ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Your favorite film reboot

> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (rocketscientist @ July 27 2009, 10:25 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 1:20 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 9:53 pm)> id="QUOTE">:laugh: Well, that's typical comic books for you!!

I'm kinda with you, though. ?All that Shi-ar, future time, alternate dimensions, and space stuff, I just never cared for that in the X-men books. ?I just think it gets too far away from the central themes of prejudice and alienation that, at their best, the comics did so well.

Truthfully, the X-men books are the only Marvel books I've ever gotten into. ?I'm primarily a DC guy.

WRT comics based on the films, I do think that the Ultimate X-men line was written with that in mind, that is, a more grounded approach.  The "Ultimate" universe was a reboot of the Marvel U and Mark Millar, who initially wrote Ultimate X-men and The Ultimates/Avengers specifically wrote the books with more of a movie sensibility in mind.  If you haven't tried them, you might want to check them out.> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 10:20 am)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 9:53 pm)> id="QUOTE">;)
The two brothers had an interesting background and it also served as a setup for three other films which are currently under development:

- X-MEN Origins: First Class
- X-MEN Origins: Wolverine II
- X-MEN Origins: Deadpool

Except for the fact that Sabertooth later doesn't seem to remember Logan as his brother, the movie worked pretty well... but I guess even this will be explained in the sequel.
My guess is that Victor Creed from the ORIGINS movie and Sabertooth from X-MEN are not the same person... but we will soon enough find out.

Vice_Adm_Baxter

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 0

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 12:53 pm

Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 8:21 am)

Quote
ENTERPRISE was a prequel to TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY and can be considered a prequel to nuTOS.


No complaints on that note.

Quote
WOLVERINE was a prequel to the X-MEN Trilogy, set before the film series.


Yes it was and we all have seen how that messed up things.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 1:20 pm

Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 9:53 pm)
Quote
WOLVERINE was a prequel to the X-MEN Trilogy, set before the film series.


Yes it was and we all have seen how that messed up things.

How that?

I am a fan of the X-MEN movies, and don't know what you mean.

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 1:25 pm

Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 1:20 pm)
Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 9:53 pm)
Quote
WOLVERINE was a prequel to the X-MEN Trilogy, set before the film series.


Yes it was and we all have seen how that messed up things.

How that?

I am a fan of the X-MEN movies, and don't know what you mean.

Storma, you should check out some of the comics.  I haven't been into them for awhile, but I did read Ultimate X-men v1-10, Grant Morrison's New X-men (inspired by the first X-men film), and Joss Whedon's Astonishing X-men.  Those are all really good.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 1:28 pm

Quote (rocketscientist @ July 27 2009, 10:25 pm)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 1:20 pm)
Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 9:53 pm)
Quote
WOLVERINE was a prequel to the X-MEN Trilogy, set before the film series.


Yes it was and we all have seen how that messed up things.

How that?

I am a fan of the X-MEN movies, and don't know what you mean.

Storma, you should check out some of the comics. ¿I haven't been into them for awhile, but I did read Ultimate X-men v1-10, Grant Morrison's New X-men (inspired by the first X-men film), and Joss Whedon's Astonishing X-men. ¿Those are all really good.

I tried.

Too many aliens, too many parallel dimensions etc.

IMO the more ground-based the X-MEN are, the better they are.

I was so happy that they decided to leave out this whole alien-power thing when it came to the Phoenix saga.

It would be cool to have a comic book series based on the films.

Vice_Adm_Baxter

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 0

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 1:31 pm

Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 10:20 am)
Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 9:53 pm)
Quote
WOLVERINE was a prequel to the X-MEN Trilogy, set before the film series.


Yes it was and we all have seen how that messed up things.

How that?

I am a fan of the X-MEN movies, and don't know what you mean.

The character of Wolverine in the movies has an vastly different character background when compared to the one in the comics

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 1:31 pm

border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 1:28 pm)

SpaceClown77

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 337

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 3:12 pm

Quote (rocketscientist @ July 27 2009, 12:41 pm)
Quote (Captain_Storma @ July 27 2009, 11:39 am)
STAR TREK - INSURRECTION

Production budget: 58 million USD

Box office performance:
Domestic: ?$70,187,658 ? ?62.3%
+ Foreign: ?$42,400,000 ? ?37.7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
= Worldwide: ?$112,587,658 ?

You call this a bomb? And I thought you were the numbers person.
So... might we call TREK XI a bomb, cause it also just got 200% at the BO of its budget?

:eyesroll:

Uh, I don't know if you were referring to my previous post, Storma, but I wasn't calling INS a bomb. ?NEM is the only ST movie that has consistently been referred to as a bomb at the box office. ?

Look at this domestic box office chart again:



As you can see, INS had only 1,814,240 sales than TFF did and it cost almost twice as much to make.

