Prometheus Review Thread (Spoilers)

[GreenScar]

Robin Hood had a budget of $200 million. It went to $250 with all the production problems they had getting it started.

[koontz1973]

Like all rumours, I will take this one with a pinch of salt till it becomes a fact.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

Robin Hood had a budget of $200 million. It went to $250 with all the production problems they had getting it started.

Yea that's true. But I honestly haven't seen any other sites reporting it, no one else is really even mentioning what's going on. Until I hear more I'm just going to think happy thoughts about the franchise and that the movie is doing ok in pre production

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

Robin Hood had a budget of $200 million. It went to $250 with all the production problems they had getting it started.

Yeah and it made $310 million worldwide. I would not want a big budget with not much profit to affect future Alien movies. I liked Prince Of Persia but it's huge budget hurt it's chances of a sequel. If it is a budget for 2 movies then thats fine but if it's for 1 then thats too much imo.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by ArmyOfDarknessAW

Yeah and it made $310 million worldwide. I would not want a big budget with not much profit to affect future Alien movies. I liked Prince Of Persia but it's huge budget hurt it's chances of a sequel. If it is a budget for 2 movies then thats fine but if it's for 1 then thats too much imo.

Completely agreed. Hopefully it all works out and we get the epic Alien prequel Scott wants to give us, R rating and all on a smaller budget

[Aerodude73]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

Robin Hood had a budget of $200 million. It went to $250 with all the production problems they had getting it started.

And, still only made $105+ Million Domestic, $205+ Million Foreign. $310+ million total. SOURCE
** EDIT: Just saw the above post, After I wrote this one **

FOX could be saying, "Look, your last movie was budgeted at $200 Million & went over, & then only took in $310 Million TOTAL. You want us to fork over HOW MUCH for this film?!"

(again, IF it's true, it would make sense if it were for TWO Films, filmed back to back. Ridley Scott's not getting any Younger)

Plus, look at his track record. Some successes sure, but only a few big movies, $$$$ wise - GLADIATOR ($457 WW Box Office/Budget: $103 M), HANNIBAL ($351 WW B.O./Budget: $87 M), AMERICAN GANGSTER ($266 WW B.O./Budget: $100 M), ALIEN ($105 WW B.O./Budget: $11 M), & BLACK HAWK DOWN ($173 WW B.O./Budget: $92 M).

Lifetime Gross Total (18): $1,124,836,884
Average: $62,490,938
Opening Gross Average (16): $16,805,229 (Wide Releases Only)

SOURCE

[GreenScar]

I'm not arguing with any of you. Just bringing in information. Ridley is probably my favorite director. Be careful with comparing numbers. Robin Hood will be considered a bust and we won't see a sequel (Robin Hood was actually Scott's sequel to Kingdom of Heaven from what I've read).

It would be possible that they film them together as well.

I'm hoping they work it out, but I agree with the above post that Scott should have creative control over the final cut.

[Aerodude73]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

I'm not arguing with any of you. Just bringing in information. Ridley is probably my favorite director. Be careful with comparing numbers. Robin Hood will be considered a bust and we won't see a sequel (Robin Hood was actually Scott's sequel to Kingdom of Heaven from what I've read).

It would be possible that they film them together as well.

I'm hoping they work it out, but I agree with the above post that Scott should have creative control over the final cut.

No arguing here either bud'. I too love most everything he's done but I don't think ROBIN HOOD deserves a sequel, or I should rephrase that actually, meaning I don't think they will based on what it did. $200-250 Million budget, & only made $310 Million TOTAL - What studio would go forward with a sequel? Prob. none I'd bet. It was Okay at best IMO, but toooo much story stuff & not enough action, not that I was looking for IRON MAN type stuff, but "Something" else.

[Bageara]

You cant make a horror film with a certificate PG-13

[partridge]

This film absolutely MUST be an 18 (or whatever the equivalent US rating is). Alien is not and never should be for kids; I'm appalled that a range of toys was released some years ago based on this franchise. They've done the same with Terminator, you can even buy a voice changing full head mask of a T600; WTF?

This is what happens when the studio smells a cash cow; the franchise get dropped down to a young teen friendly rating in the hope they'll pick up the merchandise.

aarggh!

[Malik True]

Casting this prequel will be extremely IMPORTANT. My preference would be to cast virtually unknowns mixed in with one or two good actors or actresses on the verge of stardom...
I hope this is good, first day for me...

[master_8ball]

Its Scott doing an Alien prequel, it could be total crap and would still make it money back. People have been waiting years for another instalment and will flock the the theatre. Unfortunately that would also mean people will flock to see it rated R or PG 13.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by koontz1973

Like all rumours, I will take this one with a pinch of salt till it becomes a fact.

Fox wants the budget as low as possible and wants a PG-13 to maximize the number of people that can see it. It's completely believable.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

Fox wants the budget as low as possible and wants a PG-13 to maximize the number of people that can see it. It's completely believable.

A-la AVATAR.

Just imagine how much better that would have been being more darker and R-Rated?





And do not forget this recent quote from Ridley about the ALIEN prequel-

"The film will be really tough, really nasty," he notes. "It's the dark side of the moon."

That sure sounds like R me.


.

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

I hope Ridley get's the studio to bend to him. I don't want to see any more watered down alien flicks. We've already got two sucky AvP films for that.

Why do I see Scott walking away from this and the project being handed off to some Paul Anderson kinda loser director? *shudders* Now that's a real bit of R-rated horror!

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Oh dear! Not THIS ONE too!!!!!


From io9.com

Tell Fox to go to hell and release it unrated!!!

[Neo_3]

Del Toro said AtMoM will be an Rated rated horror tentpole, which never happens. Why can't the Alien prequels be the same. Aerodude73 Nemesis will have a 150M budget and it is 250M for both films, so 125M apiece. When you look at other movies have gone beyond 225M its not much. Will likely be in the neighborhood of what AtMoM will be at.

[Malik True]

Originally Posted by BouCoupDinkyDau

I hope Ridley get's the studio to bend to him. I don't want to see any more watered down alien flicks. We've already got two sucky AvP films for that.

Why do I see Scott walking away from this and the project being handed off to some Paul Anderson kinda loser director? *shudders* Now that's a real bit of R-rated horror!

I sooo don't like that guy as a director. One of these days I hope Resident Evil (Paul W.S. Anderson) will get the treatment it has not gotten on the big screen yet...

[Jimmy Smith]

If the $250 million is for two movies its perfectly reasonable. However if its for just one I can understand Fox not wanting to spend that much since it will be difficult to recoup that money on a franchise that has been down in the dumps in recent years.

On the rating any Alien movie without an R rating would be an abomination. Alien is a horror franchise not a family franchise. A PG-13 rating ruined Alien vs Predator and I don't want to see this prequel fall to the same fate.

[AndyTheZombie]

I can not F***ing wait for this!! about time Ridley Scott goes back to his roots instead of making movies with Russell Crowe!!