[Fantinaikos]

You have in mind a prequel/midquel/sequel/remake/reboot? a Live-Action? a your totally made-up subject/script? or even an idea so experimental that probably does not have enough market to get on screen? And in any case with who and how?

Here we simple let get out the movies we have in our heads.

Guidelines and tips

*Choose which actor (or other showbusiness related personality) hiring in which role. Ignore if dead or alive just indicate who you repute fit for the purpose, his actual age it's a bit more important instead. Multiple proposals are allowed.

*Explain how you intend to build the general atmosphere and the scenic elements including special effects if there are.

*If your movie is an animated feature film you can specify If and what animation production studio would you like see working on it.

*You can modify or expanding the post you have already written progressively once you have new ideas or rethinkings.

*I don't think there is need to point out this detail, but just avoid to insert yourself as an actor in your own creation. Nobody want a self-inserted mary sue isn't?

*On other hand you can impersonate the director, the producer or both in case you cannot imagine someone that is more capable of giving shape to your creation If not yourself. Wiseau did that.

*If you feel particularly creative you can even expose an excerpt of plausible synopsis. however, especially for not original subject, try to not fall into the typical fanfiction cliche or cringe territory (even if it is a countersense a bit because, unless your movie follow a script already written like a tale or an opera, it will be almost unavoidably dictated by your interpretation of the source material on certain aspects. Does not mean that all is fanfictions is terribly written though)

[Mark]

Older Katharine Hepburn and Michael J Fox star in " Shake it Baby "

The tag line made famous by the movie is " She was shaking like a fat hooker on a cold night ".

[Micky C]

[Fantinaikos]

Here is my movie idea: An Adventure Time live action where the scenography is treated with the same cure used in "Hook", one of the small defects in that movie was the general heavy colossal aura due to this but Aventure Time has a lot of elements that justify this kind of visual epicness. The cast can't be totally composed by persons for sure, consequently all sentient being that it's not humanoid will be puppets/animatronics voiced by the original show dubbers but guys in costume are not excluded. A LOT of makeup will be involved, the same troupe from "Dr.Who" (not 63-96 obviously) should be the most suitable to fulfill this task while the most grotesque creatures will be eventually assigned to a different team, like someone that worked for the Yuzna's movies (1989 "Society" should give you the right idea). If there will be some gore, much of it will be impeccably represented by common stuff that can be found at grocery store and in nature, if you don't know why that means you have never seen a single episode.

The problem will be reinterpret in reality what look appealing in drawings, if transposed too faithfully every not human character will look like a walking nightmare fuel (like for Thing 1 and Thing 2 from the awful "Cat In The Hat" movie) but neither make them look like too fake except for those creatures that requires to looking plasticous for their nature.

Using less CGI with or without greenscreen as possible (this move is also good for the budget) just limited to background stuff and little but not risible postproduction effects in specific points. Anyway on some actors who portray determined characters such as Princess Flame will be obligatory. In this regard, utilize real actors logically preclude the use of original voices from the show unless you apply post-dubbing that I don't recommend.

The Soundtrack could include tracks performed by Bonnie Tyler written for the occasion, alternatively it's evergreen classics like "I need an hero".

Most important: It does not ruin the career or the life of half the people who participate (like happened for Star Wars even if it will difficult since the many common points with realization) neither a empty picture like the two Live-Action "Alice In Wordeland" from Disney.


Some Actors

Jack Gleeson as Finn Mertens

You know, Joffrey Baratheon in Game Of Thrones. Not sure anyway.


Mel Gibson as Simon Petrikov aka Ice King.

why? the real question is: Why you asking "WHY"?

*Facial structure. CHECK (just let grow natural beard to contain makeup costs)
*Knows how to do dramatic roles. CHECK
*Knows how to do the crazy guy. CHECK
*Experience with post-apocalyptic genera (useful in case of flashbacks in after
*Mushroom bomb pre-OOO era). CHECK
*Experience with medieval genera that eventually involves princess. CHECK

Alternative: Robin Williams (dead)


Jim Carrey as Magic Man/Normal Man

I imagine him good enough in both of the roles. Only in the shoes of Normal man is a waste of his underrated potential so maybe it will return Magic Man for a period of time as a result of an event.

Alternative: Nicolas " Kim Coppola" Cage


Jim Parsons as Count Lemongrab

The Sheldon Cooper of Big Bang Theory. As much as I hate that series for being not really funny and laughtrack rape (go watch Silicon Valley instead).


Plot

To define.


Yes I know that video parody by GreetyRebbots, you don't need to post it.

[Fox]

I am just glad they are making a sequel to The Incredibles. I will just wait when Zootopia also gets one.

[Forge]

A proper movie series for the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy set of books.

The only one that came even close was the old BBC tv series, and that was done on a small budget. It was like watching a bad Dr. Who spinoff.

[Forge]

Fox, on 01 August 2017 - 05:12 AM, said:

I am just glad they are making a sequel to The Incredibles. I will just wait when Zootopia also gets one.

[MusicallyInspired]

I enjoyed the movie with Alan Rickman. Never experienced the story before that, though.

[Forge]

MusicallyInspired, on 01 August 2017 - 09:40 AM, said:

I enjoyed the movie with Alan Rickman. Never experienced the story before that, though.

didn't do the radio show or book any justice

[Sledgehammer]

Fox, on 01 August 2017 - 05:12 AM, said:

I am just glad they are making a sequel to The Incredibles.

I just hope it won't be shit, it's definitely one of my favorite movies and well, Pixar isn't as good anymore (shouldn't even mention Disney), especially when it comes to sequels, something what they wanted to avoid back then when they were free IIRC (though Brad Bird wanted to make one long time ago). With The Incredibles it might be not as easy to pull out a proper sequel, for example. Plus, I wonder if original guys behind the first movie are still there. I know that Brad Bird is still there (along with some VAs), but he's not the sole person who made it.

[Fox]

Disney modern policy for sequels is to let the original authors decide if they want to make one or another. They don't push for profit (and they don't have to). Despite rumors about Cars, the director said the sequel was his idea.

Sledgehammer, on 01 August 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

Pixar isn't as good anymore (shouldn't even mention Disney)

[Hendricks266]

Name a single bad Pixar movie. A single one.

I recently watched Cars and Cars 2 for the first time and I enjoyed both. Sure, Cars 2 may not have that Pixar "warm & fuzzy" but it excels at what it set out to do.

[ReaperMan]

Hendricks266, on 01 August 2017 - 02:22 PM, said:

Name a single bad Pixar movie. A single one.

I recently watched Cars and Cars 2 for the first time and I enjoyed both. Sure, Cars 2 may not have that Pixar "warm & fuzzy" but it excels at what it set out to do.

The Good Dinosaur.

[MusicallyInspired]

Hendricks266, on 01 August 2017 - 02:22 PM, said:

Name a single bad Pixar movie. A single one.

Pixar hasn't made any truly bad films per se, but the first one for me that marked their downfall in quality from spectacular to mediocre was Ratatouille. And then after that, Brave. And then they started just swarming us with sequels, which were good but mostly because of what they were sequels to. I haven't been really excited about a Pixar movie since Wall-E (....and Toy Story 3, I guess, because that movie was freaking awesome despite being a sequel). It just seemed timely to me that after Pixar's first mediocre movie they soon after started degenerating into sequelitis. Both those things together just spells "bad" to me. But they're still Pixar so they're not horrible. I just haven't been a fan of their latest work.

[Sledgehammer]

MI worded it perfectly, exactly my thoughts, don't think I have to add anything else.

ReaperMan, on 01 August 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

The Good Dinosaur.

Damn, I didn't even know that it was Pixar movie.

[MusicallyInspired]

It just used to be that when a Pixar movie was coming out you knew it was going to be good so you saw it anyway whether the premise looked interesting or not (but honestly, it usually did) because Pixar was just that good. Ratatouille showed me they were no longer worthy of that reputation.

[Sledgehammer]

Exactly. Everything they made prior they were bought by Disney was actually great and I also blindly trusted them until they made Ratatouille. I mean why wouldn't you trust someone who made this in 80s, it still holds to this day:


I still had some hope though and I used to trust them even after Ratatouille (maybe because I didn't know how disgusting Disney is at that time), didn't really enjoy many of their other works after Ratatouille however. I should mention that I kind of liked Inside Out though, there was something about it, I wouldn't say it was truly great or a masterpiece, but I definitely liked it.

[MusicallyInspired]

I've heard Inside Out was good. I still haven't had the chance to see it for myself yet.

[Fox]

You guys must be joking about Ratatouille.

[MusicallyInspired]

Dead serious. I didn't even get the point when I first saw it. It marinated in me after and I get it now but all I could ask myself after that was "Well....so? Why?" Anyone can cook? Who cares?"

[Sledgehammer]

MusicallyInspired, on 01 August 2017 - 08:59 PM, said:

I've heard Inside Out was good. I still haven't had the chance to see it for myself yet.

I think it's worth watching at least once. Probably going to re-watch it later and then get my hands on The Incredibles, haven't watched it for a long time.

[Fantinaikos]

Random thought: Never had the sensation that "Grease" seems made of cutted out scenes from "Animal House" or a parallel story at least? I'm not talking about a crossover, the two movies could completely coexist with just few minor changes. Always considering that remove or maintain musical parts it's a crucial decision since it swap the genre of one of the two, apart from the college subject.

You personally have two or more movies that you would join into a single one together even if totally different?

[Fox]