Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Mon Nov 25, 2024 5:26 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
[META]PG-13 or R?
View previous topicView next topic
Page 4 of 6 [80 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Author Message
Matt Dark
Decorated


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Posts: 256
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

 		R... it has jamie in it... need i say more?
_________________
[salsalis//luxlucis]

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:42 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
dalphx
Entrenched


Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 801
Location: Partying in Batcave with Lily & Beth!
Matt Dark wrote:
R... it has jamie in it... need i say more?


Should have had a poll up on this one. Like to see the percentage of R versus PG-13

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:45 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Dr. Awkward
Unfettered


Joined: 28 Sep 2007
Posts: 374
Location: Marunouchi - Tokyo, Japan

 		Marketing Genius
Kill (at least) two birdz w/ one stone...
brettoniasam wrote:
I think Paramount's bottom line is that they're looking at the bottom line...for "Star Trek."

Pretty much, Paramount hired JJ for one reason above all: to make "Star Trek" into a megabajillion blockbuster. That's why they threw him $190 million for that and gushed that he's the next Steven Spielberg.

So, $30 million to throw JJ a bone to go play in the sandbox, flex his creative talent? No prob. Paramount could care less if "Cloverfield" sinks or swims, so long as "Trek" brings home the gold.


I can relate to that Brett...Cloverfield is a reputation enhancer for Jabrams.
I'm sure Paramount will be irritated if 1-18 winds up being a theatrical
turd nugget...because that lends no incentive to enlist a large alternate
audience to Star Trek, much less the original fan base.
Plus 300 million pennies saved is 300 million pennies earned...seems like
Paramount could find a more efficient way to spend their money if they
felt Cloverfield invited too much risk.
I also think they also know that Jabramz Robot could fart 30 million from
a number of other studios...

Jabramz small screen presence is well known at this point.
Although Joyride and the likes haven't bombed (IMO), Jabramz Robot has
yet to ignite the same level of hype on the silver screen as their TV magic has.
When Cloverfield breaks open that should change drastically...kick it up a notch - BAM (sorry Emeril) .

When Jabramz Robots big screen rep equals their lil' screen rep, the fertilizer
will have the perfect PH balance to grow a huge Star Trek MP.
All the original Trekkers will go in full force, as well as, I'd presume, a
relatively decent sized Jabrams Robot fan base that wouldn't consider
watching ST in theatres...I fall into the latter category (sorry Captain) .
I'm a Lynch/ Tarantino/ Jabramz whore...I'll go outta my way to watch anything they've touched.
I'd never have watched Blue Velvet or Destiny Turns On the Radio if the respective people weren't involved.
It's a crapshoot at times I admit...Hostel payed off very little for me -
as a matter of fact, I still feel Quentin owes me $20 for buying that DVD (Roth gets a pass) .

I don't think it's a coincidence season 4 was pushed up to February
either...you can just about guarantee more people than have already
subscribed to the past seasons will watch Lost this year -
thanks to 1-18-08.
_________________
.don I ,nem eniN ?terpretni nem enin oD
Launch Randomousity Chat ...
Do nine men interpret? Nine men, I nod.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 9:47 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
dalphx
Entrenched


Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 801
Location: Partying in Batcave with Lily & Beth!

 		Re: Marketing Genius
Kill (at least) two birdz w/ one stone...
Great Analysis DR. I also believe Paramount will not let this bomb, way too much hype around it and will get more viewers to Star Trek. Any Trekkies know the money made from the 1st movie, to what the last one drew in? (probably half). They will show off JJ in 01-18 and give trek fans something to look forward too in their film. Maybe a preview trailer on 1-18 for Star trek?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 10:24 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
tinytim
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 95

 		It'll be hard to give a Trek preview before 1-18-08. They just barely have the cast chosen and production starts in November. I don't believe their production starts til march next year (could be wrong on that dont remeber exactly). Maybe something like the batman trailer where it was just the Logo and no actors but that would be it I think. Confused

Then again I could be wrong think they could have a teaser after two months of filming?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:28 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
BobAlhazred
Veteran


Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 92

 		speaking of star trek...my new ringtone

http://hjem.wanadoo.dk/~wan13237/darkmateria_the_picard_song.mp3

XD

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:36 am
 View user's profile AIM Address
 Back to top 
Rekidk
Entrenched


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 992
Location: Indiana, USA
brettoniasam wrote:
I think Paramount's bottom line is that they're looking at the bottom line...for "Star Trek."

Pretty much, Paramount hired JJ for one reason above all: to make "Star Trek" into a megabajillion blockbuster. That's why they threw him $190 million for that and gushed that he's the next Steven Spielberg.

So, $30 million to throw JJ a bone to go play in the sandbox, flex his creative talent? No prob. Paramount could care less if "Cloverfield" sinks or swims, so long as "Trek" brings home the gold.


That's actually a really interesting analysis.

I'll forfeit my point, because--for the majority of the people interested in this movie--it doesn't matter if it's rated R or PG13.

Ultimately, the movie's content will determine its rating, not the other way around.
_________________
iTube - iTweet - iNetwork

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:11 pm
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
hmghosthoost
Decorated

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 199
Location: Ft Lauderdale FL
brettoniasam wrote:
Pretty much, Paramount hired JJ for one reason above all: to make "Star Trek" into a megabajillion blockbuster.



I'm all for THAT!! Haven't had one since THE VOYAGE HOME and WRATH OF KHAN
_________________
If I am not going to kill myself, I have to go on. There is only one thing I need from anyone, and that is respect; and anyone who cannot give it to me has no place in my life.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:30 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
casemyo
Decorated


Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Posts: 289
Location: manbearpig central
Rekidk wrote:

Ultimately, the movie's content will determine its rating, not the other way around.


that was on some proverb-esque level of brilliance hahah. impressive

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:57 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
pegassissy
Unfettered

Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 552
Rekidk wrote:
Ultimately, the movie's content will determine its rating, not the other way around.

Not nesacarly(sp) true. If they want this film to be pg-13, it will be pg-13. If they want content included that will make it R, they can make it R. I realize the point is not as strong for wanting a film to be a R movie, but we see this all the time with pg-13 movies.
_________________
And then the nurse comes round and everyone will lift their heads
But I'm thinking of what Sarah said, "Love is watching someone die"
So who's going to watch you die?...

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:45 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
john locke
Decorated


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 175
Location: Damned if we know!
hmghosthoost wrote:
brettoniasam wrote:
Pretty much, Paramount hired JJ for one reason above all: to make "Star Trek" into a megabajillion blockbuster.



I'm all for THAT!! Haven't had one since THE VOYAGE HOME and WRATH OF KHAN


wrath of khan was fantastic! I like trhe look of jjs idea a direct prequel to the series! and casting sylar as spock was genius

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:05 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
brettoniasam
Unfettered


Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 340

 		Yeah, I doubt Paramount would actually want Cloverfield to bomb, of course -- but I think they're expecting only modest results from it. Again, as long as JJ doesn't do something drastic like turn Cloverfield into kiddie porn or blatantly insult Trekkies (*GASP* -- Shocked Silly ), then Paramount will be happy so long as JJ remembers that Trek is the only thing that matters.

And yes, JJ really does have the potential to turn Trek into a bona fide GREAT film -- not just a much-needed shot in the arm for the franchise -- on the order of Trek II. (Khan stands alone -- even outside and beyond the Trek franchise -- as truly one of the greatest films I've ever seen. Montalban's plastic chestpiece and Shatner's bellowing "KHAAAAAAN" notwithstanding, of course. Wink )

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:30 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
hmghosthoost
Decorated

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 199
Location: Ft Lauderdale FL

 		I've never seen an episode of LOST.

It was just too weird to watch a Hobbit
play in this kind of show.


PS.... Believe it or not, that was in fact Mantalban's real chest. Director Nicholas Meyer said that this was the number one question ever asked him about any of his movies.

SOURCE: Star Trek The Wrath of Kahn - The Director's Edition 2-Disc Set, interview with Ricardo Mantalban and Nicholas Meyer.
_________________
If I am not going to kill myself, I have to go on. There is only one thing I need from anyone, and that is respect; and anyone who cannot give it to me has no place in my life.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:48 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
JFTeran
Unfettered


Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 319
Location: New York

 		i heard one time that when a movie's trailer says "not yet rated" it usually means that its either R and they wanna do so more editing to try to bump it down to PG-13 or from PG-13 down to PG... any chance this could be happening with cloverfield too? if the IMDb report about it being NYR is true of course...

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:22 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
clownnation
Decorated

Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 160

 		By the way, here is your first look at SPOCK from the upcoming Trek movie

http://www.movieweb.com/news/70/24370.php

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:31 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 4 of 6 [80 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  


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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group