And, from the chart, you can see there was a 28% drop in the domestic box office from FC. ?Now, obviously that is not the disaster that was TFF, which dropped 55% from TVH, but Paramount was not happy with it (just as they weren't happy about GEN not significantly gaining ground from TUC), but INS was the most expensive ST film since TMP. ?

That's why Berman said this, going into NEM:

Quote

Berman on Star Trek Nemesis :


"Star Trek was going through some changes. Deep Space Nine had ended. Voyager had ended. Voyager's ratings had not fared at all that well. Enterprise was on the air (and struggling). I think that the studio was not in a big rush. ?Patrick Stewart was kind of busy. There was a sense I was getting from the studio that perhaps the next film we produced might be better off if we did it with a new cast. I felt, right or wrong, that because we were introducing a new cast with Enterprise that to introduce a new cast almost simultaneously was not a good idea. I felt since it had been awhile, four years I believe, since the audience had seen Picard and company, that we should give the cast of The Next Generation another shot."



I mean, why do you think it was so long from INS and NEM? ?Why do you think the studio was considering using a whole new crew for the movie following INS if INS did so well? ?

Heck, Paramount was considering the same thing, going on with a new crew or Bennett SF Academy idea, for ST VI after the extremely poor showing of TFF. ?However, the 25th anniversary was coming up and the Paramount execs, I think, recognized that they were partially to blame for the problems in TFF and they wanted the original cast to go out on a high note, so TUC was made. ?

They're similar situations. ?Both TFF and INS were set-backs and each time another chance was given. ?However, the differnce is TUC regained some of the ground TFF lost and was critically acclaimed while NEM's box office dropped over 50% of INS's and was the second-worst reviewed ST movie ever.

Man, you only get on your soapbox on NEM and INS and Berman. You're almost as bad the guys bashing STXI. Let it go.

SpaceClown77

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 337

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 3:41 pm



You fail to mention that the chart is adjusted for 1979 ticket prices. And again you forget the worldwide gross sales...

ENT567

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5267

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 4:14 pm

Like X-Men movies. Absolutely don't care about the comic books (or any comic books at all).

Like Batman of the 1990s. Absolutely don't care about the new ones - it's a futile decadence which leads nowhere (character study? what's to "study" there???)

Like Bond played by Dalton, Brosnan and Craig. Absolutely don't care about all the earlier ones.

Always (1989) - one of the most boring attempts on "something meaningful" I've ever seen. I guess we might consider Ghost (1990) a watchable reboot of Always.

SpaceClown77

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 337

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 4:25 pm

Quote (ENT567 @ July 27 2009, 4:14 pm)
Like X-Men movies. Absolutely don't care about the comic books (or any comic books at all).

Like Batman of the 1990s. Absolutely don't care about the new ones - it's a futile decadence which leads nowhere (character study? what's to "study" there???)

Like Bond played by Dalton, Brosnan and Craig. Absolutely don't care about all the earlier ones.

Always (1989) - one of the most boring attempts on "something meaningful" I've ever seen. I guess we might consider Ghost (1990) a watchable reboot of Always.

Wow, another Dalton fan good on you. The Living Daylights = cool. I loved Goldeneye(still think it's the best Bond film). I don't care that much for Brosnans later films though.

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jul. 27 2009, 7:06 pm

Quote (SpaceClown77 @ July 27 2009, 3:41 pm)


You fail to mention that the chart is adjusted for 1979 ticket prices. And again you forget the worldwide gross sales...

Was it important that I mention that 1979 ticket prices were used? ¿I mean, this plot adjusts for inflation and then computes the sales. ¿Would it have changed things significantly if they'd used 2008 dollars and 2008 ticket prices?  I don't think so.


And, wrt the worldwide gross, as they said in the original article, that data is not available for the earlier films, so you wouldn't be able to get as accurate a chart as you have here.  Â¿Also, in any case, none of the previous films did spectacularly in the rest of the world.

And I'm sorry if you didn't like my post about INS and Mr. Berman.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Jul. 28 2009, 8:04 am

border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 10:31 pm)

Mirrorgirl

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 15692

Report this Jul. 28 2009, 8:21 am

Quote (Vice_Adm_Baxter @ July 27 2009, 12:36 am)
I voted Other because Lost In Space wasn't on the list neither was Planet Of The Apes

Lost in Space was #1's favourite movie for years, I loved it too.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Jul. 28 2009, 8:23 am

The new POTA was fun, technically well done, but nothing compares to the original here... Especially since the original had a socially-critical message.  :)

KALEL

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1512

Report this Jul. 28 2009, 5:15 pm

I was split between a couple of movies. Batman was a good reboot, as was James Bond. I really thought that Daniel Craig did a good job in both movies, as did Christian Bale. Of course, I thought Trek was exellent. And I saw a few people mention Lost in Space, also. I liked that movie, and would really like to see a continuation from the first.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum