Page 5 of 7

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:54 pm
by DinoDeLaurentiis

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:59 pm
by Chairman Kaga
After Kurt's turn in Grindhouse I wonder if this whole EfNY sequel may be reworked as a vehicle for another sequel instead. T's films seem to generate renewed interest in his leads.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:03 pm
by The Vicar
Chairman Kaga wrote:After Kurt's turn in Grindhouse I wonder if this whole EfNY sequel may be reworked as a vehicle for another sequel instead. T's films seem to generate renewed interest in his leads.


I'd rather have that than another stinking remake.
No contest.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:00 am
by havocSchultz
Merrick reviews the script for the Escape From New York REMAKE!!!



Beware, there are apparentely quite a few SPOILERS splattered about...

But here's the non-spoiler overview:

[quote="Merrick"]Quite a few SPOILERS will appear in the evaluation below, even though it’s a script that’s likely to change a bit before a single frame of the EFNY redux is lensed. For those wishing to remain spoiler free, here’s a quick summation: the remake script is a surprisingly faithful adaptation of John Carpenter and Nick Castle’s source material – frequently lifting entire sequences, even word-for-word dialogue exchanges, from the original film. It is extremely similar structurally. THE PREMISE IS IDENTICAL.

This is a HUGE project – expansive in scale. Many elements from the 1982 film have been drastically embiggened, and significantly amped up (including military shenanigans & the political ramifications of the President being held captive in a prison). As written, the EFNY remake would be a hard “Râ€

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:19 pm
by King Psyz
Maybe someone finally figured out the best way to make a remake if you're gonna go down that road is to not fucker with what made it a classic.

I think expanding on certain parts, but keeping Snake mysterious is still the best way to move forward. I don't want to see his past. The only thing I would want in the way of a backstory would maybe do a quick montage over the credits ala Serenity about the war that led up to New York being a penal colony or something along those lines.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:29 pm
by unikrunk
I would be into a remake with Russell in it...the movie is pretty dated. It's Carpenter's tech that pulls me out of the movie when I watch now...

Keep the real Plissken and go balls out.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:42 pm
by unikrunk
Just read Merrick's breakdown of the script on the home page; I am totally into seeing this.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:51 pm
by SilentBobX
Oh well, best we can do is hope it'll be good. On the bright side, the SE of EFNY is in the dump bin at walfart. $5

Very nice.

Mahalo

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:27 pm
by Chairman Kaga
That dvd is awesome.

PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:45 pm
by Lady Sheridan
I just taped EFNY on my DVR the other night and I'm going to kick back and watch it...and then read the script review to bitch or cheer, as I see fit.

I caught the end of it though and I have to say, Butler and Russell share some of the same facial sneers, it's kind of creepy. I can see why they approached him with it now.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:04 am
by Ribbons
Well... hope you liked Die Hard 4, because Len Wiseman is directing Escape From New York Begins

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 5:31 am
by Chilli
I did a rambling TB post, but to sum up.

NO NO NO NO NO FUCKING ZOMBIE JESUS NO.

I don't give a rat's ass if Butler can act or not, Kurt Russell IS Snake P. He understood the role, he didn't try to force depth onto him. There's no way I can see that Butler is going to play someone with zero depth. Mark my words, we'll get some 'acting' moments in there, some fucked up redemption scenes.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:13 am
by Peven
i have much less problem with Butler as Snake than i do with Wiseman directing.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:39 am
by Chilli
Peven wrote:i have much less problem with Butler as Snake than i do with Wiseman directing.


I think Butler could play a mean Snake like character (likely, haven't seen 300 yet), but playing Snake himself... this isn't Bond, there's not a new fascet of Snake that would make logical sense to explore. The portrayal Kurt Russell gave him was note-perfect, so I think at best we'll get a closely resembled performance. There isn't a lot of room with the character for personal interepretation, or there shouldn't be. Not unless they try to make him a tragic hero, and ignore the fact that the less backstory they show us and the less humanity they show us the better a character he is.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:43 am
by havocSchultz
Ribbons wrote:Well... hope you liked Die Hard 4, because Len Wiseman is directing Escape From New York Begins


Wiseman's also gearing up to possibly direct the Gears of War adaptation as well...

That was posted about a week and a half ago - along with the "rumor" of him doing the Escape From New York remake...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:20 pm
by Fawst
I don't understand all the hate that Wiseman gets. I think he's got a great eye. This is an issue I have in general with a lot of "I love/hate this director" arguments. The director is not the only reason a movie will succeed or fail.

Underworld.

