Posted by
James Killian on
Nov 19, 2010; 4:37pm
URL: https://www.shado-forum.com/Signed-Copy-of-Shane-Rimmer-Book-tp1906819p1931583.html
Well first off there is a lot of difference in money from 1980's Alien 35
million to 95 million today. Back then the average budget for a film was 20 to
40 million. Now days its more like 200 million. Which make budget of something
like District 9 seems like something done by Roger Corman for a million back in
the 70's.
There are a few FX people who can still do old school miniture effects but
now days everyone is so caught up in doing CGI works its almost forgotten.
And the other big problem is what you mention which instead of a good plot
feeling the screen with explosions every few minutes to make up for it.
James Killian
________________________________
From: "Hemmings, Rob K." <
[hidden email]>
To: "
[hidden email]" <
[hidden email]>
Sent: Fri, November 19, 2010 10:03:14 AM
Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !
Agreed.
Ridley Scott didn't do bad with only 14/28 million for Blade Runner. :o)
(well, as long as you view the seminal Directors Cut version, rather
than the dumbbed-down original release.)
Little models, painted scenery, but you can't tell that in the film -
those Blade Runner scenes look more realistic than any made using CGI
and costing megabucks, as in more recent films (which others have
already mentioned.)
One (rhet.) question though: Are there still the skills out there to
do stuff like this based on models?..
Best,
--
Rob
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
[hidden email] [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
>Marc Martin
>Sent: 18 November 2010 03:08
>To:
[hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO 2012 !
>
>> Marc, and anyone else who might be interested I also had a look at the
>> IMDB site for the up coming UFO film and beside the date change I also
>> noticed the supposed budget for the film. Only 95 million dollars.
>> That sort of on the low side in this day for a Sci-Fi film. The cast
>> will take a good deal of that leaving very little for anything in the
>> way of FX work or extras. Anybody think they can do a good film on
>> this kind of money?
>
>I think earlier articles had the budget at $130 million. Who knows
>what's correct, or even if this film will ever be made?
>
>Frankly, I see a limited budget as a potential good thing. The original
>series did NOT have an infinite amount of money at their disposal, and
>some of the episodes were pretty low budget.
>
>Marc
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]