chunks of the profits to them. That should shave 50-$100 mill of the budgets from the so called big blockbusters. How many people actually go to a film only because of the actor or actress? As for animated films, why on god/gods/donuts green earth do you need celbrity voices. I must be so different from the target audience as if im constantley reminded that actor A is the voice of a character it means they have done a very bad job of the story.

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Tue Jul 10, 2012 2:51 pm
Profile
Official forum cat lady
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
Reply with quote
Or stop making crap films :roll:

_________________
Still the official cheeky one ;)

jonbwfc wrote:
Caz is correct though


Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:05 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Posts: 12030
Reply with quote
oceanicitl wrote:
Or stop making crap films :roll:


Or people start going to see the good ones instead of the types of film you're all talking about.

_________________
www.alexsmall.co.uk

Charlie Brooker wrote:
Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever.


Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:01 pm
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm
Posts: 12143
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
oceanicitl wrote:
Or stop making crap films :roll:
You can't quantify this for a mass market. If you could, everything would be the same old blandness. As it is, at least there's diversity.

Mark

_________________
okenobi wrote:
All I know so far is that Mark, Jimmy Olsen and Peter Parker use Nikon and everybody else seems to use Canon.
ShockWaffle wrote:
Well you obviously. You're a one man vortex of despair.


Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:19 pm
Profile WWW
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 3:16 am
Posts: 6146
Location: Middle Earth
Reply with quote
Crap is unfortunately too general a term to use. I consider the majority of romances to be crap and won't watch them because of that. The Core is a crap film, no doubt about that, but I get more pleasure watching it than even the most well made romances.

_________________
Dive like a fish, drink like a fish!

><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>

If one is diving so close to the limits that +/- 1% will make a difference then the error has already been made.


Tue Jul 10, 2012 10:02 pm
Profile
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
They should all take a look at their trailers budgets to save money ;)

I only ever, like most I suspect, go to see 'blockbusters' at the cinema. Anything else I might as well watch at home. The amount of content in my home I haven't even watched never mind what's new... But it's obviously still profitable for thrillers and horror movies and so on. Christ, even documentaries. Actually, I'm starting to wonder what a 'flop' is these days :lol:

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Tue Jul 10, 2012 10:32 pm
Profile
Official forum cat lady
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:04 am
Posts: 11039
Location: London
Reply with quote
timark_uk wrote:
oceanicitl wrote:
Or stop making crap films :roll:
You can't quantify this for a mass market. If you could, everything would be the same old blandness. As it is, at least there's diversity.

Mark


Agreed

belchingmatt wrote:
Crap is unfortunately too general a term to use. I consider the majority of romances to be crap and won't watch them because of that. The Core is a crap film, no doubt about that, but I get more pleasure watching it than even the most well made romances.


Everyone's taste is different and I am in the minority on here as I'm female so probably have different tastes to the rest of you. I do appreciate all genres of films. I used to buy a lot on video and DVD but I find these days the only ones I buy are very old films which I know I will get repeated pleasure from. The last blue ray I bought was Drive for the bloke's birthday. I thought it was OK but he was not impressed *shrugs*

_________________
Still the official cheeky one ;)

jonbwfc wrote:
Caz is correct though


Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:34 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.