Well, it's been almost a year since I started posting my thoughts and feelings on this blog. In truth, when I first started jotting down these useless little nuggets, I figured David Foster and I would be finishing development on the screenplay for the remake of Silent Night, Deadly Night and heading towards pre-production. Sadly, it seems that a deal cannot be reached between the original film's rightsholder(s) and the studio who wants to remake it. So, what am I doing to try and combat this terrible situation? To be honest, there's not much that I can do. Perhaps we can remake another Christmas horror film or, since the "takes" we developed were completely original and have little resemblence to the original Silent Night, Deadly Night, we might be able to do an original film. Wow! Something that's no a remake! Is it possible? The material that was developed by the various writers is really fun and exciting. I hate for it to got to waste just because the lawyers weren't able to reach an agreement. For those of us who don't have residuals from our last ten films to live on, this revelation should be very depressing. And, in fact, it is. But there is a glimmer of hope on the horizon -- and it comes in the form of a living robot named Johnny Five.
As I am sure most of you know, David and I have been working with the original writers, Brent Maddock and Steve Wilson, on a new and improves version of the original Short Circuit and it seems we've finally found a buyer. Dimension Films. Yes, I know... they're primarily known for horror movies. But, they are also responsible for the very successful Spy Kids franchise and have been looking for a new family franchise to develop. It seems that Short Circuit is it. While no director has been attached, the original writers are on board and have come up with a new take that really reimagines the whole story. But, don't worry... we haven't thrown the baby out with the bath water. It's still the same story you remember and love, just updated and reinvented for a modern audience who (now that 20+ years have passed since the Badham original) may not known Johnny Five. Trust me, it's gonna' be a helluva lot of fun.
So,while I wait for these two studio deals to work themselves out, I shall continue developing our other projects in hopes of having a very, very, very good 2008. After all these years of slaving my fingers to the bone, God knows I deserve it.
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Thursday, June 21, 2007
IS HOLLYWOOD HORROR OVER?
Sadly, it's a fact. The last few horror movies given a wide release (2000 or more screens) from Hollywood have not done well at the box office. 
Films like "Hostel Part II" and "Vacancy" are part of a long list of genre movies that have failed to captivate audiences and generate big numbers at the box office. So, does that mean horror films are dead? Of course not! There is, and always has been, an audience for these type of films and that will never change. However, this particular genre seems to have a cyclical rotation of hot and cold. For a while, people love it. Then, then grow tired of it. For example: In the late 1970's, a maverick young fiilmmaker named John Carpenter directed a little movie you might have heard of called "Halloween." It was a huge, huge hit. Spawned decades of sequels and imitations. Single-handedly ushered in the era of the "slasher film." But, by the end of the 1980's, people had lost interest in going to see killers in hockey masks stalking naked coeds. It seemed the genre had run its course and there was nothing left to do but watch it die. And, it did... almost. 
In 1996, another maverick horror filmmaker named Wes Craven directed a film that was a total reinvention of the horror genre. It was called "Scream." Both conceptually and stylistically different than the slasher films that had been so popular in the previous decade, yet a film that both admired and satired them. A brilliant idea became a huge hit. A huge hit became a phenomenon. And, as happened a decade before, Hollywood jumped on the horror bandwagon and began churning out movie after movie, all based on the same thematic elements that made "Scream" such a hit. Films like "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and "Urban Legend" were very successful at the box office but, at the conceptual level, were little more than "Scream" rip-offs. Eventually, by the end of the 1990's, the horror audience had grown tired of the "whodunit" and began turning their backs on the satirical form of horror that the "Scream" franchise had ushered in. Once again, it seemed horror was dead. 
Then, a few years later, a young filmmaker named James Wan directed a small, but expertly crafted horror film called "Saw." Made for little more than $1 million dollars, the film was a smashing success and the horror genre was once again redefined. Films like "House of 1000 Corpses" and "Hostel" took the vicious, no-holds-barred approach of "Saw" to new levels of graphic horror while the sequels to "Saw" tried to remain true to the original film's sensibilities. Once again, a new style of film was ushered in. Once again, it was beaten to death by sequels and rip-offs and sequels to rip-offs. And once more, near the end of the decade, the horror genre seems to have gone into hibernation. So, here's the million dollar question: Is horror dead?
