New Spideman Movie

[Talking Backwards]

All I meant by "the people who paid for it" were the people who bought tickets and made them bucketloads of money, not those who financed it--although I can see how my wording could have made it look that way. Although it's nonsense saying that those who are in charge of the project should only be those who are already fans. It obviously doesn't hurt (Sam Raimi), but what matters most is that you have competent people who at least understand the source and know how to produce a good movie, regardless of where the idea came from. The main person that needs to have a greater knowledge anyway usually ends up being the responsibility of the screenwriter.

 

[Mr.Sister]

there's a really huge difference between the person who finanaces the movie, and the people that actually have any control whatsoever over what the freaking movie actually looks like

bullshit

The people with the money can control everything about the movie. And when he/she thinks his money wasn't spend well, he gets rid of the director.

 

[monoxide_child]

All I meant by "the people who paid for it" were the people who bought tickets and made them bucketloads of money, not those who financed it--although I can see how my wording could have made it look that way. Although it's nonsense saying that those who are in charge of the project should only be those who are already fans. It obviously doesn't hurt (Sam Raimi), but what matters most is that you have competent people who at least understand the source and know how to produce a good movie, regardless of where the idea came from. The main person that needs to have a greater knowledge anyway usually ends up being the responsibility of the screenwriter.

sorry for the misunderstanding

 

[monoxide_child]

bullshit

The people with the money can control everything about the movie. And when he/she thinks his money wasn't spend well, he gets rid of the director.

my post was accurate if you read the whole thing

sometimes the guy shelling out his money to pay for the movie ends up quickly saying "i'm paying for this, i want to control what it looks like" even though he knows nothing about the source material, this is where you get a movie that says "based on...." in the opening credits even though the final rendition of the movie is completely unrecognizable as being even remotely related to the thing that it's supposedly "based" on, the instant examples that come to mind are the Super Mario Bros movie and Battlefeild Earth

 

[Mr.Sister]

my post was accurate if you read the whole thing

bullshit

 

[replicated]

bullshit

The people with the money can control everything about the movie. And when he/she thinks his money wasn't spend well, he gets rid of the director.

Exactly. Remember back about 20 years ago when movies seemed to have plots, decent dialogue, immersiveness, and weren't remakes of shit from the 70's? The reason movies were good back then is because writers would come up with a script, pitch it to a producer and hopefully get a movie deal.

This changed about 2000, when you started seeing comic book movies and remakes of everything. Producers decided that they knew what people wanted, and now, producers conceive the ideas, and THEN they hire a writer.

And that's why we have so many stupid ass comic book movies and remakes.