i effin rule Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <p>*Have no idea how up to date this is, but it was the last one posted. I tacked mine onto it.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Actors:</p><p> </p><p> Adam Beach</p><p> Alan Rickman</p><p> Ben Afleck</p><p> Bruce Willis</p><p> Christopher Waltz</p><p> Danny DeVito</p><p> Edward Norton</p><p> Eric Bana</p><p> Gerard Butler</p><p> Hugh Laurie</p><p> Jared Leto</p><p> Jason Alexander</p><p> Jason Lee</p><p> Jeff Bridges</p><p> Jensen Ackles</p><p> John C. Reilly</p><p> Johnny Depp</p><p> Joseph Gordon-Levitt</p><p> Josh Brolin</p><p> Josh Holloway</p><p> Leonardo De Caprio</p><p> Matthew Fox</p><p> Michael Cain</p><p> Paul Walker</p><p> Robert De Niro</p><p> Ryan Reynolds</p><p> Steve Buschemi</p><p> Jay Baruchel</p><p> </p><p> Actresses:</p><p> </p><p> Alexis Bledel</p><p> Alison Brie</p><p> Amanda Tapping</p><p> Anna Farris</p><p> Ashley Olsen</p><p> Ashley Tisdale</p><p> Betty White</p><p> Emma Watson</p><p> Erica Durance</p><p> Eva Longoria</p><p> Evan Rachel Wood</p><p> Heather Graham</p><p> Hillary Duff</p><p> Jessica Biel</p><p> Kathy Bates</p><p> Kristen Bell</p><p> Lauren Graham</p><p> Marcia Gay Harden</p><p> Mila Kunis</p><p> Rachel McAdams</p><p> Rosie O'Donnel</p><p> Scarlett Johanssen</p><p> Sophia Bush</p><p> Zooey Deschanel</p><p> </p><p> Directors:</p><p> </p><p> Alfonso Cuaron</p><p> Darren Aronofsky</p><p> David Cronenberg</p><p> David Fincher</p><p> Eli Roth</p><p> JJ Abrams</p><p> Michael Bay</p><p> Robert Rodriguez</p><p> Sam Raimi</p><p> The Coen Brothers</p><p> Zach Braff</p><p> Sophia Coppola</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astil Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Heeeeeyy guuuys. on a break. since i dont see anyone else doing reviews why dont we pause submissions until Mad, lawkid| or I can get some reviews done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crayon Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <p>Not sure how useful this will be, but for those who are having trouble describing their plots...</p><p> </p><p> <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheSevenBasicPlots" rel="external nofollow">The 7 Basic Plots</a></p><p> </p><p> It is believed that all traditional stories can be broken down to 7 basic plots. That link provides a list to all seven, in brief and in detail.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 Sorry guys I've been stuck at work all day. Looks like you guys built up a lot of stories duing that 24 hour down period. I'm going to try and get some reviews down now. I think I'm shooting for an 8pm EST deadline then I will close it out for the night (which sucks since I haven't posted it), so if you're going to submit today you have roughly 2.5 hours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="crayon" data-cite="crayon" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Not sure how useful this will be, but for those who are having trouble describing their plots...<p> </p><p> <a href="http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheSevenBasicPlots" rel="external nofollow">The 7 Basic Plots</a></p><p> </p><p> It is believed that all traditional stories can be broken down to 7 basic plots. That link provides a list to all seven, in brief and in detail.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Great post</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Borderline Studios continues to ponder theie next move in the movie industry... while not ruling out a move to adult entertainment, they might try to make an actual movie tomorrow instead. While considering the cast they do have a question that might be interesting... Given that many of us here play games set in the Cornellverse and the like, are we allowed to use any of those people in movies? I was considering a superhero movie based on a promotion I was drafting once and thought it might be worth asking about it ahead of time. Not likely to take advantage of it any time in the near future, but it could become a franchise of mine if things were to go well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Astil" data-cite="Astil" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Astilian Productions (Starting Balance: 4,685,000)<p> </p><p> Title- A Decline in Sales</p><p> Lead Actor- Johnny Depp (100,000)</p><p> Lead Actress- Ashley Tisdale (10,000)</p><p> Director - David Ficher - 100,000</p><p> Genre- Drama</p><p> Plot- Successful singer Victoria Van Horn (Ashley Tisdale) has already seen two gold records at the young age of 20. Living a rather grounded life, she is a role model to those around her.</p><p> </p><p> That is until her aging agent retires, leaving her to find a new one. It is in this search she meet the eccentric Bobby Blade (Johnny Depp). The two hit it off well, and not only is Blade hired, but there is a bit of a romance. Van Horn's family warns her of it, but Victoria ignores them, and eventually casts them out.</p><p> </p><p> When her third album hits the market, thanks to Blade's hard work it debuts number one! This is where Van Horn reveals she wants to be an actress.</p><p> </p><p> For Van Horn's first movie Blade gets her a supporting role in a high school comedy. While a lot of the jokes are directed at Van Horn's character, they seem to be making fun of Victoria herself. She tells the director she wants the jokes changed, but the director simply tells her to play her role.</p><p> </p><p> The climax comes when Victoria first refuses, but then takes part in a racey scene that leads to her character sleeping with the antagonist. When the movie debuts Victoria Van Horn takes a huge backlash. She tries to call Blade but his phone has been disconnected.</p><p> </p><p> The story ends with Victoria Van Horn singing at a state fair, when Blade and the director walk by, chatting, obviously friendly. Van Horn suddenly realizes, and walks off the stage before finishing her set.</p><p> </p><p> Location- Memphis, TN</p><p> Budget- (Crew: 210,000, Production: 290,000 Marketing 250,000) TOTAL 750,000</p><p> Duration - 121 Minutes</p><p> </p><p> THE LIST</p><p> </p><p> Dare to Dream - TwistofFate Productions</p><p> Jack the Lion - Crychonite Studios</p><p> A Decline in Sales - Astilian Productions</p><p> </p><p> Please post this after your movie, it really helps us mods <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> Astilian Productions wanted to try and cash in on their big night at the Oscars by coming up with another sold Drama. Watching the relationship between Depp and Tisdale grow throughout the movie was very interesting and showed great range for the young Tisdale. The story itself however left a lot lacking. IT attempted to portray the struggles of trying to make it big in Hollywood even after already being a successful singer. Sadly, it missed it’s mark and we were left with a lack luster film, which a very abrupt ending. The casting was spot on, and the direction of Ficher seemed to be a good choice. However, this story just failed to have the “it” factor we were hoping for.</p><p> </p><p> Rating: 2 out of 5 stars</p><p> </p><p> Revenue: 1,100,000</p><p> </p><p> Effects:</p><p> David Ficher now wants 125,000 per movie</p><p> </p><p> Astilian Productions now has 5,035,000</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Borderline Studios continues to ponder theie next move in the movie industry... while not ruling out a move to adult entertainment, they might try to make an actual movie tomorrow instead. While considering the cast they do have a question that might be interesting...<p> </p><p> <strong>Given that many of us here play games set in the Cornellverse and the like, are we allowed to use any of those people in movies?</strong></p><p> </p><p> I was considering a superhero movie based on a promotion I was drafting once and thought it might be worth asking about it ahead of time. Not likely to take advantage of it any time in the near future, but it could become a franchise of mine if things were to go well. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Truthfully, that could be a lot of fun, not to mention add one more dimension to the C-Verse. I'll leave it open to debate for now, but truth be told the maintenance now is already a lot figuring in all the C-Verse guys may just be to much...but let's see what everyone thinks.</p><p> </p><p> If we do go forward on it though would it be to pervy of me to make an adult movie starring Hannah Potter and Emma Chase? <img alt=":o" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/redface.png.900245280682ef18c5d82399a93c5827.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> THE LIST:</p><p> ***Early Dawn - Pound Puppy Studios*** Please see posts 374, 375</p><p> Disintergration - Clarity Productions</p><p> Happy Happy Fun Land - The World's Not Round</p><p> I Love Rebecca Black 5 Times - Because of the Influence</p><p> The Relentless - Burning Pegasus</p><p> Forza Italia - Ascending Numbers Productions</p><p> Andromeda - Revenant Productions</p><p> Three Up, Three Down - Way Out In Left Field Productions</p><p> The Last Chance - JTandSilentBob</p><p> If Winter Ends - Pretty OK Films</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLLK Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Borderline Studios continues to ponder theie next move in the movie industry... while not ruling out a move to adult entertainment, they might try to make an actual movie tomorrow instead. While considering the cast they do have a question that might be interesting...<p> </p><p> <strong>Given that many of us here play games set in the Cornellverse and the like, are we allowed to use any of those people in movies?</strong></p><p> </p><p> I was considering a superhero movie based on a promotion I was drafting once and thought it might be worth asking about it ahead of time. Not likely to take advantage of it any time in the near future, but it could become a franchise of mine if things were to go well. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> I was thinking about doing something similar in the future. I say go ahead!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Crikey... while I'm apparantly coming up with good ideas, here's another potential thing for the future. Since it seems there are gonna be awards every week and that the workload here for mods is gonna keep going up rapidly as more people play and more people make movies... how about restructuring the week a little bit to makes things easier for everyone involved? I suggest breaking up the week into 4 bits. Monday/Tuesday... Wednesday/Thursday... Friday/Saturday.... and Sunday. On each of the paired days people can make 1 movie, with Sunday reserved entirely for awards. Reviews can come whenever a movie is submitted, which allows people to plan for their next movie. I'd also suggest that people can announce a movie for the next pair of days as long as they don't make one in the current stage. So a studio can announce on Monday that they are using Johnny Depp and Scarlett Johansson on their Wednesday/Thursday movie ahead of time, effectively calling dibs on the actors while also ensuring that it's not always the same people who get to use all the big stars (like say... people who aren't online early in the day ). The phases should make it easier for all players to stay on top of who is being used in any day while also ensuring that it won't always be the early birds that get their choice of actors. Likewise, by limiting how many movies people can post it'll help relieve the pressure on mods to be constantly online in order to deal with new movies. And the added structure would take away some of the chaos that can sometimes bring down games when they explode too quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i effin rule Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <p>To be honest, I'd be OK with one movie submission a week. I think it would help with the longevity of the game and slow the pace down quite a bit.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> At the rate we're going, any new studio starting out with the $1,000,000 a month from now won't have the funds to compete.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="i effin rule" data-cite="i effin rule" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>To be honest, I'd be OK with one movie submission a week. I think it would help with the longevity of the game and slow the pace down quite a bit.<p> </p><p> </p><p> At the rate we're going, any new studio starting out with the $1,000,000 a month from now won't have the funds to compete.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I thought about this a bit myself. My fear is that it's just to long of a gap in between. Maybe a compromise of 2 or even 3 a week though. That way we could still do awards weekly and they would hold more weight than if it were just 1 movie a studio. I don't know though, I hate limiting people. I think as long as you want to be able to post you should be able to ya know</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="i effin rule" data-cite="i effin rule" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>To be honest, I'd be OK with one movie submission a week. I think it would help with the longevity of the game and slow the pace down quite a bit.<p> </p><p> </p><p> At the rate we're going, any new studio starting out with the $1,000,000 a month from now won't have the funds to compete.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I suggested that a while back too, didn't seem to be a particularly popular choice at the time but I'd be happy with that too. It just feels like this has gotten popular very quickly and that the mods are gonna have to do a lot of work. If we did move to a weekly format then one week could be the equivalent of a season... awards would only need to be every 4 weeks, which might be better too as it would give everyone a chance to read everything in the thread too. Game is moving so fast I find myself skimming stuff already, can't imagine how much I'll do that if more and more people join. <img alt=":(" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/frown.png.e6b571745a30fe6a6f2e918994141a47.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_w_w Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Derek B" data-cite="Derek B" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Crikey... while I'm apparantly coming up with good ideas, here's another potential thing for the future.<p> </p><p> Since it seems there are gonna be awards every week and that the workload here for mods is gonna keep going up rapidly as more people play and more people make movies... how about restructuring the week a little bit to makes things easier for everyone involved?</p><p> </p><p> I suggest breaking up the week into 4 bits. Monday/Tuesday... Wednesday/Thursday... Friday/Saturday.... and Sunday. On each of the paired days people can make 1 movie, with Sunday reserved entirely for awards. Reviews can come whenever a movie is submitted, which allows people to plan for their next movie.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I would support this (or, alternatively, the 1 movie per week deal as well. </p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'd also suggest that people can announce a movie for the next pair of days as long as they don't make one in the current stage. So a studio can announce on Monday that they are using Johnny Depp and Scarlett Johansson on their Wednesday/Thursday movie ahead of time, effectively calling dibs on the actors while also ensuring that it's not always the same people who get to use all the big stars (like say... people who aren't online early in the day <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" />).<p> </p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I agree that something should be done to prevent the people that are online early in the day from always getting the big stars, but I'm not sure I like the dibs system. I worry about people calling dibs and not actually posting a movie. I guess, if there was some penalty for doing that (e.g., some income penalty, the actors you called dibs on won't work for you for two weeks, you can't call dibs until next season, etc), I'd be more in favor it. </p><p> </p><p> Penalties add to the mod workload though. Maybe this wouldn't be such a big deal though, if the volume of movies decreased (via only one movie per week or only 2 or 3 movies per week0. </p><p> </p><p> An alternative might be that a movie studio can only use an actor and director once per week. Not sure that would be as effective, but it might still spread the talent around.