|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 23, 2010 17:49:41 GMT -5
Here's the "Tale of the Tape" budget-wise for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The 2003 remake cost $9 million dollars to make (F*** me....where the hell did THAT cash go to, I wonder? This movie shouldn't have been anywhere NEAR that expensive) and stacked up against the originals it goes like this:
TCM 74: $83, 532
TCM 2: $4.7 million
TCM III: 3.3 million
TCM IV: $600,000
I'm seeing a pattern here.....though in this case, adjusted for inflation, Part 2 itself is almost as expensive as the remake. You could still make three damn good Texas Chainsaw movies for half of what it cost PD to remake the original though. F***'s sake, the budget of the original is probably equivalent to what the catering costs were on the remake. Bottom line on this is: if there's ANY film that can be made on the cheap (and probably ought to be) it's a Texas Chainsaw film. You just need one or two sets (the farmhouse exterior and the dining room of said house) and a modest budget for fake blood. You don't even NEED name actors for these films, dammit!
*Deep breath* Must calm down...must not get wound up over this. ;D
|
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on May 23, 2010 17:59:28 GMT -5
To be fair 9million is pretty dirt cheap for a feature length theatrical movie, that's like 45bucks in 1976 money.  |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 23, 2010 20:31:55 GMT -5
To be fair 9million is pretty dirt cheap for a feature length theatrical movie, that's like 45bucks in 1976 money. True, but this one should have been brought in way UNDER even that. There was no NEED for CGI, or name actors/actresses, or ANY of that. If anything, they could have let some up and coming indie directors have a shoestring budget and let them go wild with it. You'd have gotten a movie that was much closer in feel to the original, in any case. Even at nine million, which I do agree is pretty cheap by Hollywood standards, they spent too much money making this film look far too slick. That's the problem with PD though. They think MONEY can fix everything, and make everything better, forgetting that the key ingredient to making the original films so endearing was that they were made BY fans FOR fans. Most of the BEST horror movies come from that mindset, whether it's Shimizu or Raimi, Romero or Carpenter, Craven or hell even Lloyd Kaufman and Troma! When there's a true love for the genre there, it comes bleeding through. You don't need $35 million dollars to make a great horror movie;small films like Paranormal Activity have proven that time and time again. |
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on May 23, 2010 21:03:30 GMT -5
It's all about vision and what you want I suppose. SAW cost 1million bucks as that was a pretty contained movie, but some guys just want to show off some cool stuff, Pandorum which was pretty good was a 35million movie cuz it was a spacy and sci-fi and such.
Certainly 1-5 million can easily make a good horror movie, but sometimes you gotta get out of the dingy houses and guys with subpar make up and kick it up a notch.
Even then Horror films are lucky if they can ask for a 40M budget at most. It's actually kind of funny, horror is treated as just such a throw away thing, when it's actually the highest returning thing studios film money wise, they're all so cheap to make, and the fans are so hardcore.
It's kind of like Metal and record companies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 24, 2010 1:14:34 GMT -5
And see, I've always been one who likes the old Greg Nicotero/Tom Savini style practical effects versus the slick CGI blood and gore. Take a look at how hokey the CGI "eyeball" scene looked in Midnight Meat Train versus how realistic the practical effects seemed in that same film.
Of course, you can have bad makeup jobs, just as easily as you can have bad CGI....however, I feel that at least with bad makeup, things are really THERE versus having things look TOTALLY simulated and not even in the same world via bad CGI.
Another example of that is how the mutants looked in I am Legend. Actors in makeup would have been cheaper to use, and would have looked MUCH better than the SciFi channel quality CGI they used.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2010 1:35:36 GMT -5
You just gave me a great excuse with talking about the makeup/CGI to post this. (Violence warning) Any time that I get to plug this movie, I smile.  |
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on May 24, 2010 1:44:13 GMT -5
Hell, at most it'll take me a couple days to finish a movie and that's most likely because I get extremely tired and don't want to wake up to a noisy DVD/Blu-Ray menu. F*** the bastards who decided to make DVD menus animated. My daily routine: (1) Work from midnight until 8:00 a.m. (2) Surf the net for a couple hours (3) Eat approximately ten bucks' worth of fast food (4) Throw in horror DVD, feel eyes getting heavy after about 15 minutes. Repeat five days a week. As for that menu screen, I too thought that was an annoyance, but most players have the option to put it on "Title" repeat, which is what I do now. At least the same movie playing over and over while I sleep is better than that goddamn loud animated menu.  I pretty much only get a chance to watch any movie now when I'm riding a train for longer than a half hour. Only way I got a chance to watch Ninja Assassin yesterday.  And Legion still looks like a comedy movie to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2010 1:59:01 GMT -5
