Cult Labs - Up and Coming Films

Cult Labs (https://www.cult-labs.com/forums/)

- General Film Discussions (https://www.cult-labs.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=563)

- - Up and Coming Films (https://www.cult-labs.com/forums/general-film-discussions/7372-up-coming-films.html)

I always find the third film - Urban Harvest - the most entertaining.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs (Post 673876)

I always find the third film - Urban Harvest - the most entertaining.

Same , really don't see how anyone can judge a film without even a trailer granted most remakes are poor but been more than a few that are just as good or surpassed the original , it's as bad as people want stuff canceled just because they don't like it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trebor8273 (Post 673877)

Originally was decent for its time, looking back it now it’s more nostalgia than if it’s any good, I only watched the first 4, so can’t comment after that, the tv remake 2009 was absolutely shocking and abysmal, it might be good who knows, ppl complain about flogging a dead horse (with any film because some has 9+ to there name) and that’s part of the problem, especially when ppl complain the last 3 or 4 weren't good, there roughly 12 now give or take.

I actually think the first film is quietly atmospheric. I don't mind it at all. Prefer it to the second one.

I also like the seventh film Revelation which is basically an urban ghost story mixed into the corn mythos. Co-starring Michael Ironside.

Most people think it's shite but i'd say it was my third favourite. Four, five and six are a waste of time.

Seen this several times now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Susan Foreman (Post 567653)

It would appear that Joss Whedon has pulled out of the 'Batgirl' film claiming he 'didn't have a story!'

'The Batgirl film I'd like to see' - BBC News

There now isn't a Batgirl film. The reasons given for completely pulling the movie, which has already cost over $60 million, vary from negative audience response at the test screenings to restructuring within Warner Bros.

I have read a couple of articles and think it's much more to do with the studio than the quality of the film.

From a long-ish at Deadline:

Quote:

"There has been much speculation on why Batgirl was canceled, having to do with it being a bad movie. Sources said that the film tested once, and the result wasn’t that bad, considering that the cut had temporary visual effects which tend to temper audience enthusiasm in the scores. Already, the studio is discussing making different deals with the directors and Miss Bala star Grace, because this was not a reflection on their talent as much as the radical strategy shift. It was a hard decision for all and highly unusual to simply scrap a film that cost between $60 million and $70 million, made by the hot directors who helmed Black and the Disney+ series Ms. Marvel under Kevin Feige as well as the pre-pandemic $426M-plus grossing hit Bad Boys for Life .

Much of the decision came down to the following: Warner Bros Discovery boss David Zaslav rejecting of Kilar’s strategy to lean heavily into building streaming subscriptions for HBO Max. That was punctuated by his Project Popcorn initiative that put the entire 2021 theatrical slate — including Dune, Godzilla Vs Kong, King Richard, Matrix 4 — day and date in theaters and on HBO Max when theater attendance was sparse during the pandemic. Even after he was shown the door, Kilar continued to call the strategy a win. Many did not agree, particularly after Top Gun: Maverick waited and grossed north of $1.3 billion. It’s a decidedly different world from when Kilar made the move. Wall Street is no longer impressed by subscriber numbers as much as profits, as seen by the precipitous decline of Netflix’s stock value."

https://deadline.com/2022/08/batgirl...gy-1235084032/

I find it very difficult to believe that the creative team behind Ms. Marvel – probably the best MCU miniseries – made a film so dreadful and "irredeemable" that the studio couldn't release it for paying audiences.

It's very strange isn't it. Costing $70m according to the BBC and already in the can.

You'd think it would at least get a streaming or physical release to try and make some money back. Same goes for the Scooby Doo film they've also canceled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs (Post 674240)

It is weird, but I saw some speculation (I forget where) that Warner may want to introduce the characters in Batgirl in separate films before they are in one movie, possibly in the same way that Marvel introduced/established Iron Man, Captain America, and The Incredible Hulk before putting them in the same film.

However, because this only has Batman/Bruce Wayne, Batgirl/Barbara Gordon, James Gordon, and Ted Carlson/Firefly as the main characters, it's difficult to think how this approach would work.

I thought the whole point of this lineup was to have James Gordon's daughter working with Batman against an antagonist, in this case Firefly. You couldn't really have a coherent narrative without any of these four characters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs (Post 674280)

Plus i'm fairly sure Keaton's Batman has already been introduced. :lol:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs (Post 674310)

Plus i'm fairly sure Keaton's Batman has already been introduced. :lol:

That's very true – his character wouldn't need much (if any) introduction. Also, with Christian Bale's Dark Knight, Keaton's 'Caped Crusader' is one of the best cinematic representations of Batman.

Additionally, I find it hard to believe that a film starring Michael Keaton, J.K. Simmons, and Brendan Fraser, and made by the people behind Ms Marvel, could be so bad it's "irredeemable".