Huge budgets don’t usually make me like a movie more. I actively hold National Treasure’s budget against it. Still, there’s occasionally a movie that could’ve been great if the producers had ponied up a few more bucls. F’rinstance:
Vibes(1988), with Jeff Goldblum and Cyndi Lauper, could’ve been another Ghostbusters. It was scripted by the same people who wrote Splash. It really needed special effects, not Jeff Goldblum staring offscreen saying “Look! Ghosts!”
The Shadow with Alec Baldwin. A Batman-level character on a TV show budget. This movie could’ve ruled!
Orson Welles version of The Trial or Le Procès as IMDB calls it. There are some absolutely stunning shots in the film, and there are others where you can tell what Welles was going for, but just couldn’t pull off the funding to make it happen (and those shots are aching).
Oh I love that movie. Saw it for the first time about 3 weeks ago on TMC or AMC. I really would love to get a copy of it.
I am not sure that a bigger budget like todays blockbuster is called for, can you imagine it all special effected up? it would seriously ruin the off balancedness of it. A little bit more would have been nice, but I thought that it worked as a minimalist movie. Someone like WOlfgang Pederson could possibly manage a remake that isnt horrible.
Son of Kong – RKO wanted to cash in on the popularity of 1933’s King Kong, but they gave Cooper and Schoedsack practically no time and practically no money. You can’t make a silk purse out of a quarter of a sow’s ear. With hardly any time or budget, they were forced to recycle stuff and pack in lots of filler. That they managed to throw in as much animated stuff as they did is remarkable, all things considered. But they could have had a sequel that was a real classic (and might not have included a “son” of Kong), instead of this comic misfire.
The original The Wicker Man is a great movie, but you can tell that they had to cut a few corners. The final scene was well-written, and heart-wrenchingly dramatic. With a bigger special-effects budget, it could have been visually spectacular.
The original Dune movie, which went bankrupt halfway through filming; the producer (Dan O’Bannon) went on to make Alien as his rebound-movie. Then again, if he had made Dune, we might not have Alien…
I could live without Jodorowski’s Dune, thanks. I think that here it’d be shelved with the Veerhoeven Starship Troopers, with most of the purists hating its revisionist guts and a small minority of iconoclastic defenders.
I’ll probably get flammed for this, but I have to say the Dungeons and Dragons movie that came-out a few years ago.
It could have been good, but the props were pretty cheesy (I remember the dwarf’s axe edge being about 3/4 thick) and gapping holes in the plot and flow of the movie (because there wasn’t enough money to finish the effects or do reshoots).
I remember reading the director wanted this to be the first film in a trilogy.
Yes, but I was thinking more along the lines of Orson coming home right before shooting started and finding a huge ass pile of money in the middle of his living room. I can imagine Orson having elaborately detailed sets being built, wherein each element has a telling impact on the film, more than I can see him having Bruce Willis show up at the last moment to save Julia Roberts from the gas chamber.
Like Starship Troopers, a bigger budget might have made the movie better, but I don’t think it could overcome the other flaws to actually become good. I liked the sequel better, even though it was apparently made on a lower budget.
ETA: The first movie cost 35 million, the second 12 million.
I may get lynched for suggesting it… But alone amoung the low budget horror movie classics (in fact alone amoung the movie classics period), I really think the Peter Jacksons gorefest Bad Taste could do with being remade with a bigger budget.
Its essentially an action movie, and the practically nonexistant budget for special effects, stunts, etc. really shows. IMO Peter Jackson could revisit it with a “King Kong” budget and the result could be an epic winfest for all concerned.
Dead Alive on the other hand is classic that should not be screwed with under any circumstances, its low-budgetness is what makes it awesome.
“Truly, Madly, Deeply” Basically a British version of “Ghost” it was filmed with hardly any special effects at all. I think they should have invested a couple of million making the ghosts more ghostly. It would have made the movie much better.
