|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Aug 7, 2005 16:37:43 GMT
Hold on a minute everyone! I've had suspicions that maybe, maybe this whole Pendragon thing wasn't quite what it seemed and that even though I think Hines exists, he was given the go ahead to make his extremely low budget crap film to keep fans of the book from bitching too much about Spielbergs reinvention, and of course to make extra money - by you know who. Bit strange how the only book that's now being released is the Spielberg related one eh! Unfortunately it would be difficult to write a book about almost everything about TWOTW and not include Spielbergs film. If the author did this he would be asked as to why he missed out one of two 2005 WOTW major releases. He included Spielbergs, the 53 film, Orson Welles radio play and Jeff Waynes, but it's odd how the author is being singled out for releasing a book about Spielbergs film when he hasn't. This book also does mention the Pendragon version. Yes good points and it seems as if this book is covering all aspects of WOTW and of course they couldn't not include Spielbergs film. That would be plain stupid - but I'm sure there's many fans out there though who have suspicions about both Asylums and Pendragons films. It's as if Pendragons film was deliberately made to be bad. Just about every negative thing we talked and had fears about [ including the toy like tripods ] was in the film.
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Aug 7, 2005 17:21:22 GMT
Why on earth would Paramount need to concoct fake bad films to make a Steven Spielberg film look good? Apart from the inherent absurdity of the scenario, it also presupposes a very long game plan given that Pentimbo have been at it for five years.
What is so difficult about accepting that a man utterly devoid of talent but sadly endowed with determination managed to make a s**t film and get it released stright to DVD?
As for the suspicions of many fans, big fat hairy deal - millions of Americans think they've had their ringpieces probed by grey aliens, but that doesn't stop them from being deluded saddoes.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Aug 7, 2005 17:39:56 GMT
Well it's only a theory but like I said - let's face it Spielberg/Cruise/Paramount must have known that they would get flak from Wells fans for all the changes they were making and don't forget Cruise announced that he was buying up the rights for WOTW not long after Pendragon announced they were going to make a WOTW film. Planning for these films is often years in advance.
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Aug 7, 2005 21:55:23 GMT
Since when would Paramount give a monkeys about 'Wells fans'? Not exactly a big demographic!
I'm sorry, it's all very well to say it's 'a theory', but it defies logic, sense and evidence. After all, I could tell you until I'm blue in the face that it's only 'a theory' that the moon is made of green cheese, but it still wouldn't stop it from being utter bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Aug 7, 2005 22:22:43 GMT
Exactly! Paramount don't give a stuff about Wells fans [well not in the - pleasing them in the artistic sense ] but Spielberg might do [ Cruise obviously couldn't care less ].
Not because Spielbergs interested in giving Wells fans want they want [an authentic version of the book ] but I'm fairly sure that he would like to have HG Wells fans on his side. He was only interested in making his version and he was obviously aware of how highly many people regard the original book.
If fans think there's an authentic version on the way then they might be more accepting of yet another so called re-imagining. It doesn't defy logic if you think about it. In fact it could be a good marketing strategy.
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Aug 7, 2005 22:50:40 GMT
It would be a pathetically pointless marketing strategy. Far more trouble than it's worth. Spielberg doesn't have to care about 'Wells fans', it's a summer blockbuster with Tom Cruise. This website probably has the largest concentration of Wells fans on earth, yet you'd barely fill a cinema with us all (the ones who bother to post, that is). In fact, I've been on other WotW sites where there are members who didn't even know the films were adaptations of a book written in 1897 by some English guy called H G Wells!
Your theory is logical only insofar as assuming the earth to be the still centre of the universe with the planets orbiting it with little epicycles thrown in to account for seemingly anomalous motions is logical.
|
|
|
Post by VES on Aug 7, 2005 23:44:09 GMT
Exactly! Paramount don't give a stuff about Wells fans [well not in the - pleasing them in the artistic sense ] but Spielberg might do [ Cruise obviously couldn't care less ]. Not because Spielbergs interested in giving Wells fans want they want [an authentic version of the book ] but I'm fairly sure that he would like to have HG Wells fans on his side. He was only interested in making his version and he was obviously aware of how highly many people regard the original book. If fans think there's an authentic version on the way then they might be more accepting of yet another so called re-imagining. It doesn't defy logic if you think about it. In fact it could be a good marketing strategy. *feels forehead.* No, not feverish.....
|
|
|
Post by ArmoredTrackLayer on Aug 8, 2005 0:30:05 GMT
I just have a hard time believing that Paramount is capable of communist style conspiracies...
If Tim Hines would have NEVER made a movie before, THEN I would agree with you, but to say he's on Paramounts dollar is sillier than saying that JFK was assasinated by moon burros. Cmon, Timmy's pic was in production BEFORE 9/11....
Why do you seem to think that Paramount is satans own? geez did you really hate that movie THAT much...
You really seem to believe this "theory" Im...well...at a loss for words really, its just so....silly
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Aug 8, 2005 1:21:24 GMT
It would be a pathetically pointless marketing strategy. Far more trouble than it's worth. Spielberg doesn't have to care about 'Wells fans', it's a summer blockbuster with Tom Cruise. This website probably has the largest concentration of Wells fans on earth, yet you'd barely fill a cinema with us all (the ones who bother to post, that is). In fact, I've been on other WotW sites where there are members who didn't even know the films were adaptations of a book written in 1897 by some English guy called H G Wells! Your theory is logical only insofar as assuming the earth to be the still centre of the universe with the planets orbiting it with little epicycles thrown in to account for seemingly anomalous motions is logical. Some people on the sites you've visited might not have heard of Wells but take a look on the internet. There's absolutely loads of reviewers who mention Wells when giving reviews about the film. I might be wrong but aren't waroftheworldsonline and eveofthewar the 2 biggest WOTW sites on the net. Everyones heard of Wells on here and there. And don't forget film makers DO visit this site and others. There's thousands possibly millions of Wells fans out there who don't have access to the internet. Say what you like but I'm pretty sure Spielberg would like to have the respect and critical acclaim of Wells fans for his film. Quite a few fans moaned all over the net when it was announced that Spielberg would be updating the film to modern times.
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Aug 8, 2005 1:33:51 GMT
I just have a hard time believing that Paramount is capable of communist style conspiracies... If Tim Hines would have NEVER made a movie before, THEN I would agree with you, but to say he's on Paramounts dollar is sillier than saying that JFK was assasinated by moon burros. Cmon, Timmy's pic was in production BEFORE 9/11.... Why do you seem to think that Paramount is satans own? geez did you really hate that movie THAT much... You really seem to believe this "theory" Im...well...at a loss for words really, its just so....silly I wouldn't say it's a communist style conspiracy at all. There's possibly many conspiracies out there and they certainly ain't all communist ones. I'd say a big film company are PERFECTLY capable of conspiratorial marketing tactics. In fact I'd be very surprised if they didn't employ them. You say if Tim Hines had NEVER made a movie before [ I take it you mean before his WOTW film] that you WOULD agree with me. The thing is what's Hines made before this? Extremely low rent films that just about nobody's seen. Hardly legitimate stuff! Again though I'm not for one minute saying that Hines doesn't exist. Also I'll see if I can find it but I came across a site a while back which I mentioned on here and it had the distributor for Hines next disaster as Paramount.
|
|
|
Post by ArmoredTrackLayer on Aug 8, 2005 22:54:58 GMT
Bug Wars and Chrome all fall into the same failure bracket as WotW did, they were all supposed to be "films of the year" and "Screened at Cannes" and have huge budgets and would be seen in theaters. WotW is ANOTHER flop by Ed Woo....oops I mean Tim Hines.
All of Hines films are half boiled pieces of work, he seems to have ambition, but not the necessary means to bring them to light
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Aug 11, 2005 11:39:07 GMT
I have the film on DVD. Don't get me wrong, admist the carnage in this film there are some moments which turned out well, some memorable in ways other than pleasant, but the film does have a few scenes (not many but it does have some) that are good. I have watched the film 3 times and must admit not only has it started to grow on me, but with a morbid sense. But the film is NOT what we were told we were to have, which brings us onto these books. The DVD cover clearly states we shall have books, they advertise them, the DVD cover also advertises the film being enjoyable to watch and that sci-fi lovers will basically take a instant shine to it. . . . . Pardon?, books, advertising, not getting what we were told, oh - false advertising - there's a law against that.
Sorry, Im in one of those moods today.
|
|
|
Post by Poyks on Aug 11, 2005 12:26:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Aug 11, 2005 13:46:21 GMT
The DVD cover clearly states we shall have books, they advertise them, the DVD cover also advertises the film being enjoyable to watch and that sci-fi lovers will basically take a instant shine to it. . . . . Pardon?, books, advertising, not getting what we were told, oh - false advertising - there's a law against that. Doesn't the DVD cover also say something to the effect that it contains therein an exciting adaptation of H G Wells's masterpiece? Now that's false advertising...
|
|
|
Post by Poyks on Aug 11, 2005 13:52:35 GMT
The best bit is the "Guaranteed Superior Quality"!! Well bathe me in strawberry custard and call me Geraldine!!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by FALLINGSTAR on Aug 11, 2005 16:22:48 GMT
I don't blame you for one minute Horsell. The whole thing has been false from the start and these guys ain't delivered what they said they would.
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Aug 11, 2005 19:17:26 GMT
The best bit is the "Guaranteed Superior Quality"!! Well bathe me in strawberry custard and call me Geraldine!!! ;D Geraldine, your dripping custard and its staining the carpet.
|
|
|
Post by twistedrabbit on Aug 14, 2005 19:21:13 GMT
Didn't the DVD cover also state there was to be a video game, theme park attraction, and a low fat gummi-snack? Where are the strawberry Fighting Machines Hines? Where?
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Aug 14, 2005 21:36:07 GMT
They're in the same place as his talent.
Neverland.
|
|
|
Post by Poyks on Aug 16, 2005 2:04:43 GMT
The best bit is the "Guaranteed Superior Quality"!! Well bathe me in strawberry custard and call me Geraldine!!! ;D Geraldine, your dripping custard and its staining the carpet. I bet you say that to all the girls!! ;D
|
|