I love LSoC. I only wish that they had flmed it in genuine Black & White rather than decolorizing color imagery. Its a visual thing but it means the movie loses something in its parody of those classics.
I agree film is the way to go. But a Canon XL-1 was a lot cheaper.
I’ve never understood, in general, why I as a viewer should care that a movie was too expensive to make. I’m still paying the same price for the ticket, and all I care about is whether the movie is worth the $10 I spent or not. If it is, it’s a good movie, and if it’s not, it’s a bad movie.
Now, I can understand why Disney would be upset that John Carter, say, cost so much and made so little. But I’m not Disney, nor even a shareholder. What’s it to me?
Oh well.
I also don’t get caring about whether a movie made money for the studio beyond hoping ‘it did good so they’ll make a sequel/do another like it’. But I think the expense of movies has a lot to do with setting expectations - if I go to see a film with a $200 million effects and/or locations budget, I expect to see some visually stunning effects or locations. If I’m watching something like Clerks that had almost no budget, I’m going to have really different expectations. Also if a high budget film seems to have just burned the money to no good effect, I’m going to be disappointed too. IIRC that was one of the big complaints about Waterworld, that it was a high budget movie that didn’t look like much when you actually saw it.
Also, I’m rarely disappointed by movies I spend $10 on in the theater, because I watch most movies on DVD or streaming. Usually if I’m going to see something in the theater, it’s something like a new Star Wars film that I have high confidence in and other people are recommending to me. Because I’m usually not paying to see an individual movie, I tend to view it more as ‘was this worth watching’ than ‘did I get my money’s worth’. Sometimes a flop that was an awful film, like “KISS vs The Phantom of the Park,” is fun to watch for it’s awfulness, while something that had great potential but turned out ‘bleh’ will rank lower on the ‘worth watching’ scale for me.
What about The Adventures of Ford Fairlane? I love that movie!
I don’t care either (as I said up thread, I liked Waterworld and Sahara, both famously expensive flops). But big cost over-runs tend to attract bad press before a movie comes out, and I think that negative buzz tends to get carried into audience expectations when they see the films. After all, even though I liked them, neither of the two movies I mentioned were great films, and I can see where someone already expecting to be underwhelmed by them might walk away with a less favorible impression than I did.
I loved Falling Down! Hilarious and sick at times, but one of my all time favorites.
LOL. The first half hour or so is hilarious, unfortunately they ran out of jokes. Anybody but me notice their are two TV shows currently on that are remarkably similar to the show featured in the movie?:eek:
I thought It was funny throughout, though I do roll my eyes when someone overly insists it’s a documentary. I love the little sight gags in the background that might need pausing and rewinding to see, like the skyscraper held up with rope or the “St. God’s Hospital” sign on the building running out of room and bending down like a child would do.
Which show is like a real show? “Ow My Balls” is basically those “Kicked in the Nuts” parody videos.
I’ve never understood, in general, why I as a viewer should care that a movie is selling lots of tickets. There have been popular movies that I hated, and unpopular ones that I liked. When I’m trying to decide if I want to see a movie, I’d rather have the word of one critic I trust than know how much it has grossed. I’ve said for years that lists of movie box office figures should be covered as business news rather than entertainment. But every Monday you can find out what movie was #1 over the weekend.
Spy Kids…lead credit at least if you want to quibble about what a leading man is.
Zorro…Ballistic…Hollywood gave him lots of bullets to shoot himself in the foot with.
Should have gone with A Princess of Mars and thus make Dejah Thoris another Disney princess.
Let’s look at a specific group of “bad” movies:
-
Which Golden Raspberry winner(s) do you like?
-
Which of the IMDB’s bottom 250 do you like?
Sadly, someone already used that title for a much-inferior adaptation of Burroughs’ books. That one starred one-time underage porn star Traci Lords as Dejah Thoris, so I suspect Disney wouldn’t want to get tied into that.
I LOVED this film.
As a big fan of Beowulf* I’ve taken note of the fact that there was a boom in Beowulf-based films starting just before 2000. I’ve been collecting them on DVD. Aside from the Robert Zemeckis Uncanny Valley version, I think this overall one of the best variations on the story. exactly why it did so badly, I don’t know. Michael Crichton (who had written the novel it’s based on, Eater of the Dead (and which was a publishing success), decades earlier) actually took over as director to bring it successfully to the screen. It’s not a bad adaptation of the book. Antonio Banderas does a great job. So does Omar Sharif. Exactly why Sharif quit in disgust afterwards puzzles me – his role isn’t awful, isn’t terribly written, and the Arabs are presented as the Good Guys – the intellectual bringers of light in a crude world.
When a movie is selling a lot of tickets, that at least provides some information. At the very least, it means that a lot of people think they’ll like it. If a lot of people think they’ll like it, that might mean that a lot of people actually do. And if a lot of people actually do like something, then I might be one of them. It’s far from the most reliable metric, of course, but it has the advantage of being very easy to measure and express.
I very much enjoyed The Postman, Sahara, and Last Action Hero, and thought Waterworld was a perfectly good film too.
I loved it, too, except for the part that no one else loved either: David Bowie’s singing. He was great as the Goblin King, but whoever thought it was cool to have him sing in the movie totally destroyed his Supreme Evil Nastiness vibe. Not to mention the fact that the songs sucked as well.
I loved Buckaroo Banzai: Across the Eighth Dimension, but the above description of “twelfth movie where you haven’t seen the first eleven” is pretty accurate. I made a special note to watch for the sequel (Buckaroo Banzai and the World Crime League), but alas.
The whole movie reminded me of the bar scene in the first Star Wars movie - a whole, developed world with intersecting stories that draws you in. Plus, John Lithgow as an interplanetary Hitler, electroids from the eighth dimension, the wonderfully named Overthruster, and aliens all named John.
“Where are we going?”
“PLANET TEN!”
“When are we going?”
“REAL SOON!”
Brilliant, but it lost money.
Regards,
Shodan