Hell, at most it'll take me a couple days to finish a movie and that's most likely because I get extremely tired and don't want to wake up to a noisy DVD/Blu-Ray menu. F*** the bastards who decided to make DVD menus animated. My daily routine: (1) Work from midnight until 8:00 a.m. (2) Surf the net for a couple hours (3) Eat approximately ten bucks' worth of fast food (4) Throw in horror DVD, feel eyes getting heavy after about 15 minutes. Repeat five days a week. As for that menu screen, I too thought that was an annoyance, but most players have the option to put it on "Title" repeat, which is what I do now. At least the same movie playing over and over while I sleep is better than that goddamn loud animated menu. Just noted this post, haha. I've tried that, and it rarely works for me. And that's because the damn movie won't repeat. The only movie I could recall working on repeat was Hellboy 2. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 24, 2010 2:54:56 GMT -5
You just gave me a great excuse with talking about the makeup/CGI to post this. (Violence warning) Any time that I get to plug this movie, I smile. I loved Laid To Rest. If the Platinum Dunes team had ANY creativity, their F13 remake would have had innovative, creative kills like the ones shown in that clip. THOSE were some excellent, awe-inspiring kills. Jason was just boring in F13, outside of giving us a GREAT shot of Willa Ford's rack. But I'll get off that bash-wagon for now. ;D As for Legion....watched it at a friend's house, and couldn't believe how hokey and horrible it was, for a film with such an awesome trailer. Not to mention, we had a couple of girls there with us who couldn't believe 1)how fast Charlile delivers her baby and 2) that she was up and walking normally, and even RUNNING not five minutes later....especially given how BIG that baby looked. Little things like that might not stand out to your average horror fan, but girls...they tend to notice things like that. ;D |
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 24, 2010 9:00:22 GMT -5
As for Legion....watched it at a friend's house, and couldn't believe how hokey and horrible it was, for a film with such an awesome trailer. Not to mention, we had a couple of girls there with us who couldn't believe 1)how fast Charlile delivers her baby and 2) that she was up and walking normally, and even RUNNING not five minutes later....especially given how BIG that baby looked. Little things like that might not stand out to your average horror fan, but girls...they tend to notice things like that. ;D never came to my hometown theater, and I was mulling over whether or not to make the 40 minute trek to the nearest decent movie house around to watch it. Looked like I made the right choice saving the gas. ;D |
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,223 
|
Post by andrew8798 on May 24, 2010 15:08:04 GMT -5
Devil's Rejects was brought up a couple of pages back looks like there may be a sequel in the works
|
|
Ken Ivory
Hank Scorpio
This sorta thing IS my bag, baby.
Posts: 5,282
|
Post by Ken Ivory on May 24, 2010 17:11:20 GMT -5
Dread Central's latest edition of it's Dinner For Fiends podcast, titled "A Nightmare on Poop St." brought something interesting to my attention the other day in regards to the NOES remake: The Platinum Dunes remake had a budget that was equivalent to the first SIX original NOES installments COMBINED. Ponder that for a minute. Done? Now tell me if you saw a cent of that on the screen, because I sure didn't. This just chaps my ass even more learning that because as bad as the sequels were, as horrible as they seemed back then, every last ONE of those (save maybe for Part 2) at least utilized the tools at their disposal to make the most out of their micro-budgets. In case you were wondering, I did the math and the DFF Factoid is true. IMDB lists NOES 2K10 as having a budget of $35 million. The breakdown of the original film and it's sequels is as follows: NOES 84: $1.8 million Part 2: $3 million Part 3: $5 million Part 4: $13 million Part 5: $6 million Part 6: $5 million. That totals out to $33.8 million dollars. For that price tag, which is still two million less than the remake cost, we got 6 NOES films of varying quality, but films where every cent of their budget was up on the screen nonetheless. In the remake, it didn't even seem like they even TRIED to breathe life into Elm St., it's residents, Freddy, the Dream World.....anything. Given twenty years and the latest cutting edge technology...with a budget of the first SIX f*****g films combined, the best Platinum Dunes could give us was.... Silent Hill? Seriously? I mean, NONE of the dream sequences had any sort of vividness or creativity to them at all! They did NOTHING with the tools at their disposal. If anything, this remake should have made the original look like the 1934 KING KONG in comparison. Things are possible today that would make the 84 original look absolutely ARCHAIC....and they didn't use a ONE of them. Instead, the 84 original comes off looking so vastly superior to THIS one that it makes you question who ought to be remaking who! Wow. I actually had NO CLUE that the budget was that high...judging by what was on the screen, I figured it was somewhere in the $15-$20 million range, but $35 million? For Christ's sakes... Freddy vs. Jason had a budget of about $25 million, and that movie looked WAY more epic than NOES 2010. {Spoiler}Yeah, and it had the same freakin' ending! |
|
|
|
Post by sunwukong on May 24, 2010 17:20:36 GMT -5
That's the reason these Platinum Dunes remakes are so misguided.
The reasons these franchises were "evergreen" in the first place is because of how cheap they were to make. Saw is the modern standard bearer of that model. I'm not a huge fan of the series, but it's a cash cow they've kept well fed due to keep the budgets low. Even with Saw VI, which underperformed relative to previous entires, you still made 62 million off an 11 mil. Budget. Even accounting for ads and split revenue, that's good money.
Friday the 13th cost 19 million to make, and NOES cost 35. That's ridiculous. You're talking about movies that are generally populated with TV-level talent, directed by journeymen or young guys, and with special effects that don't require a great deal of innovation or research.
So the end issue is that Platinum Dunes is trying to make these things A-List releases when the series NEVER WERE. They were done on the cheap and churned out extremely quickly. That's part of the charm. I don't love the Friday the 13th series because of its moody lighting and cinematography, I love it because of its stripped down nature. Platinum Dunes doesn't get that. If they had kept the budgets down, they could easily reinvigorate these franchises. But they didn't.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 24, 2010 17:46:34 GMT -5
That's the reason these Platinum Dunes remakes are so misguided. The reasons these franchises were "evergreen" in the first place is because of how cheap they were to make. Saw is the modern standard bearer of that model. I'm not a huge fan of the series, but it's a cash cow they've kept well fed due to keep the budgets low. Even with Saw VI, which underperformed relative to previous entires, you still made 62 million off an 11 mil. Budget. Even accounting for ads and split revenue, that's good money. Friday the 13th cost 19 million to make, and NOES cost 35. That's ridiculous. You're talking about movies that are generally populated with TV-level talent, directed by journeymen or young guys, and with special effects that don't require a great deal of innovation or research. So the end issue is that Platinum Dunes is trying to make these things A-List releases when the series NEVER WERE. They were done on the cheap and churned out extremely quickly. That's part of the charm. I don't love the Friday the 13th series because of its moody lighting and cinematography, I love it because of its stripped down nature. Platinum Dunes doesn't get that. If they had kept the budgets down, they could easily reinvigorate these franchises. But they didn't. EXACTLY. There are certain things that just DON'T work, and a slick-looking slasher film...just isn't one of them. And while I love my F13 DVD boxset, I STILL keep old beat-up former rental VHS tapes around for rainy day occasions. That's the ONLY way to watch those movies and get the original effect. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 24, 2010 20:29:34 GMT -5
Devil's Rejects was brought up a couple of pages back looks like there may be a sequel in the works So let me see hee-yah: We could get a Rob Zombie BLOB movie (PASS) We could get a biker vs. wrestler flick (Interesting, but with Zombie's characters.....they're all gonna be foul mouthed hicks. PASS) We could get Werewolf Women of the SS (If Nic Cage does sign on as Fu Manchu....there is at least THAT. I'll say MAYBE to this one) Or we could get Devil's Rejects Part Motherf****n' DEUX, Y'all!. (How the hell? PASS) I've gotta say, unless he's learned some new tricks...or picked up some fresh, new ideas that don't revolve around inbred, gap toothed illiterate hillbillies dropping a thousand f-bombs...there's not a whole lot I want to see Mr. Zombie doing in a directors chair, to be honest. I'm halfway afraid that Platinum Dunes is going to snatch him (and the rights to Hellraiser) up and combine the two.  |
|
|
|
Post by sunwukong on May 24, 2010 21:09:55 GMT -5
It's kind of sad that I was once hopeful that Zombie would bring something to the horror genre. He certainly talked a good game. However, he doesn't seem to be a horror fan so much of a fan of inbred hillbilly-sploitation.
I MIGHT be able to work up some interest for Tyrannosaurus Rex, but that's been talked about for years now and nothing has come of it. Otherwise the guy just depresses me at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 24, 2010 22:54:56 GMT -5
It's kind of sad that I was once hopeful that Zombie would bring something to the horror genre. He certainly talked a good game. However, he doesn't seem to be a horror fan so much of a fan of inbred hillbilly-sploitation. I MIGHT be able to work up some interest for Tyrannosaurus Rex, but that's been talked about for years now and nothing has come of it. Otherwise the guy just depresses me at this point. Heh....Rob could snoop around and see if the rights to THIS cinematic gem are available:  I'm sure he'd just knock that one RIGHT out of the park. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by mysterydriver on May 24, 2010 23:09:38 GMT -5
Just an update...still haven't finished Legion.
That said, have I mentioned just how much I enjoy the Tremors movies? Michael Gross as Burt Gummer is a character that deserves more attention. I'll still complain at how SyFy treated the Tremors: the Series by not even hiding the fact that it was holding a spot until Stargate: Spinoff came on air.
On another note, I recently found Horror Express on archive.org, a great site for public domain films/literature/radio shows. Stars Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee and I've heard good things, so it should be fun whenever I can actually get to...it. At this point I'd guess that I'm going to skip Legion, but I've still got a chance of watching the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo Is Broken on May 25, 2010 20:35:30 GMT -5
What's the deal with this new movie "Splice?" These two scientists create a kangaroo woman in a lab? |
|
|
|
Post by YellowJacketY2J on May 25, 2010 22:23:39 GMT -5
I'm going to brave The Human Centipede some time this or next week. When I do, I'll make sure to post the link to my review here. Wish me luck!
|
|
