View Single Post
Old 01-29-2013, 09:34 AM   #35
Marvin
Side-Kick
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 16,900
Default Re: All Things Superman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - P

Quote:
Originally Posted by herolee10 View Post
Another note is that it seems we've finally gotten a confirmation supposedly on what the budget for the film is; which seems to be 225 million according to Empire.

Color me surprised since after the disappointment in SR, which only cost about 204 million to make, I would have assumed that Warner Bros. would be somewhat hesitant to dish out just as much, or even more money onto the character at this stage.
Wasn't that the cost of Green Lantern?

The first Transformers as well as Iron Man were both 140 and they looked great for their time(and ours). Still I'm glad Zack is getting the money he needs so that the effects won't be a problem.

I have a feeling TDKR cost about this much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallville13 View Post
Wasn't the Superbowl the first footage of Captain America though? Same for TF3 maybe?
This is true, both films really shook the audience on this element and a few others. With TF it actually looked different than it used to as well. Due in part to a certain Director of Photography

Still I remember the twitter polls were a ablaze around these parts.

Any word of weather WB will give Pacific Rim a spot?
(They ILM to tighten up that cgi asap(which can only be so good with constant night shots)).

Quote:
Originally Posted by herolee10 View Post
Regarding the Superbowl TV Spot, I'm surprised that considering that we just got a article from Variety saying on how Warner bros is awaiting to see on how well MOS does before moving towards a JLA movie, that Warner Bros. wouldn't then be going all out with their marketing strategy, meaning Super Bowl TV Spot and more.

This film definitely needs to make AT LEAST 500 million to be considered financially successfully.
That is kinda strange isn't it. It's one thing to have a philosophy that works for most of their films. But when you start dealing with these sort of stakes and expectations, one would think you would put it all out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by herolee10 View Post
Tis true; I mean look at how much "Thor 1" suffered for having just a 175 million dollar budget. That film, considering the material and set of characters that they were dealing with, SHOULD have been bigger in scale, but it wasn't because they didn't have the budget for it, hence the obvious looking set pieces at times regarding the Frost Giant Planets and the less than exciting New Mexico sequence with some shoddy visual effects at times.
They had more than enough budget, it's just between that director and the vision of the people running marvel at the time, and that director, it was just conceived to be small.

Rooms ten times smaller have looked to have more scale under Ridley scotts vision when compared to that CW on steroids look Brannagh and the Marvel universe shot for Thor. You've gotta get your lighting on point and stop with plastic production.
Alan Taylor seems to have this problem solved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fanboiii View Post
I didn't like how the constructs were done in GL, but the fight action was really well done. Martin Campbell just had no business doing CGI and sci fi.
Everytime I see Tron Legacy, from the constructs(mid construction) to the suits(I grew up during the Rayner era), to the world(Oa isn't just some star wars planet)...what a shame.

__________________
Stephen Lang for Cable, the most obvious casting in cbm history.
Marvin is offline