Jump to content


Photo

Spiderman reboot?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 04 May 2012 - 12:06 AM

I've heard rumors that ten years after Toby McGuire did his Spidey thing that there's going to be a remake of his film.

Isn't kind of early to be doing remakes? Anybody know anything about this?
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 04 May 2012 - 01:00 AM

http://www.theamazingspiderman.com/

Next I hear plans for a "Van Helsing" reboot already...
  • 0

#3 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 May 2012 - 01:27 AM

I guess it saves studio executives from making decisions about original projects. As they used to say "no one got fired for buying IBM".

Edited by Brian Drysdale, 04 May 2012 - 01:28 AM.

  • 0

#4 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 06 May 2012 - 10:05 AM

I guess it saves studio executives from making decisions about original projects. As they used to say "no one got fired for buying IBM".

There is so much fresh material out there that one really wonders what's going on behind studio exec doors.

Not ever concept can make big returns. And if the studios keep trying to reinvent the wheel with no success, then maybe they need to lower their prices.
  • 0

#5 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 10 May 2012 - 07:47 PM

No one else is fazed by this?
  • 0

#6 Paul Bartok

Paul Bartok
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 223 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 11 May 2012 - 02:34 AM

Its reboot/prequel and sequel season, where all the studios either have run out of idea's which I doubt or one did it and now there all following to compete, even 21 jump street references that there just recycling old material and feeding it to the unaware population what I thought was funny especially since the audience still didn't get it haha .I do think people are starting to catch on this finally what makes me mad casue ive been going on about this since last year arrrgh lol

And this could just be my wacky conspiracy idea :P but I think the indie market has expanded significantly since this has started look at how many big stars are doing indie films possibly cause there sick of the same old crap.

enjoy these lists:

http://www.imdb.com/list/WUNCarSomaM/

http://www.denofgeek..._the_works.html


but yep ur right to soon
  • 0

#7 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 11 May 2012 - 02:53 AM

I've been complaining for years that the studios ought to make more $10m movies and fewer $100m movies, which would give them more chances to succeed if nothing else.

I will of course be told I don't know what I'm doing, and I don't - but I'll doubtless be told that by someone who will, in the next breath, complain about plummeting cinema audiences - so something is clearly wrong somewhere.
  • 0

#8 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 11 May 2012 - 05:45 AM

I've been complaining for years that the studios ought to make more $10m movies and fewer $100m movies, which would give them more chances to succeed if nothing else.

I will of course be told I don't know what I'm doing, and I don't - but I'll doubtless be told that by someone who will, in the next breath, complain about plummeting cinema audiences - so something is clearly wrong somewhere.


I'd be inclined to agree with you, or at least that they should make $20 or $25 million films more often ($10 million is a bit low, especially when you are paying for those expensive stars!) but this article which suggest that John Carter even made a big profit, seems to suggest otherwise:

http://www.telegraph...t-the-plot.html

It could be in part that the marketing people know how to handle a film with explosions etc I guess but...

I could say a lot about this. How often do I see people on this forum say something to the effect of "well I'll just go to one more 3d film, this director might know what to do with it" or some other excuse to see a film in 3d when they claim they don't like 3d films? How often are there threads on here complaining about superhero films and films made for teenage boys which people here queue up in droves to watch?

Transformers 3 was the one that blew my mind. So many people here queued up to watch it knowing it was terrible from the get go. I was really shocked.

It's such a big subject I can barely begin and I'm not that comfortable discussing various aspects of it either.

Anyway, getting back to your original point Phil, there is an issue with making more movies because there are only a limited amount of places to show them. It's the problem that national cinema across the world has. There is a demand for the local film output but all the cinemas are booked out with the American stuff. Sometimes (not so often) theres even situations where the big cinemas showing Hollywood films are fairly empty and the little art cinemas are packed out with people who want to see the films from their own culture.

If theres only a limited number of screens to show the films in they can only make a certain amount of films to fill them thus maybe it is better to spend more on each film that uses that precious resource...

...and the big factor is that the big studios have been doing very well thankyou very much so I guess that often their strategies are working!

Having said all that, I think you would definitely be right with your idea when you are talking about the uk funded films out there. They are not working to the Hollywood model and are not vertically integrated in any way etc. It would be better for film agencies etc to fund more smaller films (preferably not ones made by their mates, nephews etc) as it gives more chances to have success. Those films are not being made for anything like $10 million tho normally. There is often this idea that one size fits all in cinema and it's obviously not the case.

love

Freya

Edited by Freya Black, 11 May 2012 - 05:45 AM.

  • 0

#9 George Ebersole

George Ebersole
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1570 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 16 May 2012 - 05:00 AM

Yeah, I've always been an advocate of lowering prices to attract more customers, and cutting back on costs to offset a loss in audience.

I just had a look at the new "Superman" reboot.

Oh. My. God.

I mean... I just don't get it. I just don't. Someone please tell me this isn't so.
  • 0


FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Opal

The Slider

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab