Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 25 May 2017




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message

Subway Guard
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 May 2008
Notes left: 1684
Last seen at: Houston, Tx.
Quote:
the director and writer were changed although they had been willing to continue.

Gans made the decision not to come back, and Avary killed his best friend and got jail time. None of that has anything to do with wanting to change the second film around, which is your implication.
Quote:
a new writer/director was hired who had worked with the producer before.

That's true in 90% of movies made these days. It wasn't even Hadida who first showed interest in Bassett - it was Don Carmody who took notice when Bassett mentioned offhandedly that he liked the SH series.
Quote:
the plot of the their adaptation was abandoned and the sequel returned to closely following the games.

And Bassett has claimed credit for that repeatedly on his blog.
Quote:
the genre of the film shifted a bit, from mystery horror to slasher horror. That meant pop tarts instead of Rose's tears.

That's the only thing on your list that might have been producer meddling, and even then, you don't know that for sure.
Quote:
the retcons about the order and stuff are there because they needed an antagonist

Really? The antagonists had to be the same cult? Alessa's and Sharon's ages had to be changed to provide an antagonist? The reunion of Alessa's soul absolutely had to be ignored? Making Sharon a baby who was kidnapped from her parents was necessary? Changing the location of Alessa's burning to her own house was necessary? Sorry, but that's wrong. If any amount of thought had been put into it, Bassett could have easily found a story that worked with no retcons. But he didn't want to, so he didn't.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay

Missing since: 11 Nov 2012
Notes left: 9
JKristine35 wrote:
Quote:
the retcons about the order and stuff are there because they needed an antagonist

Really? The antagonists had to be the same cult? Alessa's and Sharon's ages had to be changed to provide an antagonist? The reunion of Alessa's soul absolutely had to be ignored? Making Sharon a baby who was kidnapped from her parents was necessary? Changing the location of Alessa's burning to her own house was necessary? Sorry, but that's wrong. If any amount of thought had been put into it, Bassett could have easily found a story that worked with no retcons. But he didn't want to, so he didn't.


I wasn't really talking about the retcons in the script, more so the final film. I was making a point that about the order still being in silent hill despite the events of the first film! Don't get me wrong I completely support that this film is utter rubbish and your i completely agree with your view on most of the film, was just saying all those retcons and stuff are there because they wanted to make a cheap and profitable thrill of it that will get some decent audience numbers! And therefore they don't care about the lore, it's connection with the first film and everything and just rush something out.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Feb 2010
Notes left: 122
Last seen at: Tennessee
I guarantee that if the first movie made 150 million dollars, that we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Hadida and Carmody would have kept their mouths shut and let Bassett do what he want to do(whether it would have been any better than what we got is debatable).

But Silent Hill only made about 100 mil worldwide and then they waited 6 years to do a sequel. The producers were just trying to right the ship financially(and keep the franchise alive) and in turn, killed what little creativity the first film contained and the chance of SHR being a decent sequel(even though I enjoyed SHR, I wouldn't call it a good movie).


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
JKristine35 wrote:
Claudia being the Missionary has nothing to do with anything, since that doesn't relate to the games or the first movie, and as many people like it as don't like it from what I've seen.

Who knows who changed what from the script? The point is, the film's major problems, such as retcons and atrocious dialogue, only point to one person. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that anyone but Bassett created the retcons, since there's no monetary reason for them, and Bassett even stated before production started that he wanted to go a different direction and not mention the first film at all (he wanted to do an SH2 adaptation), but Hadida insisted on a direct sequel to explain the first film. Retconning the entire film =/= explaining the film. I don't see how it's not crystal clear that only Bassett created the retcons, and that it was probably Hadida who forced him to leave the more obvious ones out of the final film. The only things I see that sound like Hadida had a role were in the title of the film, the 3D, maybe some of the scares, Suki, and probably the horrific Vincent x Heather romance.

Confusing people does not appeal to the mainstream, and likely lost SHR a fair chunk of money, thanks to angry film fans and confused reviewers. I have no idea why making transitions between the film and games easier would be important to anyone at all other than Konami, who had no role in the creation of SHR.


This entire post boils down to "I see no reason for it, therefore it was Bassett and not Hadida."

That is not how filmmaking works. End of story. Just because you don't see a reason for it doesn't mean there might not have been one. It may or may not have anything to do with the previous movie; again, Hadida is concerned with money, not continuity. If Box Office Mojo is to be believed, neither film broke domestically, unlike the first Resident Evil movie. For Hadida, that's a problem. For investors, that's a problem.

The retcons may just as easily been Hadida as Bassett. My point about Claudia being the Missionary doesn't stem from any game lore, but from the thought that from a producing standpoint the film might have gotten bogged down with too many characters, and a "cool twist" for moviegoers would be to have her be it.

Lame? Yes.
Completely possible? Also yes.

I've followed adaptations before for class from an initial short story all the way through to the filmed version. Changes are made sometimes arbitrarily. That's how filmmaking works: while a lot of the fault lies with the writer and moreso director (although in this particular case Bassett is both), that doesn't make them safe from Executive Meddling. We have literally no way of knowing who made what changes unless Bassett states which he did. Scriptwriting isn't something where you write it and then it's done--chances are the script went back and forth between Bassett and Hadida, with both making changes to it. That's how it works.

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Subway Guard
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 May 2008
Notes left: 1684
Last seen at: Houston, Tx.
You act as though you're some kind of filmmaking god who knows more than anyone else. I've also gone to film school, but I've never had any professor tell me that successful producers like making inane decisions that will lose them money on their productions. The producers that do make such decisions, usually don't even get to big budget productions at all, because they have a bad reputation. No one in their right mind would have thought retconning the first film would have made them money, so there had to have been another reason. What's the only other reason that doesn't involve speculating that Hadida grows bat wings and a forked tongue every night and feeds on babies? That Bassett wanted them there. He even did everything but outright say that in his interviews. I don't know what's so difficult about seeing something that's so very obvious.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Feb 2010
Notes left: 122
Last seen at: Tennessee
If Hadida really cared about the retcons, he would have shot every one of them down. But he didn't. He may not have written them, but he knew they were there.

Can't we all just agree that Hadida, Carmody and Bassett all fucked up? We can place blame equally and hope it doesn't happen again.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
JKristine35 wrote:
You act as though you're some kind of filmmaking god who knows more than anyone else. I've also gone to film school, but I've never had any professor tell me that successful producers like making inane decisions that will lose them money on their productions. The producers that do make such decisions, usually don't even get to big budget productions at all, because they have a bad reputation. No one in their right mind would have thought retconning the first film would have made them money, so there had to have been another reason. What's the only other reason that doesn't involve speculating that Hadida grows bat wings and a forked tongue every night and feeds on babies? That Bassett wanted them there. He even did everything but outright say that in his interviews. I don't know what's so difficult about seeing something that's so very obvious.


If you've gone to film school you should know just as well as I that producers don't always make the most-sensical decisions. They wanted to make the plot more accessible--they stated that. Seeing as the first film was ages ago and had a rather small audience, them changing things makes sense. The first film, for all intents and purposes, is likely just something in the back of their head than not.

I'm not saying all of the problems are Hadida's, or that all of them are Bassett's. We're not privy to the ins and outs of how this particular film was made, but you should know just as well as I do that Executive Meddling can and does happen quite often and for seemingly arbitrary reasons.

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Subway Guard
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 May 2008
Notes left: 1684
Last seen at: Houston, Tx.
You're still not understanding what I'm saying. Executive meddling that makes the film more money is always going to happen. Executive meddling that wouldn't make a difference will also happen commonly. But executive meddling that everyone knows will result in a loss of money? Unless you're talking about a brand new producer that doesn't care whether he'll get another job, that doesn't make sense. As you yourself said, everything is about money, and alienating the people who liked the film that you're making a sequel to will not make more money. No producer in their right mind is going to build a sequel to a film that made $100 million and say "Let's confuse and alienate those $100 million worth of people, it couldn't hurt us at all". Confusing people and making retcons does not make the plot more accessible, and I'm unsure as to how you even arrived at the conclusion that one has anything at all to do with the other. Explaining the first film's plot in small words that everyone can understand, that is making the film more accessible. Turning a cult of witch burners into a far more complicated one that wants to use a little girl to give birth to a pagan god is way, WAY more confusing, not less.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 507
Last seen at: Phoenix
resevil80 wrote:
If Hadida really cared about the retcons, he would have shot every one of them down. But he didn't. He may not have written them, but he knew they were there.

Can't we all just agree that Hadida, Carmody and Bassett all fucked up? We can place blame equally and hope it doesn't happen again.


Exactly this. Even if the biased memories are true then we have to ask
Why didn't Hadida veto MJB's changing of the plot, style, tone, etc. in the sequel?
No good leader whines that he couldn't control his subordinate.

FTR I would have retained Gans but asked Avary to move on. Gans http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0304521/?ref_=tt_ov_dr hasn't exactly had been overwhelmed with film projects since 2006. If he said he didn't want to do a sequel it was probably because Hadida would not let him make the sequel that Gans wanted to make.

We complain but in the grand scheme of things they are in an impossible situation. They are working in a niche market, adapting video games, but people want big budget blockbuster results.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 Oct 2009
Notes left: 2523
JKristine35 wrote:
You're still not understanding what I'm saying. Executive meddling that makes the film more money is always going to happen. Executive meddling that wouldn't make a difference will also happen commonly. But executive meddling that everyone knows will result in a loss of money? Unless you're talking about a brand new producer that doesn't care whether he'll get another job, that doesn't make sense. As you yourself said, everything is about money, and alienating the people who liked the film that you're making a sequel to will not make more money. No producer in their right mind is going to build a sequel to a film that made $100 million and say "Let's confuse and alienate those $100 million worth of people, it couldn't hurt us at all". Confusing people and making retcons does not make the plot more accessible, and I'm unsure as to how you even arrived at the conclusion that one has anything at all to do with the other. Explaining the first film's plot in small words that everyone can understand, that is making the film more accessible. Turning a cult of witch burners into a far more complicated one that wants to use a little girl to give birth to a pagan god is way, WAY more confusing, not less.


Not everyone knows or agrees with you it will lose money. I understand you loved the first film and that's fine, but that doesn't mean that's a big thing to Hadida or to Bassett and I, frankly, find it rather shortsighted that you're not understanding that just because you can't see things one way you seem to think neither could anybody involved with the film.

I'm done with this. There's no point in arguing this further.

_________________
Image
Beyond the Joystick - game reviews, plot recaps, and more
http://beyond-the-joystick.blogspot.com - Also on Tumblr!


Top
   
 

Subway Guard
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 12 May 2008
Notes left: 1684
Last seen at: Houston, Tx.
You are being incredibly dense. I have no idea what is so hard for you to grasp about the fact that they made a direct sequel (also known as: not a reboot, not a remake). Sequels are made because so many people liked the first. That's kind of the point of a sequel, but you don't seem to understand that. Alienating everyone who liked the first is a money loser, and everyone knows that. You've even happily ignored direct quotes from the writer/director heavily implying that he added the retcons, just so you can force some nonsensical conclusion backed up by no evidence whatsoever. Just because someone is a producer, does not mean they automatically are a drooling moron who understands nothing at all about what will and will not piss off fans, and who does everything possible to make everyones' lives miserable, as you seem to believe. You act as though I'm the only person pissed off by the retcons, but that is very wrong, with several reviewers pointing them out, and the subject of retcons being brought up continuously anywhere the film is discussed. Hadida is not dumb, he would have known what retconning the first film would do. Bassett, on the other hand, is the one who didn't like the first film, and stated repeatedly that he (aka: not Hadida) wanted to bring the film back to the game. Goddamn.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Screenplay
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 507
Last seen at: Phoenix
In Silent Hill 3, Pyramid Head is seen moderating Alessa's fan forums. Instead of temp bans. he somehow cuts off posters' arms.


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: