If you got to make your own Fallout movie who would you pick

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:47 am

No, the Vault Dweller story was original, its why I want to see something original for the film set in the Fallout universe. Lets keep with the theme that every game that comes out has a new person and never has the same person as the main character. What makes Beowulf different from Lord of the Rings? Age for sure, but nothing much other then who the bad guys are and the context of why the hero is fighting the bad guy. I mean to say lets follow tradition in the Fallout way by not having the Vault Dweller, Chosen One, Lone Wanderer or Courier as the main characters because it would be anything other then Fallout to do so. I think tying it in with previous iterations of the stories we have already heard is not really being original. Your wanting to follow a previous example of what works and it doesn't brake the mold so I find it unoriginal. Lets follow that escaped Android, Lets Follow the computer who has found how to leap from one computer to the next observing the world around it, Lets even follow a Ghoul anti hero. Don't tie yourself to just the Vault Dweller. Its Fallout after all.


Ghoul anti hero??? As a first impression to the market of Fallout???? I highly disagree. I agree that you want to be original. But that doesn't mean having to change the whole story line to something people wouldn't understand. I think we need to start the series with the moments before the Great War, and then the story of the VD. So the public see what happened to the world, and the original hero. But why would that be unoriginal when you can make it very original with your shots, writing, etc I just couldn't see how a movie with a ghoul anti hero or something like that would get popular or show what Fallout really is to the general audience. The whole thing would flop. I'm not some guys who just cares about how well it does, but I don't want people to not understand it, hate it, and not pay to see it which kills making a profit on the film. I want people to see the great universe that Fallout is first, then after it gets moderate audiences and people like it then you could do your ghoul anti hero story without more of a chance of it flopping or people not understanding it. Tying myself to the the Vault Dweller? Are you suggesting that the Vault Dweller is "un Fallout"???? He started the whole series! How is he not Fallout enough???? He should be introduced first as the hero while you can have other secondary characters later. I'm not tying myself to him, I'm starting with him because he is the logical choice.

Basically after all that the main idea is that I disagree with 99% of your opinion. but everybody's entitled to their own.

(BTW why make the option to make a movie in FO1 era if you're just gonna flame us for our ideas?) And you said DREAM movie so there's mine.
User avatar
Penny Courture
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:59 pm

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 1:36 am

I'd go for a film with Bruce Campbell as the lead, just for the hell of it. It would be set somewhere between Fallout 3 and NV probably in the Midwest and it would be co-directed by Christopher Nolan and Terry Gilliam.
User avatar
Cassie Boyle
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:33 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 10:42 pm

none of yer options appeal to me, here are my selections.

Young lead - Cristina Ricci, Beth Riesgraf or Shia LaBeouf
Older lead - Jeri Ryan or Christian Kale

Time - doesn't really matter since all the fallout games take place within a fairly short period.
Location - Somewhere in the Central US, maybe St Louis. We already got both coasts covered.

Director - Michael Bay
User avatar
Vincent Joe
 
Posts: 3370
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:13 pm

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 9:12 am

Rob Zombie!!!!! Imagine the brutality.
User avatar
emily grieve
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:55 pm

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:28 am

Ghoul anti hero??? As a first impression to the market of Fallout???? I highly disagree. I agree that you want to be original. But that doesn't mean having to change the whole story line to something people wouldn't understand. I think we need to start the series with the moments before the Great War, and then the story of the VD. So the public see what happened to the world, and the original hero. But why would that be unoriginal when you can make it very original with your shots, writing, etc I just couldn't see how a movie with a ghoul anti hero or something like that would get popular or show what Fallout really is to the general audience. The whole thing would flop. I'm not some guys who just cares about how well it does, but I don't want people to not understand it, hate it, and not pay to see it which kills making a profit on the film. I want people to see the great universe that Fallout is first, then after it gets moderate audiences and people like it then you could do your ghoul anti hero story without more of a chance of it flopping or people not understanding it. Tying myself to the the Vault Dweller? Are you suggesting that the Vault Dweller is "un Fallout"???? He started the whole series! How is he not Fallout enough???? He should be introduced first as the hero while you can have other secondary characters later. I'm not tying myself to him, I'm starting with him because he is the logical choice.

Basically after all that the main idea is that I disagree with 99% of your opinion. but everybody's entitled to their own.

(BTW why make the option to make a movie in FO1 era if you're just gonna flame us for our ideas?) And you said DREAM movie so there's mine.


I am not flaming you. I am getting you to think. However, your failing to see that point. Look, that Ghoul thing was just an option, it was an example, not a reality. I listed it because Zombies are mostly the in thing any way. What with "The Walking Dead" getting ready to come on AMC and World War Z coming to Theaters in 2012 the Zombie film has never been hotter. Sorry to brake it to ya, but people love zombies right now, and to have it flipped to where something that looks like Evil Ash is the good guy, it is not such a bad thing for the movie going public's attention. Maybe for you it is, but I honestly do not feel it would be that way in the eyes of the general public. As for your wanting to be original, I get that, but your idea, it is rehashing an old story from the first Fallout and that will not make the movie honor the legacy of Fallout. Also location wise it's like the guy said above me, it would be great in a place like St. Louis instead of the West Coast. I think even Chicago would be rather cool to see it in as well. Not to begrudge your opinion, but people are bound to hate your movie or love your movie regardless of what you plan, this goes for me too. Speaking to only the fans of your niche is not the way to bring the masses to a film. You have to try to encompass the whole of the parts to equal the sum of all the stories parts. Even to the point where your brain is about to pop from exhaustion and your eyes are about to bleed out from the constant head aches. Now, to get people to want more Fallout don't go with something that has already been done, because that is not fallout, nothing is ever rehashed in Fallout. Unless you count conflict of some sort. Even that changes though.

I am fine with you not agreeing with me, but as long as you get it, that is all I care about.

And one more thing Lucky38. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwZNKntZ6CU

none of yer options appeal to me, here are my selections.

Young lead - Cristina Ricci, Beth Riesgraf or Shia LaBeouf
Older lead - Jeri Ryan or Christian Kale

Time - doesn't really matter since all the fallout games take place within a fairly short period.
Location - Somewhere in the Central US, maybe St Louis. We already got both coasts covered.

Director - Michael Bay


Wow...

You make me sad.

Your Director Choice is the worst possible choice to even think of, the man is as bad as George Lucas.

I am okay with your choice of actors as long as the movie doesn't have "B-movie" written all over it. ;)
User avatar
Solène We
 
Posts: 3470
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:04 am

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 1:38 am

Hmmm, not sure who'd I cast. But what I do know is this: Quentin Tarantino or Robert Rodriguez as director.
User avatar
Laura-Lee Gerwing
 
Posts: 3363
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:46 am

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:18 am

Hmmm, not sure who'd I cast. But what I do know is this: Quentin Tarantino or Robert Rodriguez as director.


I want to have your babies...

...

...

I am so drunk right now.
User avatar
Helen Quill
 
Posts: 3334
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:12 pm

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 8:01 am


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwZNKntZ6CU


That video represents commenters on youtube.


Ok I'll agree with you on one thing. Michael Bay svcks. :shakehead: He should stay like he was in Transformers...... flicked by Megatron.
User avatar
Catherine Harte
 
Posts: 3379
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 12:58 pm

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 4:40 am

That video represents commenters on youtube.


Ok I'll agree with you on one thing. Michael Bay svcks. :shakehead: He should stay like he was in Transformers...... flicked by Megatron.


I can assume you are choosing to disbelieve the video in the context in which I was showing you it. If that is the case "I think my words speak for themselves. Move along." :facepalm:

Why do I not see this working. :unsure:
User avatar
Camden Unglesbee
 
Posts: 3467
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 8:30 am

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 7:28 am

Director: Either Alfonso Cuarón (with the same touch as in Children of men), Terry Gilliam, Ridley Scott or Steven Spielberg (with his serious face on)

Protagonist: Skeet Ulrich (a good "not too celebrity" actor)

Supporting cast (few): Michael Wincott, Brad Dourif, Ian McShane, Ian McNeice, Powers Boothe, Kevin McKidd, Kirk Acevedo, James Purefoy, Polly Walker, Lindsay Duncan, Molly parker, Nicole DeBoer....

I'd like it to be either at least 3 hours long (to get good amount of story in it and not just rush with action - I like movies with substance) or a miniserie (5-10 episodes).
User avatar
Destinyscharm
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:06 pm

Post » Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:23 am

I can assume you are choosing to disbelieve the video in the context in which I was showing you it. If that is the case "I think my words speak for themselves. Move along." :facepalm:

Why do I not see this working. :unsure:


I understand, you were apparently calling me and my opinion "gay". While I was merely saying what I thought, which is that the spatula greatly reminds me of mindless comments on youtube. I do not "disbelieve" it, I am stating my opinion. Also, why bring "gay" into the subject matter? What are you? 12? I thought we were discussing our beliefs and opinions on film making :unsure2:
User avatar
MR.BIGG
 
Posts: 3373
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 7:51 am

Post » Sun Mar 06, 2011 7:52 pm

Ben Foster: Amazing actor and would play the part perfectly. See "Pandorum"

Fallout 3: Just a great/iconic setting

Duncan Jones: He would make it look so gritty and realistic with his "classic" aproach to making films.
User avatar
Marnesia Steele
 
Posts: 3398
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:11 pm

Previous

Return to Fallout Series Discussion