Pacific Rim

[FoxHound]

Originally Posted by TBEagle

Now you're just being ridiculous. When is the last time hollywood/a major studio released a giant robot vs monster movie?
You're acting like there hasn't been literally hundreds of other ****ing movies that has been released in the last 7 years.
Also an fyi a transformers movie has never been a top grossing movie of any year, the top grossing movies didn't have robots or giant monster essentially destroying your stupid argument.

For this example, it's giant monsters and robots. But if you look at most blockbusters, they almost always contain some over-the-top, often stupid, CGI battle elements to carry their story. I've made a list:

Battleship: CGI battle with giant, incompetent alien spaceship at sea with retired U.S.S. Missouri.
Transformers: CGI battles between giant English-speaking robots inside LA and Chicago.
John Carter: CGI battle aboard a giant walking crab city.
Avengers: CGI battle with huge steel serpents over NY City.
POTC: CGI battle with giant octopus and skeletons/living dead
Clash of The Titans: CGI battle with 300-foot kraken and other big bugs
Matrix: CGI battle with 10 million Agent Smith clones
Pacific Rim: CGI battles between tower-sized monsters and giant robots.

These ludicrous over-the-top battle elements are necessary for these films to go into production. Almost all summer blockbusters have it in common.

My script, on the other hand, is devoid of these wacky elements. Which prompted a paid reader to once ask: "Why are there no robotic war machines at this point in the future?"

[FoxHound]

Originally Posted by Terrance Mulloy

lol, epic trolling, dude. Nice try.

First off, your logic is flawed - even if you are being 100% serious. I really hope you're not because it's kinda retarded.

Wow, what class. Queensland native?

Originally Posted by Terrance Mulloy

So your argument is that you need giant robots and monsters in order to get green lit? That doesn't even make sense. SAFEHOUSE was a spec. It had no attachments when it first went out. None. It was a cold spec. Sold for buckets of cash, got an A-!lister attached and got made. SNOW WHITE & THE HUNTSMAN was a spec. Sold for $3 million. Got a guaranteed production deal from Universal as well. That hardly ever happens.

My point is - this sold because its a great script, and idea is cool as fvck and screams "big summer movie." I really find it hard to believe that some of you can't understand that.

My argument is that some preposterous over-the-top element is usually needed to get a summer blockbuster greenlit. Snow White had a telelporting magic queen, trolls, dwarfs, fairies, Kristen Stewart showing leadership etc.

Sadly, my script lacks these elements.

[Terrance Mulloy]

Originally Posted by FoxHound

Wow, what class. Queensland.

Actually I'm from Sydney. Again, nice try.

I'm sorry, but your argument still makes no sense. So you're saying that if all tentpole movies need CGI spectacle to get green lit by a studio, and yours doesn't have that, then you won't get a green light?

I can't believe I'm even arguing about this.

[Richmond Weems]

I have no problem saying I don't want to see this movie. There was nothing in the trailer that compels me to see this movie. But that's me.

If others want to see it, I don't care. I also don't think it's the death throes of a dying industry. People want to see spectacle so more power to 'em for making this flick.

It just doesn't interest me, and the only reason I'm even saying this is because I resent the fact that writers on here are suggesting other writers support something the writer may not believe in.

I, personally, don't have an obligation to see this movie unless it interests me.

HH

[TBEagle]

Originally Posted by FoxHound

.

My script, on the other hand, is devoid of these wacky elements. Which prompted a paid reader to once ask: "Why are there no robotic war machines at this point in the future?"

I see what this is now, someone said your script sucked and made a off hand comment. Scripts readers are subjective but maybe just maybe your script wasn't good enough to them to hold their attention.
You're logic is gravely flawed and the thousands of movie released since transformers shows how stupid this argument is.

[karsten]

The whole thing reminds me very much of one of my favourite Saturday-morning cartoon shows from childhood: The Inhumanoids, except in that case, the monsters came from deep within the earth, not deep within the sea.

The Pacific Rim trailer shows a ship carrying a giant skeletal monster carcase, then shows an unleashed monster attacking a bridge.

The first episode of The Inhumanoids showed a giant skeletal monster carcase being carted out, and then showed... an unleashed monster attacking a bridge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVspxocvr4k

In that series, just like in this film, humans garbed up in tech suits to battle the monsters -- the biggest difference being that their suits were man-size.

(Haven't read the script. Just going by the trailer.)

[finalact4]

Not sure anyone mentioned this, but Pacific Rim 2 is already in the works. Beacham to scribe.

Nothing wrong with a big summer blockbuster. Nothing wrong with writing them either.

I'll be going to this one and the sequel.
FA4

[Chief]

Movie might be good but the trailer wasn't. Reminded me of Battleship.

[Steven L.]

I wonder if this is going to slam the brakes on the HAWKEN adaptation.

[Chief]

Hmm, I changed my mind, I'm on Emily's side, we should support this film.

If it's a success, studios might take more risks with scripts, instead of chasing contained mini budget scripts.

If it flops...go back to that 3 characters one location script you were working on.