Film Another Hollywood Rape

Zarjazz

Identifies as a horologist.
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
2,383
That may be the worst trailer I've seen this year.
 

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Well, some things to consider;

If Brooks says it's ok, then the movie is ok. What we feel about it is ofcourse our opinion, but in a neutral sense only the makers/original writer of the stuff can say what is correct. Too much of fans saying what things shold be these days.

Brooks himself could've been the screenwriter, but according to wiki(yeah yeah) he said himself he's not good enough to write it. Which is odd considering he wrote the thing in the first place, but also his choice.

The thing was written previously as a more accurate depictation of the book, but was then turned more action oriented. Couldn't find a reason why, but i'm betting there is one outside the usual trope of "they wants cashies!".

The movie wouldn't work f it only catered to fans, it just wouldn't make a profit and even if i would be happy as a badger on cocaine if things were different, the fact remains that without profit(or atleast even), nothing will get made.
 

opticle

Part of the furniture
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
1,201
The movie wouldn't work f it only catered to fans, it just wouldn't make a profit and even if i would be happy as a badger on cocaine if things were different, the fact remains that without profit(or atleast even), nothing will get made.

I think the movie industry, and apparently you, have a pretty cynical attitude regarding what people would enjoy.

The vast majority of people I know hate the "blockbuster" approach producers take these days. Most people I know only go to see the movies anyway because they're hoping they haven't done that too much and cocked it all up.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
I think the movie industry, and apparently you, have a pretty cynical attitude regarding what people would enjoy.

The vast majority of people I know hate the "blockbuster" approach producers take these days. Most people I know only go to see the movies anyway because they're hoping they haven't done that too much and cocked it all up.

Not at all cynical, just common sense since the US market is one of the major contributors to profits and they have to make a movie more generic/action based/simplified for the masses. Not only in the US, but that's the major contribution. People you know is not a valid argument when looking at the full picture and what you said is part of the problem if not even the biggest problem; people who hate blockbuster mentality still contributing to that mentality.

Note; i'm not saying how it should be, i'm saying how it is.

The mainpoint there, just so it doesn't get mangled up again, is that these movies need to make a profit. That's the end line, not artistic freedom, not loyality to source material, profit. Otherwise it would be a fools errand to make it and only those with tens of millions to throw away can do -really- free productions. That's why this movie is turned mroe action, more accessible, more towards mainstream.

Would i like it to be just as i'd dream it to be? Ofcourse, but i know why it might not be and as such i will adjust my perspective when i see it accordingly and not get hung up on the source too much.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,397
If Brooks says it's ok, then the movie is ok. What we feel about it is ofcourse our opinion, but in a neutral sense only the makers/original writer of the stuff can say what is correct. Too much of fans saying what things shold be these days.

Author in "don't fuck up my payday" shock. The views of authors about adaptations are neither here nor there frankly, as we don't know their own motivations. Certain authors are happy to take the money with the view that movies and books are different so why should they care? Whereas at the other extreme you also get the Alan Moore's who refuse to have anything to do with it. Both approaches are right and wrong.

Brooks himself could've been the screenwriter, but according to wiki(yeah yeah) he said himself he's not good enough to write it. Which is odd considering he wrote the thing in the first place, but also his choice.

Writing a novel and writing a screenplay are very different disciplines. Most book authors shy away from adapting their own work.

The movie wouldn't work f it only catered to fans, it just wouldn't make a profit and even if i would be happy as a badger on cocaine if things were different, the fact remains that without profit(or atleast even), nothing will get made.

Then why call it World War Z? Its not Harry Potter, its a fairly niche title that doesn't have that much recognition among the general public. When it comes to genre fiction, the fan boys are your marketing campaign; its their word of mouth that gets bums on seats. If it was called "generic zombie action movie", fan boys would probably love it, but because it has quite a cult status, exactly because of its verité style, throwing that out just pisses its key influencing group off.

Seems fairly obvious to me that the studio has made the call that Brad Pitt will be the driver of audience numbers and they don't need to worry about the fans.

For the record, looked like the Tom Cruise War of The Worlds mixed with 2012 and sub-28 Days Later zombies, which is not a good thing. I wouldn't have gone to see it anyway (because zombies...yawn), but even less so now.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Author in "don't fuck up my payday" shock. The views of authors about adaptations are neither here nor there frankly, as we don't know their own motivations. Certain authors are happy to take the money with the view that movies and books are different so why should they care? Whereas at the other extreme you also get the Alan Moore's who refuse to have anything to do with it. Both approaches are right and wrong.

FAir point, but personally i've always leaned towards the makers saying what is right and the fans saying if it's good. If that makes more sense.

Writing a novel and writing a screenplay are very different disciplines. Most book authors shy away from adapting their own work.

Yeap, which also leads to the screenplay writer given the artistic freedom to "f*ck things up" so to say.

Then why call it World War Z? Its not Harry Potter, its a fairly niche title that doesn't have that much recognition among the general public. When it comes to genre fiction, the fan boys are your marketing campaign; its their word of mouth that gets bums on seats. If it was called "generic zombie action movie", fan boys would probably love it, but because it has quite a cult status, exactly because of its verité style, throwing that out just pisses its key influencing group off.

