Technico Support Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 Not sure if there are any fans here, but the "Ready Player One" movie has a release date, December 17th, 2017. Still no cast announced. I really enjoyed the book but it feels unfilmable. Also, the rights for the music and the video game characters might be pretty expensive. I wonder what the budget will look like. While it was a pretty good selling book, it wasn't the Hunger Games as far as having a massive, built-in, rabid audience goes. Why compare it to a sterotypical (but admittedly great) YA trilogy? It's a stand-alone book (for now) aimed at an older, geekier audience? The ones who are helping to drive the MCU and comic book movie boom! As far as being unfilmable, the rights are the biggest concern (but Spielberg can probably make some things happen), otherwise the book is basically a movie script. I wasn't comparing it to Hunger Games because I think Player One is an example of YA, I was comparing it as an example of the type of books Hollywood throws big budgets behind; books with a huge audience already there who will see the movie on its opening weekend. Player One was a hit but hardly big enough to be considered a sure thing by risk-averse Hollywood. So I'm wondering what kind of budget it'll get. I didn't know Spielberg was involved so maybe we're good. Or to simplify... Hunger Games: sold a shit ton and has a rabid fanbase. Gets a gigantic budget because studios know they'll recoup it easily because that fanbase will go see it. Ready Player One: not so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeeball Wizard Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 I really feel like Spielberg's involvement is what is making RP1 a go, that's gotta open a lot of doors. I really hope they don't skimp on the pop culture referential aspects of the book, but then how much could it possibly cost to license Oingo Boingo and Ladyhawke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLowe Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 Not sure if there are any fans here, but the "Ready Player One" movie has a release date, December 17th, 2017. Still no cast announced. I really enjoyed the book but it feels unfilmable. Also, the rights for the music and the video game characters might be pretty expensive. I wonder what the budget will look like. While it was a pretty good selling book, it wasn't the Hunger Games as far as having a massive, built-in, rabid audience goes. Why compare it to a sterotypical (but admittedly great) YA trilogy? It's a stand-alone book (for now) aimed at an older, geekier audience? The ones who are helping to drive the MCU and comic book movie boom! As far as being unfilmable, the rights are the biggest concern (but Spielberg can probably make some things happen), otherwise the book is basically a movie script. I wasn't comparing it to Hunger Games because I think Player One is an example of YA, I was comparing it as an example of the type of books Hollywood throws big budgets behind; books with a huge audience already there who will see the movie on its opening weekend. Player One was a hit but hardly big enough to be considered a sure thing by risk-averse Hollywood. So I'm wondering what kind of budget it'll get. I didn't know Spielberg was involved so maybe we're good. Or to simplify... Hunger Games: sold a shit ton and has a rabid fanbase. Gets a gigantic budget because studios know they'll recoup it easily because that fanbase will go see it. Ready Player One: not so much Ah, fair enough in terms of the comparison. Still, I think it's had a fair amount of buzz in the geek world, which seems to be enough for Hollywood these days. Spielberg signing on is huge though, and having heard Cline talk he's a massive Spielberg fan so it's a great match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted August 10, 2015 Share Posted August 10, 2015 Spielberg owns his own studio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 Well now... Deadline is reporting that Paramount has acquired the rights to Devil in the White City Directed by Scorsese starring Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Late 1800s Chicago as a setting used by Scorsese? Sold. And I wasn't sure if this belonged in here or the Movies folder, but this article about Pixels confirms so much, even if it isn't all that surprising: http://gawker.com/who-let-pixels-happen-the-sony-execs-behind-adam-sandl-1720903738 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted August 11, 2015 Author Share Posted August 11, 2015 Nope Nope Fuck You Oh My God Nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabe Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 Holy cow does that look terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 So, might as well be "Hannah Montana sans Drugs, Tongue and Tits." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted August 11, 2015 Share Posted August 11, 2015 So I watched that like, "Is Juliette Lewis supposed to be a female Eric Raymond or something?" and lo and behold according to IMDB her character's name is Erica Raymond... That having been said I don't think it looks that bad, it was never gonna be a literal "pastels, shoulderpads, and keytars" adaptation anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonteCarl Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Maybe not "pastel, shoulderpd, and keytars", but no Misfits or transformation or anything that made Jem, y'know, Jem. I'm not even a fan of the original cartoon, but I remember it being on when I was a kid and did occasionally watch the show. I can't imagine what actual fans of the show are thinking about that. Why even call it Jem and the Holograms at all when there is almost literally nothing about this movie that is the same from the source material other than the character names? This is worse than the Masters of the Universe movie with Dolph Lundgren that was absolutely nothing like it's source material, either. Man, don't even get me started on how disappointed I was in that movie as a kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 It would be OK as an original film about the price of fame and the value of true friendship. But as a representation of Jem? Nah. It doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustronaut Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Honestly the worst part was trying to shoehorn Synergy in there and then making it a robopet home movie projector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.T. Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Nope Nope Fuck You Oh My God Nope Synergy being a Robosapien instead of the pop music version of Cerebro and totally no selling The Misfits = Epic Fail. Shana being white instead of black must be Hollywood penance for the new Human Torch being a black guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 HATEFUL EIGHT TRAILER FUCK YEAH! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolfan in NYC Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 HATEFUL EIGHT TRAILER FUCK YEAH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Thank you good sir. YouTube, the website, is now blocked at my work, unless it's something company related. I don't even know how they set that up, but if a video is embedded elsewhere, I can watch it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 So yeah, I'm sold. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig H Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I got a little bit of a Clue vibe from it, which tickled me. I'm pretty sure QT is my favorite director. I have loved every movie he's made more than the one before it, except for Death Proof, which is still awesome. I'd put that almost even with Kill Bill just because of how silly it is and I'm a sucker for silliness. I do wonder if he ever makes another movie in a modern setting, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolfan in NYC Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Remember how I said this year could be a monster for Best Picture nominations? Yeah, here's one. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Control Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 So is Channing Tatum actually in THE HATEFUL EIGHT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niners Fan in CT Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 What are QT's "8 films"? Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, Kill Bill vol. 1, Kill Bill vol. 2, Death Proof, Inglourious Basterds, Django Unchained, The Hateful Eight. That's nine. Does he count Kill Bill as one film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Funny, since i would consider from dusk to dawn as a qt film, even if RR directed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fowler Posted August 13, 2015 Share Posted August 13, 2015 Well, I guess. But then do you count True Romance (iirc it was included in the Taratino XX blu ray box set) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts