If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Yes, with Battleship, Ouija and Tonka Trucks, it seems Hollywood only has stupid ideas left. Don't despair, sometimes those silly movie ideas actually work. Here are six that did   (charlesbfrench.com) divider line 95
    More: Interesting, ouija, Hollywood, jokers, Return of the King, Alan Rickman, epic film, Michael Keaton, event movies  
•       •       •

8693 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 12 Jul 2012 at 12:44 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-12 08:11:40 AM
It's not the silly idea.

It's the silly idea combined with a completely failed attempt to make a watchable film. Successful attempts at films made based on silly ideas usually had things like...

*Competent directors
*Skilled actors
*Budgets that actually reflected the movie being made
*Producers that could tear themselves away from snorting coke off the midriff of strippers just long enough to actually check how the movie was doing.

...and so on.
 
2012-07-12 09:35:28 AM
Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?
 
2012-07-12 09:36:09 AM
MacGruber was terrible and wasn't even a box office success. It couldn't even crack $800K in foreign box office, and some countries will watch just about anything.
 
2012-07-12 09:54:19 AM
My Ouija board told me to Yes-dbaafvud.

That would make a great movie.
 
2012-07-12 11:57:19 AM

Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?


Director pitching idea to production studio: "I want to make a series of movies. It's based on a book trilogy that has a niche, but devoted, following among hardcore nerds, but no real mainstream interest. Each book would require over 3 hours to tell the tale with any semblance of fidelity to the source material, and each would also require a special effects budget larger than the GDP of most third-world countries. Doesn't that sound awesome?"

Studio executive: *pushes button, sending director through trapdoor into pit of crocodiles*
 
2012-07-12 12:47:25 PM

SkunkWerks: It's not the silly idea.


Sometimes it is, only because in many cases it's obvious that the only thing in common with the source material is the branding. Battleship is a good example- while you could have gotten a Navy vs. Aliens story on the screen that worked, there was no reason for it to be related to the game Battleship, because there's nothing there except a brand and a fairly tedious game.

Clue is the good counter-example. There's already something to the game itself- it has a narrative structure inherent in its play. It leverages tropes common to murder mystery stories. It has colorful (literally) characters and structures itself towards a climax. The people who made the movie were able to comment on the structure and form of the source material in a meaningful way.
 
2012-07-12 12:52:01 PM
Someone, please make "Chutes and Ladders: The Movie."

/on the savage streets, you have two choices to survive: climb or slide
 
2012-07-12 12:52:09 PM
Clue might have been a silly idea if not for casting. Not to mention the maid.
 
2012-07-12 12:54:57 PM

BKITU: Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?

Director pitching idea to production studio: "I want to make a series of movies. It's based on a book trilogy that has a niche, but devoted, following among hardcore nerds, but no real mainstream interest. Each book would require over 3 hours to tell the tale with any semblance of fidelity to the source material, and each would also require a special effects budget larger than the GDP of most third-world countries. Doesn't that sound awesome?"

Studio executive: *pushes button, sending director through trapdoor into pit of crocodiles*


B-b-but, at least the pitch was coming from a well established director of epic big budget blockbusters, like the classic hit Meet The Feebles...
 
2012-07-12 12:56:03 PM
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

The Premise: Let's make three epic movies about elves, dwarves, and hobbits all chasing after a ring.


WTF, did the author even see the movies?
 
2012-07-12 12:56:53 PM
Author got four out of six. Die Hard, LOTR and Pirates seem like obvious gold in hind sight, but he makes convincing arguments for why they were gambles when originally made. MacGruber and Clue both flopped and were critically panned, so by any objective standard you can't really argue they "worked".
 
2012-07-12 12:59:39 PM
macgruber? seriously? no really, what the hell is wrong with this guy? that movie was horrible and I enjoyed 21 jumpstreet so it is clear that my expectations are pretty low for these kind of movies.
 
2012-07-12 01:00:48 PM
There was a Ouija board movie back in the 80s (along with many others) Witchboard (1986).
 
2012-07-12 01:01:07 PM

BKITU: Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?

Director pitching idea to production studio: "I want to make a series of movies. It's based on a book trilogy that has a niche, but devoted, following among hardcore nerds, but no real mainstream interest. Each book would require over 3 hours to tell the tale with any semblance of fidelity to the source material, and each would also require a special effects budget larger than the GDP of most third-world countries. Doesn't that sound awesome?"

Studio executive: *pushes button, sending director through trapdoor into pit of crocodiles*


Actually, according to Jackson (et al), the original pitch for LotR was much more conservative. It was going to be 2 movies that were probably 2 hours long. It was, strangely, the final studio that said it should be 3 movies. Pretty sure the earth shifted on its axis that way.

/with a different director, Battleship could have been a decent movie
//as it was, the movie was basically an unenjoyable version of ID4
 
2012-07-12 01:03:06 PM

t3knomanser: Sometimes it is, only because in many cases it's obvious that the only thing in common with the source material is the branding. Battleship is a good example- while you could have gotten a Navy vs. Aliens story on the screen that worked, there was no reason for it to be related to the game Battleship, because there's nothing there except a brand and a fairly tedious game.


If all you have is a branding and not much else, no it's not. Not remotely.

The article is giving us a list of films that succeeded "despite being based on silly ideas", And from the way I see it you can make a successful movie about damn near anything- as long as you actually attempt to make a successful movie.

This sounds pretty basic, but bear with me here, because this concept apparently confuses a lot of studios and IP holders.

The reason why movies like Battleship flop is because a silly idea is all that's there. There never was a sincere attempt to make a movie. Hollywood might as easily taken the $209 million and dumped it into the Marianas Trench.

I remember when I was young, we had a lot of what you'd call "comic book movies" floating about, and most of them sucked on toast. The reason for this was because the procedure involved in making them went thusly:

1) Secure rights to a marketable IP
2) Find production staff (ensuring that all production staff do in fact have a pulse of some sort- this is crucial) to make your movie.
3) Hype and release to theaters.
4) ???
5) (fail to) Profit.

The all important step six is to whine incessantly and complain that theaters are losing money, then blame pirates (worthy film-makers make movies about pirates, crap film makers complain about them).
 
2012-07-12 01:03:59 PM
"Clue" and "McGruber" are already infamous for being just the same kind of disaster as "Battleship." No history revision allowed, subby.
 
2012-07-12 01:05:46 PM

Wolf_Blitzer: Author got four out of six. Die Hard, LOTR and Pirates seem like obvious gold in hind sight, but he makes convincing arguments for why they were gambles when originally made. MacGruber and Clue both flopped and were critically panned, so by any objective standard you can't really argue they "worked".


Clue is a cult classic, but MacGruber is... shiat.
 
2012-07-12 01:06:18 PM

t3knomanser: Sometimes it is, only because in many cases it's obvious that the only thing in common with the source material is the branding. Battleship is a good example- while you could have gotten a Navy vs. Aliens story on the screen that worked, there was no reason for it to be related to the game Battleship, because there's nothing there except a brand and a fairly tedious game.


I dunno if you actually saw Battleship (I did, sadly). The tie-in for Battleship the game is very, very brief.

Honestly, the whole thing was basically, as you say, a failed opportunity to make a Navy-centric version of Battle Los Angeles (which I enjoyed, much to the consternation of many).
 
2012-07-12 01:07:25 PM

ReverendLoki: BKITU: Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?

Director pitching idea to production studio: "I want to make a series of movies. It's based on a book trilogy that has a niche, but devoted, following among hardcore nerds, but no real mainstream interest. Each book would require over 3 hours to tell the tale with any semblance of fidelity to the source material, and each would also require a special effects budget larger than the GDP of most third-world countries. Doesn't that sound awesome?"

Studio executive: *pushes button, sending director through trapdoor into pit of crocodiles*

B-b-but, at least the pitch was coming from a well established director of epic big budget blockbusters, like the classic hit Meet The Feebles...


upload.wikimedia.org

I expect you're wondering what you're doing soaking in Reg's eleven secret herbs and spices. Tomorrow we're having *you* for lunch!
 
2012-07-12 01:16:09 PM
I didn't see Battleship, but I don't remember battling aliens in the board game either.
 
2012-07-12 01:22:29 PM

BKITU: Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?

Director pitching idea to production studio: "I want to make a series of movies. It's based on a book trilogy that has a niche, but devoted, following among hardcore nerds, but no real mainstream interest. Each book would require over 3 hours to tell the tale with any semblance of fidelity to the source material, and each would also require a special effects budget larger than the GDP of most third-world countries. Doesn't that sound awesome?"

Studio executive: *pushes button, sending director through trapdoor into pit of crocodiles*


media.tumblr.com
 
2012-07-12 01:22:37 PM

Geotpf: I didn't see Battleship, but I don't remember battling aliens in the board game either.


you played it wrong man. Also, you should use Lincoln log pieces for a catapult and make the ships out of lego.
 
2012-07-12 01:30:34 PM
An excellent compilation that proves tha-

*Record scratch*


Macgruber is on here? FFS,why?
 
2012-07-12 01:33:34 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Actually, according to Jackson (et al), the original pitch for LotR was much more conservative. It was going to be 2 movies that were probably 2 hours long. It was, strangely, the final studio that said it should be 3 movies. Pretty sure the earth shifted on its axis that way.


Strange? Not really.

Studios love franchises. Further, I'm sure that the studio suites understood that because each movie is a chapter of a larger story, people who see the first film will see the next two in order to see how the story concludes. Additionally, because there's lots of overlap in locations between the films and no lapse in time, parts of the different films could be shot at the same time, lowering production costs.
 
2012-07-12 01:40:34 PM
Man, you're all nuts. MacGruber was hilarious. I bet you all wish your noses were dicks so you could fark butts.
 
2012-07-12 01:43:03 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Actually, according to Jackson (et al), the original pitch for LotR was much more conservative. It was going to be 2 movies that were probably 2 hours long. It was, strangely, the final studio that said it should be 3 movies. Pretty sure the earth shifted on its axis that way.


That's my point exactly. Anyone walking into the pitch with a realistic expectation of what it would take to make the movies good would be laughed out of the building by executive pinheads.

Peter Jackson won the frogdamn lotto, considering the luck he had in finding 1) a sane executive, 2) on a day he was in a good mood, 3) with enough foresight to understand that the market was significantly larger than hardcore nerds. Jackson had to walk in with a half-baked idea for it to gain any traction whatsoever.
 
2012-07-12 01:47:21 PM

t3knomanser: Clue is the good counter-example. There's already something to the game itself...


Be honest Tim Curry looks great in fishnet stockings and we'll sit through just about anything to see him in them again.

But seriously folks, make a hundred crappy movies and a few might just hit the sweet spot.
 
2012-07-12 01:50:17 PM

BKITU: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Actually, according to Jackson (et al), the original pitch for LotR was much more conservative. It was going to be 2 movies that were probably 2 hours long. It was, strangely, the final studio that said it should be 3 movies. Pretty sure the earth shifted on its axis that way.

That's my point exactly. Anyone walking into the pitch with a realistic expectation of what it would take to make the movies good would be laughed out of the building by executive pinheads.

Peter Jackson won the frogdamn lotto, considering the luck he had in finding 1) a sane executive, 2) on a day he was in a good mood, 3) with enough foresight to understand that the market was significantly larger than hardcore nerds. Jackson had to walk in with a half-baked idea for it to gain any traction whatsoever.


Add one more thing: Jackson's track record up to that point. Yes, he'd made a few mildly entertaining movies, but nothing on the scale of LotR. It took an amazingly prescient executive to belief that Jackson could actually pull this off.
 
2012-07-12 01:53:54 PM

SkunkWerks: And from the way I see it you can make a successful movie about damn near anything-


Nearly, but not anything. For example, the movie Battleship really wasn't about the game Battleship, not in any meaningful way. It was an alien invasion movie with boats. And you couldn't actually base a movie off of the game, because there's nothing to be said about the game. The game is barely even worth playing to begin with.

You can make a successful movie about anything that offers you a narrative structure and enough background to flesh it out into a movie. Otherwise, you're just slapping a name on a movie.
 
2012-07-12 02:01:16 PM
i saw a flick where guy comes back to the old hood to find it's a shiathole and crime is everywhere. this leads to that, next thing you know he's got a custom jacked-up Garbage Truck he's using to take out the hive of scum and villainy. they can make a movie out of anything.

/garbage truck crime fighter is my hero
 
2012-07-12 02:01:23 PM

BKITU: Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?

Director pitching idea to production studio: "I want to make a series of movies. It's based on a book trilogy that has a niche, but devoted, following among hardcore nerds, but no real mainstream interest. Each book would require over 3 hours to tell the tale with any semblance of fidelity to the source material, and each would also require a special effects budget larger than the GDP of most third-world countries. Doesn't that sound awesome?"

Studio executive: *pushes button, sending director through trapdoor into pit of crocodiles*


This.
We got our son the DVD set back when it first came out (he went to the theater first, of course), and I sat down one Saturday night to watch it with him. When it got to the "insert disc 2" point, I just gave it up and went to bed.
 
2012-07-12 02:05:53 PM
Battleship? Should have made Nukem.
 
2012-07-12 02:13:25 PM

Roja Herring: Clue might have been a silly idea if not for casting. Not to mention the maid.


3.bp.blogspot.com

content6.flixster.com

i2.listal.com
 
2012-07-12 02:15:20 PM
One more for the list:

The A-Team
 
2012-07-12 02:17:22 PM
nicolebirch.files.wordpress.com

www.digitalbusstop.com
 
2012-07-12 02:18:27 PM

The_Time_Master: Wolf_Blitzer: Author got four out of six. Die Hard, LOTR and Pirates seem like obvious gold in hind sight, but he makes convincing arguments for why they were gambles when originally made. MacGruber and Clue both flopped and were critically panned, so by any objective standard you can't really argue they "worked".

Clue is a cult classic, but MacGruber is... shiat.


I didn't realize Clue did so poorly. It was a great movie, haven't seen it in years, I bet it still holds up pretty well.

/I am, your singing telegram
 
2012-07-12 02:32:18 PM

naugahyde monkey: macgruber? seriously? no really, what the hell is wrong with this guy? that movie was horrible and I enjoyed 21 jumpstreet so it is clear that my expectations are pretty low for these kind of movies.


A reference point, author holds up Coneheads as an example of a good SNL movie, so you know his taste buds are in his butt hole.

Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.

/and what's wrong with 21 Jumpstreet? I thought it was funny enough for multiple viewings (once with buds, once with the wife)
 
2012-07-12 02:36:14 PM

mcmnky: Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.


Michael Keaton was the best Batman.
 
2012-07-12 02:43:31 PM

Spindle: The_Time_Master: Wolf_Blitzer: Author got four out of six. Die Hard, LOTR and Pirates seem like obvious gold in hind sight, but he makes convincing arguments for why they were gambles when originally made. MacGruber and Clue both flopped and were critically panned, so by any objective standard you can't really argue they "worked".

Clue is a cult classic, but MacGruber is... shiat.

I didn't realize Clue did so poorly. It was a great movie, haven't seen it in years, I bet it still holds up pretty well.

/I am, your singing telegram


The thing I like most about Clue is on release each theater only got one of the endings.

Lulz.
 
2012-07-12 02:44:18 PM

Spindle: The_Time_Master: Wolf_Blitzer: Author got four out of six. Die Hard, LOTR and Pirates seem like obvious gold in hind sight, but he makes convincing arguments for why they were gambles when originally made. MacGruber and Clue both flopped and were critically panned, so by any objective standard you can't really argue they "worked".

Clue is a cult classic, but MacGruber is... shiat.

I didn't realize Clue did so poorly. It was a great movie, haven't seen it in years, I bet it still holds up pretty well.
, it
/I am, your singing telegram


In it's initial release, the domestic box office take was just a few thousand short of the cost to make it. Since then, I can only imagine it has done well on home video, TV syndication, and the occasional cult theater screening. So, it's definitely made money since then. Also, in the past years the critics have warmed up to it a lot.
 
2012-07-12 02:45:31 PM
My best friend's dad produced Pirates of the Caribbean. When he told me that he was producing it I told him (as a know it all teen would) "I can't see a movie being based off a Disney ride working".

Man, I think that was the most wrong I have ever been in my life.

/I was surprised when they didn't make Mr. Toads Wild Ride starring Jack Black after POC
 
2012-07-12 02:46:30 PM

t3knomanser: And you couldn't actually base a movie off of the game, because there's nothing to be said about the game.


Is there anything to be said about the Pirates of the Caribbean ride at Disney that's worthy of making a movie about it?

Trust me, this is a bet you'd lose.

But again, in order to lose it, you'd have to have an actual attempt to make a movie. Movies have coherent plots, character development, interesting stories, moods and themes to be conveyed- far more than whatever source material they're based in.

Battleship could have been a good movie that stood on it's own- independent of it's origin and not just another attempt to shoehorn a recognizable property into something. But it failed out of the gate because, once again, they forgo the "making a movie" part and more or less stopped at "battleships, explosions, and um... blue explosions".
 
2012-07-12 02:48:47 PM

Krymson Tyde: Making Lord of the Rings was a silly idea?


One thing that I never understood about The Lord of the Rings tiology:

Peter Jackson was not a big name. He had made Heavenly Creatures, which was quite good, but prior to that he had made shorts and low-budget horror flicks. What prompted a major movie studio to give him $280 million dollars to make these movies? I'm glad they did, don't get me wrong...I'm just surprised.
 
2012-07-12 02:49:22 PM

Mugato: mcmnky: Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.

Michael Keaton was the best Batman.


I submit that he portrayed the "rich idiot with no day job" guise of Bruce Wayne to perfection.
 
2012-07-12 02:56:39 PM

Mugato: mcmnky: Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.

Michael Keaton was the best Batman.


You ever dance with the Devil in the pale moonlight?
 
2012-07-12 02:57:03 PM

BKITU: Mugato: mcmnky: Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.

Michael Keaton was the best Batman.

I submit that he portrayed the "rich idiot with no day job" guise of Bruce Wayne to perfection.


And he played the psycho side of Bruce Wayne better that the other guys.
 
2012-07-12 03:04:46 PM
So where is my Crossbows and Catapults movie?
 
2012-07-12 03:05:24 PM

Mugato: mcmnky: Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.

Michael Keaton was the best Batman.


Kevin Conroy was the best Batman.

There, I said it.
 
2012-07-12 03:07:29 PM

Pants_Optional: So where is my Crossbows and Catapults movie?


In line after Crossfire.

/You'll get caught in it.
 
2012-07-12 03:11:06 PM

thecpt: Mugato: mcmnky: Also, Mr Mom as Batman never worked for me.

Michael Keaton was the best Batman.

You ever dance with the Devil in the pale moonlight?


that reminds me, they still don't show the follow up line after "where does he get all those wonderful toys". why did they edit that out?

it was "what are you waiting for, go ask him!"

//to drive me nuts that's why
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report