Of course not. In the not too distant future, someone will create a film that will recapture the fickle horror audience's imagination. My guess is that it will be come kind of horror/comedy hybird similar in tone to Sam Raimi's "Evil Dead" saga. Or, perhaps, it will be a resurgance of giant bug movies, the kind that were popular back in the late 50's and early 60's. Or, more than likely, it will be some form of horror that no one has yet thought of. But, the reality is that producers in Hollywood (myself included) need to start thinking out of the box and come up with ideas/concepts/scripts that are fresh and unique. Or, we'll just wait for some young innovative filmmaker to make a brilliant horror movie that captures the publics attention and then we'll steal the concept and rip it off over and over again. Either way, horror shall return.
Films like "Hostel Part II" and "Vacancy" are part of a long list of genre movies that have failed to captivate audiences and generate big numbers at the box office. So, does that mean horror films are dead? Of course not! There is, and always has been, an audience for these type of films and that will never change. However, this particular genre seems to have a cyclical rotation of hot and cold. For a while, people love it. Then, then grow tired of it. For example: In the late 1970's, a maverick young fiilmmaker named John Carpenter directed a little movie you might have heard of called "Halloween." It was a huge, huge hit. Spawned decades of sequels and imitations. Single-handedly ushered in the era of the "slasher film." But, by the end of the 1980's, people had lost interest in going to see killers in hockey masks stalking naked coeds. It seemed the genre had run its course and there was nothing left to do but watch it die. And, it did... almost. 
In 1996, another maverick horror filmmaker named Wes Craven directed a film that was a total reinvention of the horror genre. It was called "Scream." Both conceptually and stylistically different than the slasher films that had been so popular in the previous decade, yet a film that both admired and satired them. A brilliant idea became a huge hit. A huge hit became a phenomenon. And, as happened a decade before, Hollywood jumped on the horror bandwagon and began churning out movie after movie, all based on the same thematic elements that made "Scream" such a hit. Films like "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and "Urban Legend" were very successful at the box office but, at the conceptual level, were little more than "Scream" rip-offs. Eventually, by the end of the 1990's, the horror audience had grown tired of the "whodunit" and began turning their backs on the satirical form of horror that the "Scream" franchise had ushered in. Once again, it seemed horror was dead. 
Then, a few years later, a young filmmaker named James Wan directed a small, but expertly crafted horror film called "Saw." Made for little more than $1 million dollars, the film was a smashing success and the horror genre was once again redefined. Films like "House of 1000 Corpses" and "Hostel" took the vicious, no-holds-barred approach of "Saw" to new levels of graphic horror while the sequels to "Saw" tried to remain true to the original film's sensibilities. Once again, a new style of film was ushered in. Once again, it was beaten to death by sequels and rip-offs and sequels to rip-offs. And once more, near the end of the decade, the horror genre seems to have gone into hibernation. So, here's the million dollar question: Is horror dead?Of course not. In the not too distant future, someone will create a film that will recapture the fickle horror audience's imagination. My guess is that it will be come kind of horror/comedy hybird similar in tone to Sam Raimi's "Evil Dead" saga. Or, perhaps, it will be a resurgance of giant bug movies, the kind that were popular back in the late 50's and early 60's. Or, more than likely, it will be some form of horror that no one has yet thought of. But, the reality is that producers in Hollywood (myself included) need to start thinking out of the box and come up with ideas/concepts/scripts that are fresh and unique. Or, we'll just wait for some young innovative filmmaker to make a brilliant horror movie that captures the publics attention and then we'll steal the concept and rip it off over and over again. Either way, horror shall return.
Friday, April 06, 2007
PORN COULD BE THE KEY IN THE NEXT-GENERATION DVD WAR
I was reading the news online and came across this particular article, which I found fascinating. Back in the 1970's the VHS videotape format (developed by JVC) and the 
Betamax video format (developed by Sony) were at war with each other and, as we all know, VHS became the victor. Why? In part because VHS embraced the Adult Video market and Betamax shunned it. Love it or hate it, porno movies are here to stay and generate $25 billion dollars worth of revenue annualy. So, thirty years later, the home video market is in the EXACT same position... and, again, it's Sony's superior format (there is no question that Blu-Ray is technically superior to HD-DVD just at Betamax wastechnically superior to VHS) that is shunning the adult industry. All I can say is this: Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Give the article a read and judge for yourself.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - In the battle over next generation DVDs, pornography could prove to be the XXX factor that helps
determine a winner. Thirty years ago, VHS toppled Betamax in part because of the adult film industry, and now some see blue movies playing a key role again as backers of HD-DVD and Blu-ray maneuver to make their formats the standard. The stakes are high. As prices of high-definition televisions and DVD players fall, backers of the rival -- and incompatible -- formats are looking to tap a home and rental DVD market approaching $25 billion.
Yet so far, neither next-generation format has been able to land a knock-out blow.
James McQuivey, a principal analyst at technology research firm Forrester, said in the VHS-versus-Betamax war, porn provided a significant boost for the winning format. He also noted the adult entertainment industry has often paved the way with new uses of technology -- such as streaming video on the Internet -- and said porn could help tip the scales in the current DVD format battle. "If the porn industry wanted to break the logjam of HD-DVD and Blu-ray, it could," McQuivey said. "If they said 'We are going to go with HD-DVD' you would see a few million homes immediately go out and buy HD-DVD players. They have that power."
It is a potential weapon that one side, at least, has ignored. Instead, Blu-ray backer Sony Corp.(6758.T) blocked manufacturers from producing porn DVDs in that format -- a move that some say has pushed adult film studios into the camp of HD-DVD camp led by Toshiba Corp. (6502.T) Steven Hirsch, founder of Vivid Entertainment Group, said Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS - news) also refuses to use DVD makers -- known as replicators -- that press porn titles. This makes finding a Blu-ray replicator willing to alienate Sony and Disney almost impossible for porn studios because the format requires costly new equipment and there are only a handful of replicators able to make such DVDs.
That isn't a problem for HD-DVD because that technology is based on previous-generation standards, which makes it far
simpler and cheaper for companies to hire replicators to press their DVDs. Hirsch said that Vivid -- home to adult film stars such as Jenna Jameson, Tera Patrick and Briana Banks -- found a willing manufacturer to press "Debbie Does Dallas ... Again," which the company plans to issue in April. But the cost and difficulty of doing so for the sequel to the 1978 adult film classic "Debbie Does Dallas" clouds whether more adult films in Blu-ray will follow, said Hirsch, who declined to provide details on who is pressing the movie. "We have been able to find a replication facility to do our title but it wasn't easy and it has deterred us for the most part from releasing titles on Blu-ray," Hirsch said. "That can be potentially problematic for Blu-ray."
Studios like Vivid say they have been shooting films in high-definition for years to build up a library, but so far the number of titles is only a trickle as the industry weighs the advantages of each format. HD-DVD machines are cheaper but Blu-ray has backing of a majority of the mainstream studios and an advantage in that the format is compatible with the PlayStation 3, the latest version of Sony's popular series of video game consoles. The founder of adult studio Digital Playground -- whose films include "Island Fever 3" and "Pirates" -- believes Blu-ray backers are erring in not embracing porn as they fight over billions of dollars in royalties. "The reason they should want to work with us is that they are in a war with HD-DVD and in a war you would want as many people in your corner," said Joone, the Digital Playground founder who goes by one name. Joone said in an ideal world Digital Playground would offer films in both formats. Instead, he sees Sony and other Blu-ray backers pushing the adult entertainment industry toward HD-DVD, whose supporters he said have welcomed porn producers. "In general we need to have one format because it cuts down the confusion in the marketplace for the consumer," Joone said. "HD-DVD has helped us tremendously to get titles out."
Betamax video format (developed by Sony) were at war with each other and, as we all know, VHS became the victor. Why? In part because VHS embraced the Adult Video market and Betamax shunned it. Love it or hate it, porno movies are here to stay and generate $25 billion dollars worth of revenue annualy. So, thirty years later, the home video market is in the EXACT same position... and, again, it's Sony's superior format (there is no question that Blu-Ray is technically superior to HD-DVD just at Betamax wastechnically superior to VHS) that is shunning the adult industry. All I can say is this: Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.Give the article a read and judge for yourself.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - In the battle over next generation DVDs, pornography could prove to be the XXX factor that helps
determine a winner. Thirty years ago, VHS toppled Betamax in part because of the adult film industry, and now some see blue movies playing a key role again as backers of HD-DVD and Blu-ray maneuver to make their formats the standard. The stakes are high. As prices of high-definition televisions and DVD players fall, backers of the rival -- and incompatible -- formats are looking to tap a home and rental DVD market approaching $25 billion.Yet so far, neither next-generation format has been able to land a knock-out blow.
James McQuivey, a principal analyst at technology research firm Forrester, said in the VHS-versus-Betamax war, porn provided a significant boost for the winning format. He also noted the adult entertainment industry has often paved the way with new uses of technology -- such as streaming video on the Internet -- and said porn could help tip the scales in the current DVD format battle. "If the porn industry wanted to break the logjam of HD-DVD and Blu-ray, it could," McQuivey said. "If they said 'We are going to go with HD-DVD' you would see a few million homes immediately go out and buy HD-DVD players. They have that power."
It is a potential weapon that one side, at least, has ignored. Instead, Blu-ray backer Sony Corp.(6758.T) blocked manufacturers from producing porn DVDs in that format -- a move that some say has pushed adult film studios into the camp of HD-DVD camp led by Toshiba Corp. (6502.T) Steven Hirsch, founder of Vivid Entertainment Group, said Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS - news) also refuses to use DVD makers -- known as replicators -- that press porn titles. This makes finding a Blu-ray replicator willing to alienate Sony and Disney almost impossible for porn studios because the format requires costly new equipment and there are only a handful of replicators able to make such DVDs.
That isn't a problem for HD-DVD because that technology is based on previous-generation standards, which makes it far
simpler and cheaper for companies to hire replicators to press their DVDs. Hirsch said that Vivid -- home to adult film stars such as Jenna Jameson, Tera Patrick and Briana Banks -- found a willing manufacturer to press "Debbie Does Dallas ... Again," which the company plans to issue in April. But the cost and difficulty of doing so for the sequel to the 1978 adult film classic "Debbie Does Dallas" clouds whether more adult films in Blu-ray will follow, said Hirsch, who declined to provide details on who is pressing the movie. "We have been able to find a replication facility to do our title but it wasn't easy and it has deterred us for the most part from releasing titles on Blu-ray," Hirsch said. "That can be potentially problematic for Blu-ray."Studios like Vivid say they have been shooting films in high-definition for years to build up a library, but so far the number of titles is only a trickle as the industry weighs the advantages of each format. HD-DVD machines are cheaper but Blu-ray has backing of a majority of the mainstream studios and an advantage in that the format is compatible with the PlayStation 3, the latest version of Sony's popular series of video game consoles. The founder of adult studio Digital Playground -- whose films include "Island Fever 3" and "Pirates" -- believes Blu-ray backers are erring in not embracing porn as they fight over billions of dollars in royalties. "The reason they should want to work with us is that they are in a war with HD-DVD and in a war you would want as many people in your corner," said Joone, the Digital Playground founder who goes by one name. Joone said in an ideal world Digital Playground would offer films in both formats. Instead, he sees Sony and other Blu-ray backers pushing the adult entertainment industry toward HD-DVD, whose supporters he said have welcomed porn producers. "In general we need to have one format because it cuts down the confusion in the marketplace for the consumer," Joone said. "HD-DVD has helped us tremendously to get titles out."
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
WHAT'S GOING ON WITH SLAUGHTERHOUSE?
As you may or may not know, I've been developing a pretty over-the-top horror screenplay called "Slaughterhouse" with a first-time writer named Bruce Harrell. I won't go into detail about its content here, suffice to say that it's about a group of
high school kids who get sucked into a 1976 grindhouse horror movie. It's stylisitc, high-concept, and a helluva' lot of fun. So, guess what? People at the studios really seem to dig it.
New Line Cinema likes it. Rogue Pictures likes it. Paramount Pictures likes it. Dimension Films likes it. MTV likes it. New Regency likes it. Happy Madison likes it. In my opinion, that's a pretty go response to any script -- let alone one which was written by a first timer. Now, to be clear, these companies aren't bidding on the material yet. I have a "Champion Executive" at each of these studios/production companies and they are going to do their best to get traction on the project with the head of their company. It's a long process, but that's what Hollywood is all about.
So, what is it that will put this project over the top? In most cases, a director. When trying to set up a horror film, from a studio's standpoint, it's all about the filmmaker and their vision. There's a young South African director named Jason Xenopolous who loves the script and desperately wants to do it. The question is, "Do the studios want to be in business with him?" It's the same question with every director we take it to. Whether it's Lexi Alexnader or Victor Garcia or even the master of horror John Carpenter... each one of them means something different to each studio.
At any rate, things are moving along nicely. We have the script out to several directors, we'll see who all sparks to it. Then, we'll figure it out from there. Hurry up and wait... Hurry up and wait... The story of my life.
high school kids who get sucked into a 1976 grindhouse horror movie. It's stylisitc, high-concept, and a helluva' lot of fun. So, guess what? People at the studios really seem to dig it.New Line Cinema likes it. Rogue Pictures likes it. Paramount Pictures likes it. Dimension Films likes it. MTV likes it. New Regency likes it. Happy Madison likes it. In my opinion, that's a pretty go response to any script -- let alone one which was written by a first timer. Now, to be clear, these companies aren't bidding on the material yet. I have a "Champion Executive" at each of these studios/production companies and they are going to do their best to get traction on the project with the head of their company. It's a long process, but that's what Hollywood is all about.
So, what is it that will put this project over the top? In most cases, a director. When trying to set up a horror film, from a studio's standpoint, it's all about the filmmaker and their vision. There's a young South African director named Jason Xenopolous who loves the script and desperately wants to do it. The question is, "Do the studios want to be in business with him?" It's the same question with every director we take it to. Whether it's Lexi Alexnader or Victor Garcia or even the master of horror John Carpenter... each one of them means something different to each studio.
At any rate, things are moving along nicely. We have the script out to several directors, we'll see who all sparks to it. Then, we'll figure it out from there. Hurry up and wait... Hurry up and wait... The story of my life.
Monday, January 22, 2007
HD-DVD vs BLU-RAY
As I am sure many of you know, the next generation of DVD's are here and available at your local Circuit City, Best Buy and Good Guys. 
But, as has happened in the past, there are two competing formats and no clear indication which one will eventually win out. I've looked at (and now own) both formats and here are my thoughts:
In terms of technical specifications, the Blu-Ray disc is clearly superior. It holds more data and allows you to watch its content in full 1080p high-definition. Also, for those who love video games, the new Playstation 3 also doubles as a Blu-Ray player. Your other option is the HD-DVD format which allows you to watch content in 1080i high definition, a step down from the Blu-Ray player. For those of you with an Xbox 360, you can buy the HD-DVD upgrade for a mere $199.
So, now that I have own both formats, which one do I think will win? To be honest, I'm still not sure. They both look the same on my 60" Sony Flastscreen Wega. According to all of the literature I've read, Blu-Ray discs have the ability to evolve far beyond their current capabilities and store huge amounts of data. As an example, imagine the entire "Star Wars" saga on one disc. While HD-DVD has already almost maxed out its full storage capacity, one can't help but look at simplicity of its name: HD-DVD. It really says it all, doesn't it? Also, the stand-alone HD-DVD players are far cheaper than their Blu-Ray counterparts.
Right now, HD-DVD clearly has a head start. It has the name. It was the first format released. It's a cheap add-on for the Xbox 360 which seems to be outselling the Playstation 3. But, all things change. If Blu-Ray can quickly evolve and deliver storage/menus/capabilities that are visibly beyond HD-DVD, then I think the Blu-Ray forman will win supreme. If not, HD-DVD may take the crown.
But, as has happened in the past, there are two competing formats and no clear indication which one will eventually win out. I've looked at (and now own) both formats and here are my thoughts:In terms of technical specifications, the Blu-Ray disc is clearly superior. It holds more data and allows you to watch its content in full 1080p high-definition. Also, for those who love video games, the new Playstation 3 also doubles as a Blu-Ray player. Your other option is the HD-DVD format which allows you to watch content in 1080i high definition, a step down from the Blu-Ray player. For those of you with an Xbox 360, you can buy the HD-DVD upgrade for a mere $199.
So, now that I have own both formats, which one do I think will win? To be honest, I'm still not sure. They both look the same on my 60" Sony Flastscreen Wega. According to all of the literature I've read, Blu-Ray discs have the ability to evolve far beyond their current capabilities and store huge amounts of data. As an example, imagine the entire "Star Wars" saga on one disc. While HD-DVD has already almost maxed out its full storage capacity, one can't help but look at simplicity of its name: HD-DVD. It really says it all, doesn't it? Also, the stand-alone HD-DVD players are far cheaper than their Blu-Ray counterparts.
Right now, HD-DVD clearly has a head start. It has the name. It was the first format released. It's a cheap add-on for the Xbox 360 which seems to be outselling the Playstation 3. But, all things change. If Blu-Ray can quickly evolve and deliver storage/menus/capabilities that are visibly beyond HD-DVD, then I think the Blu-Ray forman will win supreme. If not, HD-DVD may take the crown.
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
GET OVER IT!
As many of you know, I am hard at work with David Foster trying to develop an interesting remake/reimagining of the 1984 slasher film SILENT NIGHT, DEADLY NIGHT. 
The original film was a no-holds-barred, repugnant horror flick, but the hook (and poster) were fabulous. As you may or may-not know, the original film sparked an outcry from conservative parents everywhere claiming "Hollywood had gone too far" which eventually resulted in Tri-Star Films, the movie's distributor, pulling it from theatres (after they made a few million in profit, of course.) The movie was sold to a home video company and became one of the most successful horror titles released on VHS -- so much so that four straight-to-video sequels were made. Clearly, there was an audience for the movie then, just as there will be an audience for the movie now.
So, while doing some research on the internet for our remake, I came across the website Deadline Hollywood Daily and an story written by Nikki Finke titled, "Weinsteins & MGM to release X-mas Crap." The article is about the upcoming release of BLACK CHRISTMAS, a remake of a 1974 horror film directed by Bob Clark (A Christmas Story, Porky's). I have to tell you, I was really infuriated by this article. Give it a read and, afterwards, I'll explain why:
"Shame, shame, shame on Harvey and Bob Weinstein, and their distributor MGM's Harry Sloan, for opening a holiday-themed slasher movie on Christmas Day. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the ads and release date for Black Christmas from Dimension/MGM. The promos even make fun of "people who express outrage" as well as the plot's body count. And the entertainment industry wonders why it continues to have a huge PR problem as promoters of garbage? Showbiz marketing calls this counter-programming. Still, I don't understand: just how many disturbed human beings does The Weinstein Company and MGM think actually want to go see a gory movie on December 25th -- specifically, a remake of a 1974 horror flick in which a college sorority house is terrorized by a psycho who makes frightening phone calls and murders the girls during the holiday break. Is the intended audience supposed to be non-Christians? Really, investors in The Weinstein Company, and MGM, need to protest this deplorable decision. It should be noted that, in 2003, the Weinsteins made Bad Santa, a distasteful comedy which at least wasn't released on Christmas Day. Among the few other Christmas-themed slasher movies (none released on December 25th) were little-seen Santa Claws (1996), and Santa's Slay (2005, Lionsgate) and 1984's Silent Night, Deadly Night, released by TriStar and so repugnant that it prompted protests at theaters where it was shown. Unfortunately, the latter did big box office and spawned 4 sequels. Moviegoers, don't let this happen again."
I'll be blunt... who the hell is she to tell you, me, or anyone what we should or should not watch?! Personally, after dealing with all the purchasing of gifts, traveling to see family and all the other stresses of the holiday season, I'll find it refreshing to watch a Christmas-themed horror movie. Is it for everyone? Of course not. It's designed for a select movie audience who traditionally are not appeased at Christmastime. I have to tell you, I am really disgusted the mindset of its author. And not, as you might think, because I am trying to embark on a similar film myself (though that fact did draw my attention to this), but because I am sick and tired of people complaining about movies they have no interest in seeing. For example, I have no interest whatsoever in seeing BABEL. I thought it looked pretentious and boring and not at all the type of movie I enjoy. But, that's me. I would never complain about or impose my feelings for a film on anyone else. So, what gives Nikki Finke the right to try and impose her view of BLACK CHRISTMAS on all of us? If you don't want to see it, don't go. But don't tell me I can't see it because it offends your puritanical prudish sensabilities.
What I am trying to say is: Fuck you, Nikki.
The original film was a no-holds-barred, repugnant horror flick, but the hook (and poster) were fabulous. As you may or may-not know, the original film sparked an outcry from conservative parents everywhere claiming "Hollywood had gone too far" which eventually resulted in Tri-Star Films, the movie's distributor, pulling it from theatres (after they made a few million in profit, of course.) The movie was sold to a home video company and became one of the most successful horror titles released on VHS -- so much so that four straight-to-video sequels were made. Clearly, there was an audience for the movie then, just as there will be an audience for the movie now. So, while doing some research on the internet for our remake, I came across the website Deadline Hollywood Daily and an story written by Nikki Finke titled, "Weinsteins & MGM to release X-mas Crap." The article is about the upcoming release of BLACK CHRISTMAS, a remake of a 1974 horror film directed by Bob Clark (A Christmas Story, Porky's). I have to tell you, I was really infuriated by this article. Give it a read and, afterwards, I'll explain why:
"Shame, shame, shame on Harvey and Bob Weinstein, and their distributor MGM's Harry Sloan, for opening a holiday-themed slasher movie on Christmas Day. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the ads and release date for Black Christmas from Dimension/MGM. The promos even make fun of "people who express outrage" as well as the plot's body count. And the entertainment industry wonders why it continues to have a huge PR problem as promoters of garbage? Showbiz marketing calls this counter-programming. Still, I don't understand: just how many disturbed human beings does The Weinstein Company and MGM think actually want to go see a gory movie on December 25th -- specifically, a remake of a 1974 horror flick in which a college sorority house is terrorized by a psycho who makes frightening phone calls and murders the girls during the holiday break. Is the intended audience supposed to be non-Christians? Really, investors in The Weinstein Company, and MGM, need to protest this deplorable decision. It should be noted that, in 2003, the Weinsteins made Bad Santa, a distasteful comedy which at least wasn't released on Christmas Day. Among the few other Christmas-themed slasher movies (none released on December 25th) were little-seen Santa Claws (1996), and Santa's Slay (2005, Lionsgate) and 1984's Silent Night, Deadly Night, released by TriStar and so repugnant that it prompted protests at theaters where it was shown. Unfortunately, the latter did big box office and spawned 4 sequels. Moviegoers, don't let this happen again."
I'll be blunt... who the hell is she to tell you, me, or anyone what we should or should not watch?! Personally, after dealing with all the purchasing of gifts, traveling to see family and all the other stresses of the holiday season, I'll find it refreshing to watch a Christmas-themed horror movie. Is it for everyone? Of course not. It's designed for a select movie audience who traditionally are not appeased at Christmastime. I have to tell you, I am really disgusted the mindset of its author. And not, as you might think, because I am trying to embark on a similar film myself (though that fact did draw my attention to this), but because I am sick and tired of people complaining about movies they have no interest in seeing. For example, I have no interest whatsoever in seeing BABEL. I thought it looked pretentious and boring and not at all the type of movie I enjoy. But, that's me. I would never complain about or impose my feelings for a film on anyone else. So, what gives Nikki Finke the right to try and impose her view of BLACK CHRISTMAS on all of us? If you don't want to see it, don't go. But don't tell me I can't see it because it offends your puritanical prudish sensabilities.
What I am trying to say is: Fuck you, Nikki.
Monday, December 04, 2006
IS JOHNNY FIVE REALLY ALIVE?
You have to love the power and speed of the internet. 
A little story, no matter how trivial, can be posted on an obscure website and then spread like wildfire across the information super-highway in a matter of minutes. For a perfect example, take the current story that (as of 1:32 pm on Monday, December 4th) has been posted on Moviehole and JoBlo.com -- "Johnny Five is Alive." Both sites are reporting that a remake of the 1986 cult-classic SHORT CIRCUIT is in the works. Are they right? Well... Maybe.
As I am sure you know, I work with David Foster -- the producer of the original SHORT CIRCUIT movies. We currently control the shopping rights to the film and, just last week, found a studio that was interested in discussing the project. We've had one meeting at this studio and talked about the possibility of bringing Number Five back to life via the original SHORT CIRCUIT writers, Brent Maddock and S.S. Wilson. While some people don't like the idea of remakes and think that Number 5 should remain an 80's cult icon, I think (after recently watching the original 2 films) there is great potential in a reimagining of this franchise. And, more importantly, a paycheck. Let's not forget, this IS how I make my living. And, when a studio is interested in one of my project, I jump at the opportunity.
Sorry, I'm getting off point. So, we have a meeting last week to discuss the feasibility of remaking this property -- nothing more. Then, this morning, I come into work and find the following article posted on Moviehole.net:
"Moviehole has got word (fairly solid word) that yet another 80's classic is about to get the remake treatment -- and I think I just spewed in my mouth a little. 'Short Circuit', John Badham's 1986 sci-fi comedy/adventure, about a wacky experimental government robot named Johnny 5 who flees the government and ultimately ends up hiding out with a suburban sweetie (Ally Sheedy), is about to get a contemporary do-over. There have been rumours about some kind of continuation of the franchise for a while now, but this is the first that someone up the food chain has actually acknowledged the buzz. It'’s believed some of the original gang -– sans Badham Â- are involved in the remake. The original film, which starred Guttenberg, Sheedy, Fisher Stevens, G.W Bailey and Tim Blanley as the voice of 'No.5', made over $40 million on its release in 1986."
The article was repeated on JoBlo.com and I am sure by the time I have finished writing this BLOG, it will be on several other websites. How did this information get out? I have no idea. I spoke with the studio involved and it didn't come from their camp, nor ours, nor the writers. So, who else is there? Who cares? People are already weighing in with their thoughts, both good and bad, and the rebirth of Number Five is becomig message board fodder. Whether this movie actually gets made or not has yet to be seen, we still have a long way to go, but one thing is for sure... when Number Five starts looking for input, all he'll need to do is hook into a T1 line and he'll be up-to-date in seconds.
How far we have indeed come from the days of the Encyclopedia Britannica
A little story, no matter how trivial, can be posted on an obscure website and then spread like wildfire across the information super-highway in a matter of minutes. For a perfect example, take the current story that (as of 1:32 pm on Monday, December 4th) has been posted on Moviehole and JoBlo.com -- "Johnny Five is Alive." Both sites are reporting that a remake of the 1986 cult-classic SHORT CIRCUIT is in the works. Are they right? Well... Maybe.As I am sure you know, I work with David Foster -- the producer of the original SHORT CIRCUIT movies. We currently control the shopping rights to the film and, just last week, found a studio that was interested in discussing the project. We've had one meeting at this studio and talked about the possibility of bringing Number Five back to life via the original SHORT CIRCUIT writers, Brent Maddock and S.S. Wilson. While some people don't like the idea of remakes and think that Number 5 should remain an 80's cult icon, I think (after recently watching the original 2 films) there is great potential in a reimagining of this franchise. And, more importantly, a paycheck. Let's not forget, this IS how I make my living. And, when a studio is interested in one of my project, I jump at the opportunity.
Sorry, I'm getting off point. So, we have a meeting last week to discuss the feasibility of remaking this property -- nothing more. Then, this morning, I come into work and find the following article posted on Moviehole.net:
"Moviehole has got word (fairly solid word) that yet another 80's classic is about to get the remake treatment -- and I think I just spewed in my mouth a little. 'Short Circuit', John Badham's 1986 sci-fi comedy/adventure, about a wacky experimental government robot named Johnny 5 who flees the government and ultimately ends up hiding out with a suburban sweetie (Ally Sheedy), is about to get a contemporary do-over. There have been rumours about some kind of continuation of the franchise for a while now, but this is the first that someone up the food chain has actually acknowledged the buzz. It'’s believed some of the original gang -– sans Badham Â- are involved in the remake. The original film, which starred Guttenberg, Sheedy, Fisher Stevens, G.W Bailey and Tim Blanley as the voice of 'No.5', made over $40 million on its release in 1986."
The article was repeated on JoBlo.com and I am sure by the time I have finished writing this BLOG, it will be on several other websites. How did this information get out? I have no idea. I spoke with the studio involved and it didn't come from their camp, nor ours, nor the writers. So, who else is there? Who cares? People are already weighing in with their thoughts, both good and bad, and the rebirth of Number Five is becomig message board fodder. Whether this movie actually gets made or not has yet to be seen, we still have a long way to go, but one thing is for sure... when Number Five starts looking for input, all he'll need to do is hook into a T1 line and he'll be up-to-date in seconds.
How far we have indeed come from the days of the Encyclopedia Britannica
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
