Anyone interested in a NEW "Mars Attacks!" movie? - Mars Attacks! (1996) Discussion

[–] leetron 10 years ago

Only if it has Tom Jones in it.

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Whether or not Tom Jones is in it . . .

The NEW Mars Attacks movie should NOT be a spoof like the Burton film was.

I won't mince words here.

The Mars Attacks cards were and are graphic and shocking and overly violent so a Mars Attacks movie ought to be just as graphic, shocking and overly violent . . . if not MORE so.

reply

[–] leetron 10 years ago

IDK. The camp/comedy is what made Burton's version appealing and stand apart.

A straight-up horror film based on the cards would probably get lost in the sea of horror already out there.

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

I wonder about that.

BTW, the Mars Attacks! cards are basically more science fiction than horror . . . they simply pile on the gore.

reply

[–] leetron 10 years ago

The cards are great: http://www.tkinter.org/Stuff/MarsAttacksCards/index.htm

You can see a couple that Burton lifted directly.

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] cathy-creswell 10 years ago

Thanks for the post. I didn't collect the cards, so this is all new to me.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

I'd rather see a "Dinosaurs Attack!" movie.

Wouldn't THAT be a "Jurassic Park" clone?

reply

[–] leetron 10 years ago

Not if the dinosaurs had lasers!

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Lasers?

Sounds like a case of missing the point to me.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

No, the original cards were NOT a spoof.

The story was played straight.

Now Burton's version, THAT was a spoof.

reply

[–] Wombstar 10 years ago

Yes they were a spoof.
They were done seriously at all, not even the creators/designed who worked on it would agree with you.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Wrong.

The cards were sci-fi thrillers of the shocking and violent sort.

reply

[–] Wombstar 10 years ago

Not according to those who made them.
I think i'll believe what their intentions were than what your interpretation is.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Clearly you are not familiar with the cards at all.

For they were intended to be sci fi thrillers and were marketed as such.

reply

[–] Wombstar 10 years ago

I have all the cards, and as i said i tend to listen to those who created them, they know more about their work then you do.

Clearly you're not familiar with the cards or their history.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

I am indeed familiar with the cards and the creators clearly intended them to be graphically violent sci-fi thrillers.

You should do better research.

reply

[–] Wombstar 10 years ago

That's not what they say.
But never mind, you must be right and they must be wrong.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Are you still trolling, Wombstar?

reply

[–] Wombstar 10 years ago

Look who's talking.

Stop coming up with stupid and false information.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Troll.

reply

[–] virgiltx 10 years ago

I think it's just a little too soon for a remake. I think it needs to be 20-25 years, at least, with 30 being the probable minimum. I'm basing that on historical precedent. The most relevant example would be The Thing (1982), remake of The Thing from Another World (1951).

I'm disregarding English language remakes of foreign language films, which are often just several years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_remakes_(N–Z)

____________________
The story is king.[royal]

reply

[–] leetron 10 years ago

nak nak nak, nak nak, NAK NAK!

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Still missing the point, I see.

reply

[–] leetron 10 years ago

How would you make them sound?

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

The point is:

The original cards were NOT a comedy at all.

So an updated film version (most likely an R-rated one) would be more serious, more violent, more graphic.

So, would anyone on this forum want to contribute anything to this thread other than goofiness?

reply

[–] leetron 10 years ago

Lighten up, Francis.

If you want a specific version of a movie to be made, Lobby to John Carpenter, or Steven Spielberg. Or move to Hollywood, learn how to make movies, and do it yourself.
Anyone can sit back and espouse ideas that others will have to fulfill to make you happy. That's the EASY part. It's a hell of a lot harder to actually DO something.

NAK!

Hey Whitey! Where's your hat?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

I wonder if there are any "Mars Attacks" cards purists on this board.

Virgiltx struck me as one for the most part. The "Where it goes wrong" thread seemed to me like a thread worth reading.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

So, with that out of the way . . .

reply

[–] grrrdevin 10 years ago

Wow, who cares whether it has graphic violence or not? Get a therapist.

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Well, graphic violence WAS the selling point of the cards . . .

reply

[–] grrrdevin 10 years ago

While that is completely true, I'm not sure how the novelty would carry over to a film without coming across as torture porn. I mean, that has its audience, but it's very niche if you ask me. I'll admit I could see it working in context. For example, the most disturbing card was the men tied to rocket tubes being blown in half. This would make a very suspenseful scene if a protagonist were tied to one of the tubes while others died around her/him.

Otherwise, the invasion is really the point of the cards' premise, and how many alien invasion movies have we already seen?

reply

[–] rgon-1 10 years ago

Not half as much as zombie apocalypse movies, perhaps?

reply

[–] grrrdevin 10 years ago

True.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Bloodfordracula 9 years ago

Set in the Cold War '60s with 100% practical effects.

reply

[–] darkzero 9 years ago

One that is MORE faithful to the original Topps cards?

Abso-bloody-lutely.

However, there are some prerequisites that must be adhered to in order for it to work:

1. Setting it in the early 60s to stay true to the trading card series.

2. A subtle tone, like a B-movie pretending to take itself seriously, but with a knowing wink.

3. Little people in costumes/animatronic masks as the martians instead of CGI.

4. R-rating - the trading card series was full of graphic gore, and so should be the movie.

Originality needs a reboot.

reply

[–] rgon-1 9 years ago

Well said, darkzero. Particularly the point about the graphic gore.

reply