Seems fairly obvious to me that the studio has made the call that Brad Pitt will be the driver of audience numbers and they don't need to worry about the fans.

For the mainstream, brad pitt is the buttseater for sure, but while that may have been enough they do get more butts in seats(even if it's full of crap) by calling it WWZ. The fans will watch it anyway(as opticle pointed out) even if they hear it's crap since it's still WWZ.

Movies are a bit like games, there's so much more going on behind the scenes that we don't know about, that it's often best just to think "it's done for a reason". For all we know the author may have told the people that it's a better idea to focus on one story then to do a multistory thing, or there might have been a choice to make it more action oriented due to the book catering to the fans already and this being a somewhat "introduction to the world" for the rest.
 

opticle

Part of the furniture
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
1,201
FAir point, but personally i've always leaned towards the makers saying what is right and the fans saying if it's good. If that makes more sense.

I agree there - it's their creation, it's really up to them what direction things go in. I don't have to like the result :)

The only problem is when authors make something great and then sell out on it for the fast buck, that's very depressing and undermines all their work - in a different way also the case if a company buys the rights, butchers it and then the author is forced to "approve" of their changes for the media.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Yeap that is a problem too, but most times it's rather speculative if it's a sellout, or if it's honestly something they thought would be a good movie adaptation.

Best examples would be Marvel movies, which to be fair usually are really good, but sometimes also take wrong turns even if they believe it's the right one. And in those cases there's no sellout possibility(unless you count the rights to their heroes they sold long time ago, like spiderman, which should go back to marvel already :p).
 

opticle

Part of the furniture
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
1,201
I am so with you on Spiderman. Though I really liked the latest re-start and think its a much better direction, I need to see him and Wolverine meet the other Avengers.

Best examples would be Marvel movies, which to be fair usually are really good, but sometimes also take wrong turns even if they believe it's the right one. A

Tell me you're talking about this douchebag :) I'm so upset by it:

29801019_.jpg
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
That's DC though ;)

One sliver of hope that's a real possibility is that all the PR for WWZ is to get butts in seats and the movie itself will be less towards that direction. Only movie that now pops to mind is Sucker Punch, which had a trailer that didn't really portray the whole movie.
 

megadave

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
11,911
Looks abysmal, don't understand why they bothered pretending it has anything to do with World War Z, should have just started from scratch.

Forgetting the book though, the CGI zombies look shit, as does the premise.


Perhaps i'll pirate the film if im desperately bored one night, for now i'll stick with the audio books :)
 
Last edited:

Raven

Happy Shopper Ray Mears
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
44,617
The CGi does look about 10 years old.

Not read the book but will do now.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Yeah that sure does clear it up, bit of an 180 on his opinion :p

Though have to see the movie to see how fast they actually are, or is it simply looking that way when a flood of them go down stairs, or if they take ravage sprints instead of long runs.

Romeros explanation for fast zombies not being possible was something towards their feet couldn't take it, so there might be room for very short bursts of speed.
 

opticle

Part of the furniture
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
1,201
Maybe they just fall forwards a lot over prolonged periods of time.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Yeah i don't really have a problem with fast zombies per say, but they always seem too agile. Fumbling, stumbling, trying to run zombies, now that's plausible.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,397
Romeros explanation for fast zombies not being possible was something towards their feet couldn't take it, so there might be room for very short bursts of speed.

Because zombies are of course, real. They can go at the speed of light if you like.
 

Cyradix

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,128
Aye, now that the higgs has been found it's time to move on to the zombie particle...
We'll prove it! Fire up the collider boys!!
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Funny those people who say "oh disney bought star wars and now instantly start rushing one out!", failing to realize that it's the other way around. They wanted to make one, so they bought the f*cking thing :p

Not to mention the people who fail to realize that star wars have always been kids films.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
I'd say kids films that grownups can watch. Much like dreamworks and pixar films. The 123 thing felt less adulty since it's a different time, in the 70s-80s the nannypampering of the world wasn't as bad ;)
 

Turamber

Part of the furniture
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
3,558
Enjoyable enough film, if you can stomach Team America and Brad Pitt saving the world (again). It proudly says it is "based on" the book, but I'd say "inspired by" was more accurate. But like I say, an enjoyable enough way to spend a Sunday evening. Certainly better than watching England lose to India in the cricket.
 

Mkilbride

Loyal Freddie
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
160
What do you mean "Stomach" Team America?

It is one of the greatest films of our time.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
I'm guessing he means all the "flags flying super awesome attitude of Murica!!" ;)
 

Hawkwind

FH is my second home
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,541
Enjoyable enough film, if you can stomach Team America and Brad Pitt saving the world (again). It proudly says it is "based on" the book, but I'd say "inspired by" was more accurate. But like I say, an enjoyable enough way to spend a Sunday evening. Certainly better than watching England lose to India in the cricket.


IMHO I think the authors of such material should impose some contractual control on the story when selling their IP to the studios. But instead they usually just take the dosh and don't care. The problem with movie studios is that they are run by people who care only about the bottom line. It isn't a creative process, its a money making process. They know exactly what the rednecks and chavs like in a story and regardless of the movie concept they will make sure it is changed to meet that criteria.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom