James Cameron's AVATAR (was: info req...)
jru...@ix.netcom.com
pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki) wrote:
>TITANIC (1997)
>SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>AVATAR (1999-2000)
>TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
Does anyone know what the scoop is on Titanic? I know it is costing a
fortune - but is it a historical sort of thing or more in the 'Raise
the Titanic' mode?
Rusty
Jeremy R.
On 20 Mar 1997, Peter Ronaszeki wrote:
> And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>
> TITANIC (1997)
> SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
> AVATAR (1999-2000)
> TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>
> He is directing all of these in this order. This list doesn't include the
> other things he is involved with like producing etc. such as PLANET OF THE
> APES, BROTHER TERMITE, CROWDED ROOM and the loads of other stuff that he
> still has links to. Of course, these are just his current plans and are
> subject to change.
So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the big
screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
Anybody have any casting suggestions?
Later!
Jeremy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grampa:"I'm an old man. Nobody listens to me!"
Lisa:"I'm a little girl. Nobody listens to me!"
Homer:"I'm a white male, age 18-49. *Everybody* listens to me, no matter
how stupid my ideas are!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Reiher
jru...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki) wrote:
>
> >TITANIC (1997)
> >SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
> >AVATAR (1999-2000)
> >TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>
> fortune - but is it a historical sort of thing or more in the 'Raise
> the Titanic' mode?
Mostly historical, though some scenes were shot in a Russian submersible
that dove down to the actual Titanic wreckage. It sounds like a
typical Cameron shoot - vastly over budget and schedule, physically
and emotionally grueling, key personnel fired (the cinematographer,
in this case), weird occurrences (someone lacing catered food with
PCP, this time). Of all the films Cameron has done so far, "Titanic"
is the one with the least obvious commercial promise. Not really
an action film, not science fiction, no megastars. The budget is
incredibly big, perhaps bigger than any other Hollywood film ever
made. This film is an incredibly big gamble.
There was a very interesting article about the shooting of the film
in a recent Calendar section of the LA Times - neat stuff like how
they only built one side of the ship in their nearly-full-scale
model, and are using mirror-reversed lettering on all written materials
when it's subbing for the missing side. (This should be a bonanza
for the gaff-watchers, as someone who's appeared elsewhere in the
film is bound to obviously change from being right-handed to left-
handed.)
--
Peter Reiher
rei...@cs.ucla.edu
<http://fmg-www.cs.ucla.edu/project-members/reiher>
Peter Ronaszeki
Matt...@Peconic.net (Matt) writes:
>I just checked the IMDb, entered 1997-1999 for year and James Cameron
>for Cast/Crew and it came back with Titanic and Avatar.
>Avatar is due out in 1999, and the only info the IMDb had was that
>Cameron was writing and directing it.
>Anyone know anything about it????
AVATAR has even more secrecy surrounding it than THE FIFTH ELEMENT. The
only thing that I know for certain is that it will be the first to employ
Digital Domain's Virtual Human technology, which Cameron is developing
especially for this film. SPIDERMAN will actually debut a limited version
hopefully, and then the full version with muscles moving underneath skin
etc. will be premiere in AVATAR.
And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
TITANIC (1997)
SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
AVATAR (1999-2000)
TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
He is directing all of these in this order. This list doesn't include the
other things he is involved with like producing etc. such as PLANET OF THE
APES, BROTHER TERMITE, CROWDED ROOM and the loads of other stuff that he
still has links to. Of course, these are just his current plans and are
subject to change.
If anyone has any additional information I haven't mentioned here then
post away!
- Peter Ronaszeki
THE ENTERTAINMENT NEXUS will be back on-line soon!
(.sig under re-construction)
Scary Mary
Jeremy R. wrote:
> So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the big
> screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
>
> Anybody have any casting suggestions?
Of course! I think everyone who's ever thought about it has suggested
Bruce Campbell. I'm all for that, although I don't know if Bruce is
interested. He's been branching out of the action hero genre and may not
want the role. In which case I might nominate Chris O'Donnell.
--
ma...@bronze.coil.com==================================
"Well OK, I still get stoned
I'm not the kind of girl you take home."
- Sheryl Crow
=============================http://www.coil.com/~mary
Bob Hamm
> So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the big
> screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
>
> Anybody have any casting suggestions?
There was talk of Jim Carey playing Spidey a while back, before he
became a mega-star. Personally, I don't see Jim as Spidey, unless they
are looking for camp.
-Bob
Andy
"Jeremy R." <jjrs...@pitt.edu> wrote:
>So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the big
>screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
>
>Anybody have any casting suggestions?
I have to admit that I really like Stan Lee's suggestion of Christopher
Barnes as Spider-Man. His voice is one of the few things I enjoy about
the Saturday morning cartoon and, if you've seen him playing Greg in
the Brady Bunch movies, you know that he can do a great job of playing
a skinny dork, which is exactly how Spidey should be. If that doesn't
happen, I have to nominate Bruce Campbell since he's just born to play
a superhero.
Andy
Brian John Wright
Peter Ronaszeki (pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au) wrote:
: And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
: TITANIC (1997)
: SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
: AVATAR (1999-2000)
: TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
Wait a sec - are we supposed to believe that Jimbo Cameron is
going to actually make a film a year for the next four years, when it
usually takes him 3 years to make just one?
-Brian
Hunter Metz
> "Jeremy R." <jjrs...@pitt.edu> wrote:
>
> >So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the big
> >screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
> >
> >Anybody have any casting suggestions?
>
Ever since my friends and I started discussing this, we thought Matthew
Perry would be perfect for the part.
Hunter
IronMan
On 20 Mar 1997 03:33:11 +0800, pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki)
wrote:
>Matt...@Peconic.net (Matt) writes:
>
>>I just checked the IMDb, entered 1997-1999 for year and James Cameron
>>for Cast/Crew and it came back with Titanic and Avatar.
>
>>Avatar is due out in 1999, and the only info the IMDb had was that
>>Cameron was writing and directing it.
>
>>Anyone know anything about it????
>
>AVATAR has even more secrecy surrounding it than THE FIFTH ELEMENT. The
>only thing that I know for certain is that it will be the first to employ
>Digital Domain's Virtual Human technology, which Cameron is developing
>especially for this film. SPIDERMAN will actually debut a limited version
>hopefully, and then the full version with muscles moving underneath skin
>etc. will be premiere in AVATAR.
>
>And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>
>TITANIC (1997)
>SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>AVATAR (1999-2000)
>TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>
>He is directing all of these in this order. This list doesn't include the
>other things he is involved with like producing etc. such as PLANET OF THE
>APES, BROTHER TERMITE, CROWDED ROOM and the loads of other stuff that he
>still has links to. Of course, these are just his current plans and are
>subject to change.
>
>If anyone has any additional information I haven't mentioned here then
>post away!
>
>
>- Peter Ronaszeki
>THE ENTERTAINMENT NEXUS will be back on-line soon!
>(.sig under re-construction)
>
Whoa there partner! Where did you hear he's going to do T3? I haven't heard a
thing about that. What's your source?
Thanks!
Mike
-- The Invincible --
IronMan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A word to the wise, I wouldn't listen to me if I were you."
facehugger
In article <01bc3593$8eff6c60$3fb6...@kruuna.helsinki.fi>, "Juho Tunkelo"
<juho.t...@helsinki.fi> wrote:
> Bob Hamm <elpu...@ou.edu> wrote in article <333151...@ou.edu>...
> > > So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the
> big
> > > screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
> > >
> > > Anybody have any casting suggestions?
> >
> > There was talk of Jim Carey
Johnny Depp. Contemporary yet classic. Capable. Just right.
Jeremy R.
On 20 Mar 1997, Andy wrote:
> I have to admit that I really like Stan Lee's suggestion of Christopher
> Barnes as Spider-Man. His voice is one of the few things I enjoy about
> the Saturday morning cartoon and, if you've seen him playing Greg in
> the Brady Bunch movies, you know that he can do a great job of playing
> a skinny dork, which is exactly how Spidey should be. If that doesn't
> happen, I have to nominate Bruce Campbell since he's just born to play
> a superhero.
See my earlier post as to my opinion on Campbell. Barnes is a decent
choice, especially since his voice is associated with the character
lately. That might just help bring in the youngsters...or not.
Also, you're 150% on the mark about him making a good Peter Parker as
well.
Jeremy R.
On Thu, 20 Mar 1997, Scary Mary wrote:
> Of course! I think everyone who's ever thought about it has suggested
> Bruce Campbell. I'm all for that, although I don't know if Bruce is
> interested. He's been branching out of the action hero genre and may not
> want the role. In which case I might nominate Chris O'Donnell.
Besides, Bruce is a bit too old for the character, unless you were making
Spider-Man: The Dark Webhead Returns or something like that :) I'd rather
see Bruce play Batman.
As for O'Donnell...maybe! I mean, he's already got the Robin gig and might
not be so anxious to play another superhero. On the other hand, the
Spider-Man movie would be a starring gig, not a supporting role.
> --
> ma...@bronze.coil.com==================================
> "Well OK, I still get stoned
> I'm not the kind of girl you take home."
> - Sheryl Crow
> =============================http://www.coil.com/~mary
Cool! Those are the best kinds of girls! ;)
Joshua Kamm
In article <333086B3...@cs.ucla.edu>, Peter Reiher
<rei...@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
> jru...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> >
> > pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki) wrote:
> >
> > >TITANIC (1997)
> > >SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
> > >AVATAR (1999-2000)
> > >TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
> >
> > Does anyone know what the scoop is on Titanic? I know it is costing a
> > fortune - but is it a historical sort of thing or more in the 'Raise
> > the Titanic' mode?
>
> Mostly historical, though some scenes were shot in a Russian submersible
> that dove down to the actual Titanic wreckage. It sounds like a
> typical Cameron shoot - vastly over budget and schedule, physically
> and emotionally grueling, key personnel fired (the cinematographer,
> in this case), weird occurrences (someone lacing catered food with
> PCP, this time). Of all the films Cameron has done so far, "Titanic"
> is the one with the least obvious commercial promise. Not really
> an action film, not science fiction, no megastars. The budget is
> incredibly big, perhaps bigger than any other Hollywood film ever
> made. This film is an incredibly big gamble.
Why is everyone upset about this? If a shitload of money is going into a
movie, let it be a movie like Titanic, which isn't a surefire
drooling-idiot success.
__
A work of art is the trace of a magnificent struggle.
--Robert Henri
Joshua "pri...@primenet.com" Kamm
Peter Ronaszeki
iro...@iname.com (IronMan) writes:
>On 20 Mar 1997 03:33:11 +0800, pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki)
>wrote:
>>AVATAR has even more secrecy surrounding it than THE FIFTH ELEMENT. The
>>only thing that I know for certain is that it will be the first to employ
>>Digital Domain's Virtual Human technology, which Cameron is developing
>>especially for this film. SPIDERMAN will actually debut a limited version
>>hopefully, and then the full version with muscles moving underneath skin
>>etc. will be premiere in AVATAR.
>>
>>And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>>
>>TITANIC (1997)
>>SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>>AVATAR (1999-2000)
>>TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>>
>>He is directing all of these in this order. This list doesn't include the
>>other things he is involved with like producing etc. such as PLANET OF THE
>>APES, BROTHER TERMITE, CROWDED ROOM and the loads of other stuff that he
>>still has links to. Of course, these are just his current plans and are
>>subject to change.
>Whoa there partner! Where did you hear he's going to do T3? I haven't
>heard a thing about that. What's your source?
J.C. and Arnie said shortly after finishing their T2:3D project that they
can't wait to do another Terminator movie together. However, Cameron has
clearly indicated where his priorities lie at the moment (TITANIC,
SPIDERMAN, AVATAR in that order). Cameron has also stated that he has
begun preliminary writing on T3. Digital Domain has supposedly already
done some conceptual investigations concerning the film already. (all
hush-hush of course... it seems Digital Domain are good at keeping
secrets... Fifth Element, Avatar, T3...)
Juho Tunkelo
Bob Hamm <elpu...@ou.edu> wrote in article <333151...@ou.edu>...
> > So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the
big
> > screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
> >
> > Anybody have any casting suggestions?
>
> There was talk of Jim Carey playing Spidey a while back, before he
> became a mega-star. Personally, I don't see Jim as Spidey, unless they
> are looking for camp.
After he's done with Liar, Liar and The Truman Show, we might have another
view of him. Come to think of it, without the baggage of the Ace Venturas
etc.,
he seems like the perfect choice.
Peter Ronaszeki
bjwr...@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca (Brian John Wright) writes:
>Peter Ronaszeki (pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au) wrote:
>: And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>: TITANIC (1997)
>: SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>: AVATAR (1999-2000)
>: TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
> Wait a sec - are we supposed to believe that Jimbo Cameron is
>going to actually make a film a year for the next four years, when it
>usually takes him 3 years to make just one?
Those dates are *very* subject to change. But I think we'll see the first
three on that list done by 2000... just. (since Titanic is virtually
done, and that leaves 2 projects for 2.5 years, and then T3 for the next
millenium). There is no way in hell that he is going to hand over the
directing duties on any of those. Also, I really hope he hurries and gets
AVATAR out before the official SNOW CRASH movie is released (its going to
be close - let's hope we don't see another Leviathan/Deep Star Six/Abyss
problem). Personally, I have no doubt that SNOW CRASH in unfilmable, and
we're going to see a butchering of it by whoever does it. AVATAR on the
other hand will surely be one of the milestone sci-fi films of the
millenium (there is nothing wrong with being influenced by a great
novel, Cameron will still make this movie 100% his own).
Although I guess if J.C. waits till 2000 to release AVATAR, then it could
be promoted as "pioneering virtual human technology for the new millenium"
or something...
p.s. first person to say the millenium doesn't begin in 2000 gets
mailbombed... ;)
Jeremy R.
On 20 Mar 1997, Joshua Kamm wrote:
[snipped everything regarding budgets]
> Why is everyone upset about this? If a shitload of money is going into a
> movie, let it be a movie like Titanic, which isn't a surefire
> drooling-idiot success.
Here here! It seems too many people are judging Titanic by its price tag,
not its quality. This could be quite a good movie if done right. And with
Cameron at the helm, I think it will be.
Now, if you want an example of $$$ down the drain, look at Batman &
Robin's trailer, folks. It's a shame, really. $100M and all they could
come up with was "Everybody! Chill!"
Oh, the humanity...
Home Skully
> Whoa there partner! Where did you hear he's going to do T3? I haven't heard a
> thing about that. What's your source?
>
>
> Mike
>
When Carolco went bankrupt, Fox bought the rights to the Terminator
series. The buzz is that one of the reasons Fox has been so supportive of
Titanic even though it stands almost no chance of turning a profit is that
Cameron will do T3 for them next. Rumor has it that the pressure has
been put on for that scenario to happen for summer 1999 and that the cast
of T2 is ready to hop on board.
Cathy Byland
Brian John Wright (bjwr...@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca) wrote:
: Peter Ronaszeki (pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au) wrote:
: : And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
: : TITANIC (1997)
: : SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
: : AVATAR (1999-2000)
: : TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
: Wait a sec - are we supposed to believe that Jimbo Cameron is
: going to actually make a film a year for the next four years, when it
: usually takes him 3 years to make just one?
: -Brian
Well, Titanic is already done and is due to be released this summer. So
in all actuality, he might start work on Spiderman in 1997. That's two
years right there. And Avatar if it takes most of 1999 and 2000, that's a
year and a half, and Terminator 3 is due to start in 2000+, which means in
might not be until 2001 or 2002 etc.
Cathy Byland
A.W.
Peter Reiher wrote:
>
> jru...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> >
> > pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki) wrote:
> >
> > >SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
> > >AVATAR (1999-2000)
> > >TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
> >
> > fortune - but is it a historical sort of thing or more in the 'Raise
> > the Titanic' mode?
>
> Mostly historical, though some scenes were shot in a Russian submersible
> that dove down to the actual Titanic wreckage.
Really? About 6 months ago I read in SFX magazine that it would have some
connection with "The Abyss" I guess that was yet another unfounded
rumour. Oh well.
I find this Strange. Which studio is backing it? I seriously doubt that
any studio would give any Director a budget of $180 million to produce a
historical movie unless they are thinking Apollo 13 all over again. I
guess I did watch "The Titanic" the original movie based on the event it
was black and white and very accurate to recorded events.
Wait a minute if this movie is historical then why are we talking about
it in a SF newsgroup?
--
Does it matter?
Even if it does matter, does it matter that it matters?
Remove ".remove" from e-mail address to mail me.
Hemingway Green Inc.
> AVATAR on the
> other hand will surely be one of the milestone sci-fi films of the
> millenium (there is nothing wrong with being influenced by a great
> novel, Cameron will still make this movie 100% his own).
I have never heard of the novel "Avatar." Who wrote it, and is it still
in print?
Michael James Donnelly
Jeremy R. wrote:
>
> On 20 Mar 1997, Peter Ronaszeki wrote:
>
> > And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
> >
> > SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
> > AVATAR (1999-2000)
> > TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
> >
> > other things he is involved with like producing etc. such as PLANET OF THE
> > APES, BROTHER TERMITE, CROWDED ROOM
Wasn't "The Crowded Room" originally called "The Minds of Billy
Milligan" and slated to star John Cusak as the titular "hero" a couple
of years ago, before all collapsing horribly? "Planet of the Apes" is,
according to the April 1997 edition of "SFX" - a British sci-fi magazine
- still in active development with Arnold Schwarzenegger still
interested in starring.
Incidentally, to those of you that don't know the best place for this
kind of information, check out Corona's "Coming Attractions" pages at
http://www.islandnet.com/~corona/films/allfilms.html .
> > and the loads of other stuff that he
> > still has links to. Of course, these are just his current plans and are
> > subject to change.
>
> So, we're possibly close to Cameron *finally* bringing Spidey to the big
> screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
>
> Anybody have any casting suggestions?
Wasn't Michael Biehn (Hicks in "Aliens", Kyle Reese in "Terminator", Mad
Bloke in "The Abyss") slated for the role of the Webslinger last year or
has that all collapsed in the litigation nightmare? Harry Knowles's
excellent site has some info on "Spiderman" - check out
http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/coolnews.html .
I'm not sure about "Avatar" though. The whole concept of a virtual actor
just seems to leave me cold. Anyway, I don't believe that the software
and/or hardware is up to the task of accurately modelling the human form
in every movement, muscle ripple, tendon flex, etc. Not to mention the
humans that, after all, are the main driving force behind all this CGI
(Computer Generated Imagery, acronym fans) stuff. Computers are just
tools - it still takes creative and talented people to make something of
them. Just because you give someone a hammer and chisel it doesn't make
them Michaelangelo.
Also, I'm not too sure if I could sympathise with a totally computer
generated character in a film. Mind you, that didn't stop me rooting for
Woody and Buzz.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
- Michael J. Donnelly - Email: mjdon...@dial.pipex.com -
- Systems Engineering Group - -
- British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. - "There's nary an animal alive -
- Sellafield Works - that can outrun a greased -
- Cumbria CA20 1PG - Scotsman" -
------------------------------------------------------------------
J and C Wilson
> big
> > > screen??? COOOOOOL!!!!!!
> > >
> > > Anybody have any casting suggestions?
> >
> > became a mega-star. Personally, I don't see Jim as Spidey, unless they
> > are looking for camp.
>
> After he's done with Liar, Liar and The Truman Show, we might have another
> view of him. Come to think of it, without the baggage of the Ace Venturas
> etc.,
> he seems like the perfect choice.
Riddler right. He may be a funny guy, but that does not mean he has to
be in every goddamn movie that comes out. As far as I know James
Cameron is much more intellegent than that. Remember Peter Parker is an
introvert, Carey has never a day in his life been an introvert. I can't
think of who would be a good Spidey, but Jim Carey is not it.
Jim
Matt Martinez
Home Skully wrote:
>
> When Carolco went bankrupt, Fox bought the rights to the Terminator
> series. The buzz is that one of the reasons Fox has been so supportive of
> Titanic even though it stands almost no chance of turning a profit is that
> Cameron will do T3 for them next. Rumor has it that the pressure has
> been put on for that scenario to happen for summer 1999 and that the cast
> of T2 is ready to hop on board.
>
I'm just hoping that T3 details how John Connor destroys SkyNet(?) in
the future. I just love it when a story comes full circle.
--
Matt
"Do not be so proud of this technological terror you have constructed.
The ability to criticize Star Wars is insignificant next to power of the
Fans"
-Brandon David Short
(-o-)
Andy
It's not a novel. Not to my knowledge anyway. I think he's referring
to Neal Stephenson's novel Snow Crash, which, on the surface, sounds
similar to Cameron's Avatar.
Andy
IronMan
On Fri, 21 Mar 1997 11:30:57 -0500, Home Skully <sk...@wam.umd.edu> wrote:
>> Whoa there partner! Where did you hear he's going to do T3? I haven't heard a
>> thing about that. What's your source?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Mike
>>
>When Carolco went bankrupt, Fox bought the rights to the Terminator
>series. The buzz is that one of the reasons Fox has been so supportive of
>Titanic even though it stands almost no chance of turning a profit is that
>Cameron will do T3 for them next. Rumor has it that the pressure has
>been put on for that scenario to happen for summer 1999 and that the cast
>of T2 is ready to hop on board.
>
Thanks for the T3 info! Where do you get these great rumors? And are there any
rumors on the story fot T3?
Image-A
In article <333345...@teleport.com>, J and C Wilson at
wils...@teleport.com says with great feeling...
If Jim Carrey had to be in it he could be the Hobgoblin. But,
definately not Spiderman.
--
Image-A umjo...@cc.memphis.edu
/============================================\
famous last words:
<sarcasm>"Am I supposed to be afraid of a little bug?"</sarcasm>
- Captain sarcastic
IronMan
On Fri, 21 Mar 1997 17:29:59 -0800, Matt Martinez <jsej...@alpha.wcoil.com>
wrote:
>Home Skully wrote:
>>
>> When Carolco went bankrupt, Fox bought the rights to the Terminator
>> series. The buzz is that one of the reasons Fox has been so supportive of
>> Titanic even though it stands almost no chance of turning a profit is that
>> Cameron will do T3 for them next. Rumor has it that the pressure has
>> been put on for that scenario to happen for summer 1999 and that the cast
>> of T2 is ready to hop on board.
>>
>
>I'm just hoping that T3 details how John Connor destroys SkyNet(?) in
>the future. I just love it when a story comes full circle.
>
That's exactly what I have always thought. T3 should follow through on the
little snippets shown about the war with skynet in T1 and T2 to complete the
circle. And of course to see MASSIVE battle sequences like the world has never
seen before! But that's secondary.:)
Ann Daman
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95L.97032...@unixs1.cis.pitt.edu>,
>
> On 20 Mar 1997, Andy wrote:
> > I have to admit that I really like Stan Lee's suggestion of
> > Christopher Barnes as Spider-Man. His voice is one of the few things
> > I enjoy about the Saturday morning cartoon and, if you've seen
> > him playing Greg in the Brady Bunch movies, you know that he can do
> > a great job of playing a skinny dork, which is exactly how Spidey
> > should be. If that doesn't happen, I have to nominate Bruce
> > Campbell since he's just born to play a superhero.
>
> See my earlier post as to my opinion on Campbell. Barnes is a
> decent choice, especially since his voice is associated with the
> character lately. That might just help bring in the youngsters...or not.
>
> Also, you're 150% on the mark about him making a good Peter Parker as
> well.
>
> Later!
> Jeremy
That's the guy? Cool. I agree that he would be a good choice. I love the
animated series. It really captures the humor of Spidey. And he does have
the look too. As much as I love Campbell and would love to see him featured
in something instead of just a side bit player (I was so pissed off when I saw
Congo and Brucey only had a few scenes and they were pretty much the ones we
saw in the preview. Talk about false advertising), he's just way too old to
be Peter Parker. Peter's a college student, remember. So, definately, Chris
Barnes would be my choice.
J and C Wilson
Image-A wrote:
> If Jim Carrey had to be in it he could be the Hobgoblin. But,
> definately not Spiderman.
> --
> Image-A umjo...@cc.memphis.edu
> /============================================\
> famous last words:
> <sarcasm>"Am I supposed to be afraid of a little bug?"</sarcasm>
> - Captain sarcastic
>
I don't think he has to be in it, but maybe he could play the Hobgoblin,
as long as he found out who the Hobgoblin was and how he behaved, before
filming. Carey did neither before playing the Riddler.
Jim
Albert
Brian John Wright wrote:
>
> Peter Ronaszeki (pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au) wrote:
>
> : And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>
> : TITANIC (1997)
> : SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
> : AVATAR (1999-2000)
> : TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>
> going to actually make a film a year for the next four years, when it
> usually takes him 3 years to make just one?
> -Brian
Right. Make it :
TITANIC (1997) (the movie will be a half success, then it will be
on to
TERMINATOR 3 (1999) Huge hit worldwide.
AVATAR (2002)
SPIDERMAN (2005)
Sounds more reasonable !
A
David Laprad
In article <5gpf1n$7j0$1...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au>, pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au (Peter Ronaszeki) wrote:
>And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>
>TITANIC (1997)
>SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>AVATAR (1999-2000)
>TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
Sigh... I am in heaven! :-)
Peter Ronaszeki
>>
>> : And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>>
>> : TITANIC (1997)
>> : SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>> : AVATAR (1999-2000)
>> : TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>>
>> going to actually make a film a year for the next four years, when it
>> usually takes him 3 years to make just one?
>Right. Make it :
> TITANIC (1997) (the movie will be a half success, then it will be
>on to
>TERMINATOR 3 (1999) Huge hit worldwide.
> AVATAR (2002)
> SPIDERMAN (2005)
>Sounds more reasonable !
Cameron does NOT plan to do T3 until *after* SPIDERMAN and AVATAR, as I've
said before. BTW, Digital Domain just got finished some test shots of the
virtual human technology, and they are supposedly indistinguishable from
real humans.
Anthony Renaud
Ann Daman wrote:
> "Jeremy R." <jjrs...@pitt.edu> writes:
[snip]
>
> That's the guy? Cool. I agree that he would be a good choice. I love the
> animated series. It really captures the humor of Spidey. And he does have
> the look too. As much as I love Campbell and would love to see him featured
> in something instead of just a side bit player (I was so pissed off when I saw
> Congo and Brucey only had a few scenes and they were pretty much the ones we
> saw in the preview. Talk about false advertising), he's just way too old to
> be Peter Parker. Peter's a college student, remember. So, definately, Chris
> Barnes would be my choice.
I have to say I feel the same way about Cambell in Escape From LA. He
had 2 lines and maybe 45 seconds of on screen performance. What a waste
of talent.
Anyhoo, on to Spidey. James Cameron, who has been hot to do this
project, claimed he wanted to set the movie at the onset of the
Spiderman story, the origin and so forth. With this in mind, he wants
to cast someone to play a teenage Peter Parker for the movie, and very
possibly an unknown. This is according to the Corona Complete Movie
Guide (http://www.islandnet.com/~corona/films/allfilms.html). I also
read (at that site and Harry's Ain't it Cool News site
http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/coolnews.html) that MGM has aquired the
rights to Spiderman from Corolco (along with $2million and rights to a
Basic Instinct sequel). This may kill James Cameron's ambitions to
direct the movie, since the Corona site claims he has an exclusive deal
with 20th Century Fox. This would be tragic, utterly tragic.
-Tony
William Burns
Andy <andys...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
_The Avatar_ by Poul Anderson
--William
This place treats its employees like mushrooms.
They're kept in the dark and fed faeces.
IronMan
Albert <al...@nix.com> wrote:
>Brian John Wright wrote:
>>
>> Peter Ronaszeki (pred...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au) wrote:
>>
>> : And before anyone asks, the order of James Cameron's new films is:
>>
>> : TITANIC (1997)
>> : SPIDERMAN (1998-1999)
>> : AVATAR (1999-2000)
>> : TERMINATOR 3 (2000+)
>>
>> Wait a sec - are we supposed to believe that Jimbo Cameron is
>> going to actually make a film a year for the next four years, when it
>> usually takes him 3 years to make just one?
>> -Brian
>
>
>Right. Make it :
>
> TITANIC (1997) (the movie will be a half success, then it will be
>on to
>
>TERMINATOR 3 (1999) Huge hit worldwide.
>
> AVATAR (2002)
>
> SPIDERMAN (2005)
>
>Sounds more reasonable !
>
>A
MUCH more!
We want T3!
We want T3!
We want T3!
We want T3!
We want T3!
We want T3!
Mike
-- The Invincible --
IronMan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our
own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile. We are
the Borg." - The Borg
V-X
On Fri, 21 Mar 1997 17:29:59 -0800, in alt.cult-movies, Matt Martinez
<jsej...@alpha.wcoil.com> wrote:
>I'm just hoping that T3 details how John Connor destroys SkyNet(?) in
>the future. I just love it when a story comes full circle.
I probably shouldn't ask this...but what the hell kind of sense would that make?
That future was prevented by the end of...oh my god...no, it wasn't. I mean, it
was, but they left it open-ended. *That's* why T2 has that vague ending where
Sarah waxes philosophical over the future not being set. That's why the future
scene in the park was cut out. So there could be a sequel.
I can't believe I'm just figuring this out. Lord, am I dense.
Visit the Jack Chick Archive and Loads o' Groove at:
http://www.ungh.com
"He can't have been an ordinary person.
His actions take up a whole page."
--Chinese Propaganda Comic, 1965
Terrence J. Brady
Who should be Spider-Man? I question not "who" but "why?" Why does
Hollywood believe that this film will capture the tragic figure of
Peter Parker? I think Cameron is one of the best filmmakers in
Hollywood today and by no means do I criticize or question his talent
but the truth is, Spider-Man: the movie, will never succeed or even
meet people's expectations. It's hard to explain to non-comic book
fans but PP is a character in the making for over 30 years. His
triumphs, his defeats, his day-to-day challenges; I know PP. I've
known him for many, many years. He is more than just a comic book
character to many.
The Incredible Hulk, Capt. America, the TV Spider-Man series, the
Fantastic Four movie (what happened there??) etc...all failed attempts
to bring the comic book world to life. Only the Superman and Batman
films have captured some of the character's true essence on film (I
said some, not all; I'm sure DC fans would agree). I would love to see
Spider-Man, the X-Men, and other Marvel characters that I've known for
years to come to life but the plain truth of the matter is, the general
public outlook on comic books is that they're made for children and
tend to clump them with cartoons and toys. I'm afraid that any
Spider-Man film will look flimsy, unbelievable, and not taken very
seriously.
I do hope Cameron proves me wrong.
In <3336B1...@nrc.ca> Anthony Renaud <Anthony...@nrc.ca>
writes:
Steven Thorpe a.k.a. thor
wbu...@geraldton.lakeheadu.ca (William Burns) writes:
>Andy <andys...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>>"Hemingway Green Inc." <hemg...@compusmart.ab.ca> wrote:
>>>I have never heard of the novel "Avatar." Who wrote it, and is it still
>>>in print?
>>It's not a novel. Not to my knowledge anyway. I think he's referring
>>to Neal Stephenson's novel Snow Crash, which, on the surface, sounds
>>similar to Cameron's Avatar.
be filmed for Touchstone.
>_The Avatar_ by Poul Anderson
--thor
facehugger
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95L.97032...@unixs1.cis.pitt.edu>,
"Jeremy R." <jjrs...@pitt.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Mar 1997, Scary Mary wrote:
>
> > Of course! I think everyone who's ever thought about it has suggested
> > Bruce Campbell.
> Besides, Bruce is a bit too old for the character, unless you were making
> As for O'Donnell...maybe!
Johnny Depp. It's over, folks. Johnny Depp.
Gojira95
Personally, I always thought that RAY LIOTTA would make a decent SPIDEY,
as he LOOKS like a John Romita Peter Parker. Let's face it, he's got the
build for it too. Not TOO muscular, but not exactly THIN, either.
George
>
> Johnny Depp. It's over, folks. Johnny Depp.
Stop masturbating.
If you tried to search thru Usenet, you would have found that
Cameron already have chosen the guy, that he is 15 years olds now,
and probably will be 18 when Cameron will shoot the movie.
He is from Canada, and he is an unknown.
G
found
Alas, sad but true. I think the reason for the general public not taking
these characters seriously is because of the Batman TV series. This campy
60's show ruined it for most others who came afterwards. With "Batman" and
"Batman Returns" I thought things would change, but now, even this series
has caved under pressure from McDonalds and the public and returned to the
campyness that existed in the original TV series. Perhaps the "Spawn"
movies will change this.
--
http://home1.gte.net/ajreeve
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams,
it is still a beautiful world. Be careful, strive to be happy.
Terrence J. Brady <teak...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5h9okj$q...@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>...
Gunther Simons
Michael Bhien. I think he could fill out the skimpy spidey outfit,
and he looks like P. Parker.
-----------------------------------------
Gunther Simons
str...@glo.be
http://shell.glo.be/~strange/
---------------------------------------------
Matt Martinez
But I like Todd MacFarlane better than John Romita (Sr. or Jr.). I say
pick a person who looks like his artwork.
Michael Benedetti
Too old!
--
What is this fish doing in my ear?
Adam Neil Villani
In article <01bc39f9$07617a40$6c872399@default>, found <ajr...@gte.net> wrote:
> Alas, sad but true. I think the reason for the general public not taking
>these characters seriously is because of the Batman TV series. This campy
>60's show ruined it for most others who came afterwards. With "Batman" and
>"Batman Returns" I thought things would change, but now, even this series
>has caved under pressure from McDonalds and the public and returned to the
>campyness that existed in the original TV series. Perhaps the "Spawn"
>movies will change this.
Mmm... I wouldn't put too much hope there. I dunno, maybe the movie will capture
the "Spawn" feeling, but I think that's probably pretty different from the
feeling one should get from a Spidey movie, an FF movie, a Hulk movie,
or whatever. Please take this with the caveat that I haven't read any Spawn comics,
but have read other Image comics, and I didn't like them at all. I'm part
of the old fogey Marvel guard (actually, I'm only 23) that thinks the
best things in comics were the Marvels of the 60s-80s that concentrated
on characterization, tight storytelling, and complementary art. The Image-
ization of the Marvel Universe is the worst thing to ever happen to it.
As far as movies go, I think a much better Spider-Man director would be
somebody like John Sayles. Yes, the guy who made Matewan and Lone Star.
A good Spider-Man director would need to be good with characters, action,
and not have an overbearing style. OK, Sayles hasn't done much action.
But a Cameron Spider-Man movie would be marginal with the characterization
good on the action, but everything would pound into you in blue-tinted
Cameronness. The movie would have no charm whatsoever, which is something
Spiderman needs. It would be like reading the Todd McFarlane Spiderman.
Who would be good for Spiderman? How about Alex "Repo Man" Cox? That would
be wild...
--
Adam Villani ad...@cco.caltech.edu http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~addam
"If we want to get there quickly and safely,
then we all have to obey the rules." ---David Lynch on traffic safety
Jef Sewell
George wrote:
> Stop masturbating.
>
> If you tried to search thru Usenet, you would have found that
> Cameron already have chosen the guy, that he is 15 years olds now,
>
> and probably will be 18 when Cameron will shoot the movie.
>
> He is from Canada, and he is an unknown.
I hope he is a better find that Edward Furlong. No offense to Cameron,
whom I revere, but I think much too much was made of Edward Furlong as
'a complete unknown' when he was plucked from some mall for T2.
--
Jef Sewell, Interface Design OnRamp Technologies
j...@onramp.net http://www.onramp.net/~jdsewell
On TV Right Now: "Your Needs, Your Airline. Japan Airlines."
Rich Travsky
Gunther Simons wrote:
> Michael Bhien. I think he could fill out the skimpy spidey outfit,
> and he looks like P. Parker.
Too old. The role is for a younger person.
rich
Randal Morris
Terrence J. Brady wrote:
(snip some)
> I would love to see
> Spider-Man, the X-Men, and other Marvel characters that I've known for
> years to come to life but the plain truth of the matter is, the general
> public outlook on comic books is that they're made for children and
> tend to clump them with cartoons and toys.
(snip)
Daredevil. Very human character with many faults, and not-so-super
powers. I still think he would translate well to the screen, even as a
more serious "comic hero" film. There are so many (to many) fantastic
elements to other comic characters, Hulk, Flash, The Shadow, Supes &
Spidey that the film renditions must focus on in order to score a $$$$
hit.
Daredevil could be a superhero film that is not necessarily about a
superhuman.
I don't know, just my thoughts.
--Ranman
facehugger
Colin Ryono
How about Tom Everett Scott (he starred in "That Thing You Do" as the
drummer Guy)? Sorta nerdy looking, sense of humor, mischevous look on
his face. Works for me.
--
____________________________________________________________________________
Colin L. Ryono | If there is a witness to my little life
Lewis & Clark College | To my tiny throes and struggles
Portland, Oregon | He sees a fool;
www.lclark.edu/~ryono | And it is not fine for gods to menace fools.
| -Stephen Crane
Colin Ryono
WIZARD magazine said John Cusack, counting Charlie Sheen (ee-yuck!) as
not being nerdy enough for a Peter Parker.
Lee Banyard
Randal Morris (randal...@utmb.edu) wrote:
: Daredevil. Very human character with many faults, and not-so-super
: powers. I still think he would translate well to the screen, even as a
: more serious "comic hero" film. There are so many (to many) fantastic
: elements to other comic characters, Hulk, Flash, The Shadow, Supes &
: Spidey that the film renditions must focus on in order to score a $$$$
: hit.
: Daredevil could be a superhero film that is not necessarily about a
: superhuman.
I would love to see the Punisher done _properly_, ignoring the crappy
Dolph Lundgren effort and being more faithful to the comic. The Punisher
is more of an anti-hero, and has no special powers, but uses some cool tech
and has the right attitude. I'm not talking about the ridiculous early
appearances of the Punisher in the Spidey comics, by the way - I mean
his own, darker stuff like Punisher War Journal, etc.
found
{snip}
> Daredevil. Very human character with many faults, and not-so-super
> powers. I still think he would translate well to the screen, even as a
> more serious "comic hero" film. There are so many (to many) fantastic
> elements to other comic characters, Hulk, Flash, The Shadow, Supes &
> Spidey that the film renditions must focus on in order to score a $$$$
> hit.
> Daredevil could be a superhero film that is not necessarily about a
> superhuman.
and has "super-human" strength & can be invisible, or a terminator whose
body is made of mercury and can reshape his body, or that Tom Cruise could
actually be nominated for an Oscar, why cant we have a believable super
hero with fantastic powers? It doesn't matter WHO PLAYS Spiderman, or any
other hero, the film MUST TAKE THE CHARACTER SERIOUSLY! Films like the
Terminator were successful because the characters were BELIEVABLE! I think
it's possible to have a great Hulk, or X-Men film by delving into the
characters just like Stan Lee did when he first intro'd Spidey. What is it
like to have these powers? Is it a curse or blessing?
When I was many moons younger and read these comics, they were believable
because they asked these ?'s. When will Hollywood get it right?
Francis Russell
ad...@ugcs.caltech.edu (Adam Neil Villani) wrote:
As far as movies go, I think a much better Spider-Man director would be
somebody like John Sayles. Yes, the guy who made Matewan and Lone Star.
A good Spider-Man director would need to be good with characters, action,
and not have an overbearing style. OK, Sayles hasn't done much action.
____________________________________________________
Excellent commentary!! Sayles did the excellent ALLIGATOR. Although not
necessarily an action pic, it is certainly one of the better giant creature
flicks. And yes, it was good because of the fact that Sayles knew how to put
some humanity into an otherwise mundane plotline. Sayles should do
SPIDERMAN!!! I wish I would of thought of that.
Merrick Baldelli
On Tue, 25 Mar 1997 01:25:01 -0800, d...@microweb.com (facehugger) wrote:
>Johnny Depp. It's over, folks. Johnny Depp.
Ugh... Where's the Pepto... :\
Michael Brooke
Francis Russell (the_c...@earthlink.net) wrote:
: ad...@ugcs.caltech.edu (Adam Neil Villani) wrote:
: As far as movies go, I think a much better Spider-Man director would be
: somebody like John Sayles. Yes, the guy who made Matewan and Lone Star.
: A good Spider-Man director would need to be good with characters, action,
: and not have an overbearing style. OK, Sayles hasn't done much action.
: ____________________________________________________
: Excellent commentary!! Sayles did the excellent ALLIGATOR.
"Did" in this case meaning "wrote". Lewis Teague directed
'Alligator'. And I don't get the slightest sense from the films that
Sayles *has* directed that he'd be the tiniest bit interested in doing
something like 'Spiderman'.
: Although not
: necessarily an action pic, it is certainly one of the better giant creature
: flicks. And yes, it was good because of the fact that Sayles knew how to put
: some humanity into an otherwise mundane plotline. Sayles should do
: SPIDERMAN!!! I wish I would of thought of that.
Well, for all we know, Sayles may have written parts of 'Spiderman'
already - he's earned a substantial income on the side as an
uncredited script doctor over the last decade or so...
Michael
Vincent G. Macek
<<I think it's possible to have a great Hulk, or X-Men film by delving
into the characters just like Stan Lee did when he first intro'd
Spidey. What is it like to have these powers? Is it a curse or
blessing?>>
I'm hardly the last word on this stuff, but I liked the TV HULK w/
Bill Bixby...he had the cursed thing down pretty good.
VMacek
Merrick Baldelli
On 25 Mar 1997 23:54:59 GMT, teak...@ix.netcom.com(Terrence J. Brady)
wrote:
>The Incredible Hulk, Capt. America, the TV Spider-Man series, the
>Fantastic Four movie (what happened there??)
You forgot to mention "The Punisher." ;)
>I'm afraid that any Spider-Man film will look flimsy, unbelievable,
>and not taken very seriously.
Nah, you're probably just trying to beat on the thought
mercilessly. Seems to me that they're going to do the same thing with
SpiderMan as they did with Superman and Batman. It'll catch some of the
essence, but will miss out in many places. So be prepared to see your
interpretation being a lot loftier than what's portrayed.
>I do hope Cameron proves me wrong.
He'll do what he can... But seeing that you look at Spidey a lot
differently than anyone else, I'm afraid it'll probably not make your
mark...
Merrick Baldelli
On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 07:30:56 +0000, Jef Sewell <j...@onramp.net> wrote:
>I hope he is a better find that Edward Furlong. No offense to Cameron,
>whom I revere, but I think much too much was made of Edward Furlong as
>'a complete unknown' when he was plucked from some mall for T2.
Edward Furlong... Now there's a good thought. Although, I hope he
lost that punk kid attitude since T2.. Peter Parker never struck me as
being punkish at all.. More like some goody-two-shoes.
George
Adam Neil Villani wrote:
>
> A good Spider-Man director would need to be good with characters, action,
> and not have an overbearing style.
> be wild...
The guy did Sid & Nancy... he deserve to get shot (J. Lydon 1986)
As for the description of the director, I think your qualities
fit Cameron on all counts ! -)
> But a Cameron Spider-Man movie would be marginal with the characterization
> good on the action, but everything would pound into you in blue-tinted
> Cameronness. The movie would have no charm whatsoever, which is something
> Spiderman needs. It would be like reading the Todd McFarlane Spiderman.
>
Nope, I think all Cameron movies shines because of the characters,
not only the action.
Thing his, the action is so impressive people tend to only retain
this from his movies.
Spidey is Cameron's dream, let him do it, please !
Best
G
Merrick Baldelli
d...@microweb.com (facehugger) wrote:
Ugh... And just to throw more confusion into this, I'll put my
vote on DiCaprio...
J and C Wilson
I don't think Jeff was saying that Edward Furlong should play Spider Man
I think he was saying Furlong could not act his way into puberty, and I
would agree with him. Any who do not agree just look at the "time out,
time out" scene on the motorcycle.
Jim
Jef Sewell
Thank you Jim for pointing out this. I hate it when I'm misread in
Usenet (which happens to me all the time)
Jim is right, I was simply saying that I hope we can expect the 'next
Cameron discovery' to be a higher caliber performer than Furlong. I
think Cameron is one of the greats, a really terrific filmmaker, so I
wouldn't want to give anyone the wrong impression...
And I agree that the 'time out' scene is a good example of the problem.
(also the ' No fate but what we make for ourselves!' delivery made yours
truly wince like Larry King had just broken "Duke Zebert's Motza Ball
Soup" wind)
Lyle & Kate
I think Henry Rollins or Keith Morris
Merrick Baldelli <merr...@america.net> wrote in article
<3349487d...@peach.america.net>...
Pissboy
Matthew Modine - he looks like Peter parker
facehugger
In article <333345...@teleport.com>, J and C Wilson
<wils...@teleport.com> wrote:
> What no way Carey would suck as Spiderman, he couldn't even get the
> Riddler right.
Johnny Depp.
J and C Wilson
Jim
Robert John Guttke
Whomever they pick, ithad beetter be someone who looks good in a skin
tight suit! Otherwise, grim......
stephen prior
In article <333BA1...@earthlink.net>,
Francis Russell <the_c...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>ad...@ugcs.caltech.edu (Adam Neil Villani) wrote:
>
>As far as movies go, I think a much better Spider-Man director would be
>somebody like John Sayles. Yes, the guy who made Matewan and Lone Star.
>____________________________________________________
>
>flicks. And yes, it was good because of the fact that Sayles knew how to put
>some humanity into an otherwise mundane plotline. Sayles should do
>SPIDERMAN!!! I wish I would of thought of that.
>
>the_c...@earthlink.net
>I heard many years ago that they were thinking of doing a Spiderman film
following the success of Batman. And that bloke who played Hicks in Aliens
was going to be Spidey. Anyone hear that?
Blaine R. Thompson
The Spider-man movie has been in the works since before Batman was
made. There has been a lot of legal crap involved. At one time, Texas
chainsaw Massacre director, Tobe Hooper, was to direct it...
Jonathan Hertzberg
>>ad...@ugcs.caltech.edu (Adam Neil Villani) wrote:
>>Excellent commentary!! Sayles did the excellent ALLIGATOR. Although not
>>necessarily an action pic, it is certainly one of the better giant creature
Actually Sayles only wrote ALLIGATOR; Lewis Teague directed. But, Sayles
did also write other genre favorites like THE HOWLING, LADY IN RED,
PIRANHA, BATTLE BEYOND THE STARS. Of course, those all came at the height
of a certain period and Sayles was writing a lot of scripts to get
financing for his own films (obviously quite different from the
aforementioned ones). I agree Sayles could (and most probably would) add
immensely to the script and film potential. All of those movies, are
probably most distinguished by the trademark, witty flourishes of Sayles
in terms of character, details. That conversation between Robert Forster
and the pet shop owner at the beginning of ALLIGATOR quickly comes to
mind. The only hitch here is that Sayles did those scripts a long time
ago, strictly to make money for HIS films which of course, are something
altogether different. Don't know if he'd be into stepping into that genre,
and also Hollywood and studiodom--remember his terrible experience on
BABY, IT'S YOU. But, whoever made that call it was a good one--and I
would actually be really excited about this movie. That would be quite a
coup to get John Sayles(=immediate respectability & breathes new life into
genre and pic).
Jon
Bill Templeton
My vote for the film Spidey would have to go to the guy who does his voice for
the SPIDER-MAN cartoon on Fox. You can check him out on-screen as Greg in the
Brady Bunch movies... he looks _exactly_ like Peter Parker, I think. And that
voice!
Best,
Bill
Andy
Hell yes! His name is Christopher Barnes. Even Stan Lee has said he'd
be his #1 choice to play Spider-Man.
Andy
Josh Stevens
I think CG technology will be able to handle that part of it.
____________________________________________________________________
/ \
| Josh Stevens Soul Collector on Quake |
| http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~jstev/index.shtml |
\____________________________________________________________________/
Faculty of Education
I think James Earl Jones would make a fantastic spirder man! he is a 1st class
stunt man don't ya know? he used to do all the old stunts in the first star
trek series.