Give that script a good scrubdown and you have a great movie. Seriously, it's not Len's fault that there was a useless fight scene in the middle of the movie between two completely useless characters that no one cared about (Vampire w/ Whips vs. Lycan). It was in the script.

So if this script for EFNY is any good, chances are we'll have a good movie.

I haven't seen Die Hard 4 yet, but from all accounts, it's a good action movie that falls apart because a) it's not R-rated, and b) the story itself (SCRIPT) has issues. Not because Wiseman couldn't direct.

The perfect example of this is Singer. The Usual Suspects? Fantastic. X-Men? Terrible. X-Men 2? Fantastic. Superman Returns? Terrible.

But what did they all have in common? Good direction (for the most part, we'll ignore a lot of the X-Men 1 stuff), with either good or bad scripts.

The point is that Wiseman, if given a really good script, will give us a really good movie. I think there is way too much "Oh n0ez! Undaw0rldz wuz teh suck! My pweshous EFNYz0rz will be R00NT!" going on here.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:34 pm
by minstrel
Fawst, as I understand it, directors trump writers in the movie creative sweepstakes. They change scripts as they see fit. If there's a bad scene in the script, they don't have to shoot it. If there's a bad scene in the finished movie, it's primarily the director's fault for a) shooting it, and b) keeping it in.

As for Singer, I wish he'd stop doing superhero films. As far as I'm concerned, he has no feel for the genre at all, and no eye for comic-book-style action.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:57 pm
by Fawst
You have a good point, Minstrel. I just think people shouldn't be so negative. Be cautiously optimistic. Underworld/Evolution were well-directed movies. This could be Wiseman's time to really shine.

He's fucking PERFECT for Gears of War...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:04 pm
by havocSchultz
Fawst wrote:I don't understand all the hate that Wiseman gets. I think he's got a great eye. This is an issue I have in general with a lot of "I love/hate this director" arguments. The director is not the only reason a movie will succeed or fail.

Underworld.

Give that script a good scrubdown and you have a great movie. Seriously, it's not Len's fault that there was a useless fight scene in the middle of the movie between two completely useless characters that no one cared about (Vampire w/ Whips vs. Lycan). It was in the script.


Wiseman also co-wrote both Underworld movies...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:28 pm
by Ribbons
havocSchultz wrote:
Fawst wrote:Give that script a good scrubdown and you have a great movie. Seriously, it's not Len's fault that there was a useless fight scene in the middle of the movie between two completely useless characters that no one cared about (Vampire w/ Whips vs. Lycan). It was in the script.


Wiseman also co-wrote both Underworld movies...


I was gonna say, didn't Wiseman write the script in the first place?

Anyway, I liked Die Hard 4, so I don't know. I don't have much of an opinion about Wiseman one way or the other.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:35 pm
by Chilli
Fawst wrote:You have a good point, Minstrel. I just think people shouldn't be so negative. Be cautiously optimistic. Underworld/Evolution were well-directed movies. This could be Wiseman's time to really shine.

He's fucking PERFECT for Gears of War...


Dude, you're kidding right?

Granted I can only speak for Underworld, but that was one of the worst films I ever had to sit through. Awful direction, really banal and pedestrian looking. Granted DH4 had solid direction (if rather workmanlike), but lets not really praise the dude too much. He's not all that and a bag of cheese.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:47 pm
by minstrel
Chilli wrote:He's not all that and a bag of cheese.


Cheese comes in bags where you are?

Weird.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:49 pm
by Fawst
havocSchultz wrote:
Fawst wrote:I don't understand all the hate that Wiseman gets. I think he's got a great eye. This is an issue I have in general with a lot of "I love/hate this director" arguments. The director is not the only reason a movie will succeed or fail.

Underworld.

Give that script a good scrubdown and you have a great movie. Seriously, it's not Len's fault that there was a useless fight scene in the middle of the movie between two completely useless characters that no one cared about (Vampire w/ Whips vs. Lycan). It was in the script.


Wiseman also co-wrote both Underworld movies...


d'ohned!

(See that d'oh and owned = ...nevermind)

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:56 pm
by Fawst
Chilli wrote:
Fawst wrote:You have a good point, Minstrel. I just think people shouldn't be so negative. Be cautiously optimistic. Underworld/Evolution were well-directed movies. This could be Wiseman's time to really shine.

He's fucking PERFECT for Gears of War...


Dude, you're kidding right?

Granted I can only speak for Underworld, but that was one of the worst films I ever had to sit through. Awful direction, really banal and pedestrian looking. Granted DH4 had solid direction (if rather workmanlike), but lets not really praise the dude too much. He's not all that and a bag of cheese.


Not even close. You haven't seen Underworld: Evolution? It's about a hundred times better than the original. Yes there is some silly deus ex machina stuff going on there, but really... it's fucking VAMPIRES fighting WEREWOLVES. Gears of War is HULKING SOLDIERS vs. HULKING ALIEN SOLDIERS. He's already got a head start there. Considering how great some of the action sequences of U:E were, I can easily see Wiseman handling a GoW movie. The game isn't exactly a masterpiece of a story, I would argue that Wiseman could only IMPROVE it by writing it.

Trust me, Wiseman is as perfect for GoW as Bay was for Transformers. EFNY, I will cling to my idea that he'll be fine for it, but I also have zero care for the original. It was fun, it was interesting, for it's time it was great but... eh, it's no Big Trouble In Little China ;)

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:13 pm
by Peven
gotta disagree that Underworld 2 was much better than 1. in fact, it seemed more chopped up and less cohesive than the first. more FX shots does not a better movie make, imo. i have not seen LFoDH, and maybe he did better work there, but using either Underworld movie as an example of why Wiseman is good for EFNY is not making a very strong case, imo.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:59 pm
by DinoDeLaurentiis
Peven wrote:more FX shots does not a better movie make


Donneth a you mean a the "doth", no?

PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 10:04 pm
by Peven
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:
Peven wrote:more FX shots does not a better movie make


Donneth a you mean a the "doth", no?


:oops: yes

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:24 am
by Chilli
Yes there is some silly deus ex machina stuff going on there, but really... it's fucking VAMPIRES fighting WEREWOLVES. Gears of War is HULKING SOLDIERS vs. HULKING ALIEN SOLDIERS.


That's an excuse to suck?

Blade was Vamps vs. Humans vs. a Daywalker, and that managed to house good action sequences with humour and some decenct character beats. You have to respect the material no matter what you make, and Underworld never did for me. It felt like a shitty computer game.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:36 am
by Logan5
Fawst wrote:
Chilli wrote:
Fawst wrote:You have a good point, Minstrel. I just think people shouldn't be so negative. Be cautiously optimistic. Underworld/Evolution were well-directed movies. This could be Wiseman's time to really shine.

He's fucking PERFECT for Gears of War...


Dude, you're kidding right?

Granted I can only speak for Underworld, but that was one of the worst films I ever had to sit through. Awful direction, really banal and pedestrian looking. Granted DH4 had solid direction (if rather workmanlike), but lets not really praise the dude too much. He's not all that and a bag of cheese.


Not even close. You haven't seen Underworld: Evolution? It's about a hundred times better than the original. Yes there is some silly deus ex machina stuff going on there, but really... it's fucking VAMPIRES fighting WEREWOLVES. Gears of War is HULKING SOLDIERS vs. HULKING ALIEN SOLDIERS. He's already got a head start there. Considering how great some of the action sequences of U:E were, I can easily see Wiseman handling a GoW movie. The game isn't exactly a masterpiece of a story, I would argue that Wiseman could only IMPROVE it by writing it.

Trust me, Wiseman is as perfect for GoW as Bay was for Transformers. EFNY, I will cling to my idea that he'll be fine for it, but I also have zero care for the original. It was fun, it was interesting, for it's time it was great but... eh, it's no Big Trouble In Little China ;)



Two points I'd like to add to this;
Wiseman is not perfect for GoW. Underworld is a good example of that. Not dirty enough. Underworld is just so clean and sleek. GoW should be dirty and hard. We need a director like Gans or Balaguero, not sure about Balaguero doing action though but Gans action is good.

Next point. The only thing that made Underworld: Evolution better than the original was that Kate Beckinsale was hotter.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:56 am
by havocSchultz

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:59 am
by Maui



Is this the director that talks his way into the playboy mansion?

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:04 pm
by Fawst
Logan5 wrote:
Fawst wrote:
Chilli wrote:
Fawst wrote:You have a good point, Minstrel. I just think people shouldn't be so negative. Be cautiously optimistic. Underworld/Evolution were well-directed movies. This could be Wiseman's time to really shine.

He's fucking PERFECT for Gears of War...


Dude, you're kidding right?

Granted I can only speak for Underworld, but that was one of the worst films I ever had to sit through. Awful direction, really banal and pedestrian looking. Granted DH4 had solid direction (if rather workmanlike), but lets not really praise the dude too much. He's not all that and a bag of cheese.


Not even close. You haven't seen Underworld: Evolution? It's about a hundred times better than the original. Yes there is some silly deus ex machina stuff going on there, but really... it's fucking VAMPIRES fighting WEREWOLVES. Gears of War is HULKING SOLDIERS vs. HULKING ALIEN SOLDIERS. He's already got a head start there. Considering how great some of the action sequences of U:E were, I can easily see Wiseman handling a GoW movie. The game isn't exactly a masterpiece of a story, I would argue that Wiseman could only IMPROVE it by writing it.

Trust me, Wiseman is as perfect for GoW as Bay was for Transformers. EFNY, I will cling to my idea that he'll be fine for it, but I also have zero care for the original. It was fun, it was interesting, for it's time it was great but... eh, it's no Big Trouble In Little China ;)



Two points I'd like to add to this;
Wiseman is not perfect for GoW. Underworld is a good example of that. Not dirty enough. Underworld is just so clean and sleek. GoW should be dirty and hard. We need a director like Gans or Balaguero, not sure about Balaguero doing action though but Gans action is good.

Next point. The only thing that made Underworld: Evolution better than the original was that Kate Beckinsale was hotter.


Argh, how can you seriously try to make that argument? Underworld/U:E looked clean and sleek BECAUSE THEY WERE MEANT TO. The vamps were vain, sexy euro-trash. They're not going to live in a dingy apartment. They have big bucks, of course they're going to have impressive digs. Just because the overall aesthetics of Underworld and GoW are different doesn't mean that Wiseman can't do a good job with it.

That's almost like trying to say that Spielberg couldn't do Schindler's List because there weren't enough sharks in it.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:52 pm
by Leckomaniac


Yikes. That rumor? Has now been confirmed

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:13 pm
by Lady Sheridan
For the love of God, Loincloth Butler, JUMP SHIP NOW!!

PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:19 pm
by RaulMonkey
Fuck this. I had hope in this project based on Merrick's script review, and I was holding out on making a final call on Wiseman until I saw the uncut LFODH, but this feels like a kick to the nuts.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:48 pm
by havocSchultz

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 4:54 pm
by Chairman Kaga
Phew....Hey I got an idea....Get Carpentar on it. He hasn't be doing anything for a while give the man a budget and hell cast Stuntman Mike himself again.....then set it somewhere else....This practically writes itself.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:32 pm
by DaleTremont
Chairman Kaga wrote:Phew....Hey I got an idea....Get Carpentar on it. He hasn't be doing anything for a while give the man a budget and hell cast Stuntman Mike himself again.....then set it somewhere else....This practically writes itself.


I say they go with someone a bit controversial- Don Coscarelli. He could keep the B-movie feel but he's still a pretty great technical director. Bubba Hotep had some really nice effects, especially considering there wasn't much of a budget.

Hey, it worked for Spiderman...

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:39 pm
by Lord Voldemoo


Oh maaaan....I really wanted to hate this and now the hate potential has dropped slightly... :P

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:23 am
by Leckomaniac
Lady Sheridan wrote:For the love of God, Loincloth Butler, JUMP SHIP NOW!!


The Loincloth has, indeed, jumped ship. Over "creative differences" apparently. So the Ratner AND the Loincloth have now left the project. Apparently, the guy responsible for Terminator 3 is writing it now with an option to direct. Not sure where this leaves the project since it was being sold as a vehicle for the very popular Butler post-300.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:33 am
by Al Shut
Oh my god.

LS has the power to comand the Loincloth. :shock:

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:38 am
by Jahbulon
Al_Shut wrote:Oh my god.

LS has the power to comand the Loincloth. :shock:


Or what's under it.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:05 am
by Zarles
Al_Shut wrote:Oh my god.

LS has the power to comand the Loincloth. :shock:


Would it be wise to argue with a woman with two giant guns? And pistols, too?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:48 am
by unikrunk
You know, I have said this before, and I will say it again; I am all for a remake, just cast Kurt 'Stuntman Mike' Russell again. The guy is scarier than ever, go ahead and update it, but keep the Snake.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:17 pm
by Lady Sheridan
Zarles wrote:
Al_Shut wrote:Oh my god.

LS has the power to comand the Loincloth. :shock:


Would it be wise to argue with a woman with two giant guns? And pistols, too?


:twisted:

But he's still in trouble for ever considering it. Loincloth, my New Rocks need polishing--get to it!!

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:18 pm
by Lord Voldemoo
please let this die now...

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:23 pm
by The Vicar
Call Russell & Carpenter, just make them promise to try harder than they did in Escape from LA.....

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:42 pm
by Fawst
Agreed. Bury this. The original wasn't that good, why throw good money after bad? :D

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:10 pm
by Worst Part's Almost Over
Why don't people remake shit films? Take a rubbish movie that had a decent original concept and remake that into an excellent slice of cinema. Seems so simple, doesn't it?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:57 am
by DinoDeLaurentiis
Much a like a the Dino, he did with a his a Kong, eh?