Atrocities Committed in Hollywood.

[andyfraser]

Whilst Cronenburg's Fly has a very healthy SFX budget, it looses out to the original because they dropped this bit...

That must be one of the most disturbing scenes I've seen in any film. Unfortunately Cronenberg's story didn't allow for it. I still maintain that Cronenberg's film was the better of the two though.

 

[DWiggy]

I thought the 80's version of Batman with Michael Keaton was superb (Both 1 & 2) and definitely preferred it over the re release staring Christian Bale, although they went that bad.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

I thought the 80's version of Batman with Michael Keaton was superb (Both 1 & 2) and definitely preferred it over the re release staring Christian Bale, although they went that bad.

I wish the technology for the later films was around for Keaton. He could barely move in the heavy suit but the performances were still great. Imagine how good it could have been if he could have moved around like Bale.

 

[AndyRM]

I thought the 80's version of Batman with Michael Keaton was superb (Both 1 & 2) and definitely preferred it over the re release staring Christian Bale, although they went that bad.

The Tim Burton Batman efforts (particularly Returns) remain my favourites. The Christopher Nolan versions are also excellent, though the final one was a bit weak.

I have enjoyed Ben Affleck in many films, but based on his disastrous turn as Daredevil, I'm a little worried about what might happen...

 

[Profpointy]

I wish the technology for the later films was around for Keaton. He could barely move in the heavy suit but the performances were still great. Imagine how good it could have been if he could have moved around like Bale.

Never mind keaton, has anyone since lauren baccall in "have and have not" looked as sexy as Michelle Pfiffer 's catwooman ?

I liked the first of the recent ones - the "joker" one' but have to say to follow up 2 were utter tripe.

The catwoman / penguin one of the Tom burton ones was a masterpeice though

 

[Cletus Van Damme]

On a Sam Raimi theme, I've got high hopes for Army of Darkness 2. What could possibly go wrong...?

It could be a pile of shite like most of his films after Army Of Darkness (just IMHO). Still I guess Army Of Darkness was a bigger budget film and was quite Hollywood at the time, but back then Hollywood was not as crap as it is now and Bruce Campell was great in it. It worked though unlike Mad Max Beyond The Thunderdome which was shite compared to the first 2 films. I would imagine that the new Mad Max film will be crap too, just the usual dumbed down rubbish to appeal to a larger audience and make more $$$.

 

[Gravity Aided]

I'm thinking the banks have taken over Hollywood. The cost of film production and distribution is quite high, as are the legal and promotional costs. Banks want a sure thing, for the saddened widows and hapless orphans that invest in them. They won't let producers have the money to promote creativity and originality anymore, so we get sequels and adaptations of graphic novels and comic books ad nauseum. I reckon the lack of success some of these recent movies have had will cause a rethinking of this trend. Many independent films and small projects are quite good.

 

[MontyVeda]

I thought films were paid for by producers rather than banks... I can't imagine Spielberg going to his Bank Manager and saying "Can you loan me 200 million dollars for my next film?", but i can imagine him getting a group of producers on board who know the potential pitfalls.

 

[Gravity Aided]

Producers have to go to banks for money, given what films cost these days. Walt Disney had issues with bankers, due to the fact that he had some problems with his early ventures, and did not break even with the banks until after he made quite a few films.
http://www.byrdseed.com/the-surprising-financial-failures-of-walt-disney/
"I could never convince the financiers that Disneyland was feasible, because dreams offer too little collateral".

 

[benb]

What's a bit sad is that virtually any mainstream Hollywood film will make money, no matter how crap it is, purely because of the marketing machine.
So they might as well be making innovative and edgy films rather than the 90% derivative BS that they are doing. What a missed opportunity.

 

[Fnaar]

I misread the title as Atrocities Committed in HolyROOD, and was therefore expecting an engaging thread about the 1543-1550 War of the Rough Wooing
Imagine my surprise to find it was about films and stuff.

 

[AndyRM]

I misread the title as Atrocities Committed in HolyROOD, and was therefore expecting an engaging thread about the 1543-1550 War of the Rough Wooing
Imagine my surprise to find it was about films and stuff.

Sorry to disappoint.

 

[Gravity Aided]

What's a bit sad is that virtually any mainstream Hollywood film will make money, no matter how crap it is, purely because of the marketing machine.
So they might as well be making innovative and edgy films rather than the 90% derivative BS that they are doing. What a missed opportunity.

Sin City was pretty good, and a sequel is in the works that looks better.