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i effin rule Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <p>Hey mad, what are you thoughts on the discussion from earlier regarding potential D20 use and floors/ceilings?</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> I can put everything into one post if you'd like me to.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Clarity" data-cite="Clarity" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><strong>Clarity Productions:</strong> $10,480,000<p> </p><p> <strong>Title -</strong> Disintergration</p><p> <strong>Lead Actor -</strong> Hugh Laurie ($25,000)</p><p> <strong>Lead Actress -</strong> Eva Longoria (50,000)</p><p> <strong>Supporting Actor -</strong> Jeff Bridges (40,000)</p><p> <strong>Supporting Actress -</strong> Heather Graham ($25,000)</p><p> <strong>Director -</strong> Zach Braff (25,000)</p><p> <strong>Genre -</strong> Drama</p><p> </p><p> <strong>Plot -</strong></p><p> What happened to the love we both knew?</p><p> </p><p> That question is at the heart of Disintergration. Colin Bass (Hugh Laurie) and his wife Sandra (Eva Longoria) have been married now for many years. They lives have become dull and boring and each yearn for something more. They begin to argue more and more and eventually seperate. Colin hits rock bottom and winds up at the bottom of the bottle before meeting homeless Walter (Jeff Bridges) whilst Sandra tries struggling on day to day in an empty house..</p><p> </p><p> Disintergration follows both of them struggling to deal with the breakdown of their marriage and Colins slip into alcoholism.</p><p> </p><p> With the help of Walter, Colin begins to start looking forward to each day however the couple never reconcile. </p><p> </p><p> <strong>Location-</strong> Chicago, USA</p><p> </p><p> <strong>Budget-</strong> $165,000 for Cast and Director + $400,000 production cost = $565,000</p><p> </p><p> <strong>Duration -</strong> 95 Minutes</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> Perhaps the most anticipated film of the week comes out this week in Disintegration. The second film by Clarity Productions is hoping to start where the first left off, at the top. Hugh Laurie plays Colin, a married man who starts to get tired of his dull life. His wife Sandra, played Eva Longoria, feels the stress of it too and as a result their marriage suffers. The film takes a sad look at how most marriages in America fall apart and begs for the actors to work through their differences. Sadly, that’s not to be. Colin decides to turn to the bottle where he meets Walter, played by Jeff Bridges, and starts to slowly come out of his depression. The story ends with Colin realizing that his life isn’t that bad and slowly starts looking forward to his life ahead. Sadly however the couple never gets back together. </p><p> </p><p> The Bottom Line:</p><p> Clarity productions have made another sure fire classic that is sure to make it big. The dynamic between Laurie and Longoria was spot on and I look forward to seeing them work together In the future. Bridges executed his role as a kind of mentor to perfection as well, and overall you couldn’t ask for better asking. One thing that was concerning however Heather Graham’s lack of involvement in the film. While being listed as a supporting actress she barely had any screen time and you have to wonder if perhaps this was just the CEO trying to “get lucky” again. More advertising would have helped this movie really succeed in the box office, but sadly that was not meant to be.</p><p> </p><p> On a side note, I don’t see how much you spent on advertising. I’m going to take a stab in the dark here and just say 200K for both production and Advertising. Also, I adjusted your cast cost due to your half price perk. I’m not sure if you didn’t see it, just forgot, or thought I was the one to do it and not you. Either way please include all perks in your costs so I don’t have to dig for them, just makes it a little easier on me. You’re adjusted worker cost was 82,500.</p><p> </p><p> Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars (Although I was tempted to give it another 5</p><p> Revenue: 1,500,000</p><p> </p><p> Clarity Productions now has 11,931,750</p><p> </p><p> Effects:</p><p> </p><p> Clarity now must pay full price for cast</p><p> Hugh Laurie now wants 50,000 per movie</p><p> Eva Longoria now wants 65,000 per movie</p><p> Jeff Bridges now wants 50,000 per movie</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> THE LIST:</p><p> ***Early Dawn - Pound Puppy Studios*** Please see posts 374, 375</p><p> Happy Happy Fun Land - The World's Not Round</p><p> I Love Rebecca Black 5 Times - Because of the Influence</p><p> The Relentless - Burning Pegasus</p><p> Forza Italia - Ascending Numbers Productions</p><p> Andromeda - Revenant Productions</p><p> Three Up, Three Down - Way Out In Left Field Productions</p><p> The Last Chance - JTandSilentBob</p><p> If Winter Ends - Pretty OK Films</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="i effin rule" data-cite="i effin rule" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hey mad, what are you thoughts on the discussion from earlier regarding potential D20 use and floors/ceilings?<p> </p><p> </p><p> I can put everything into one post if you'd like me to.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I think it has a lot of marit and makes sense. However, I like the way I do things. It's simple, and effective. The more elements I add into this the harder it is to do each review. You figure each review now takes me roughly 10 -15 minutes. I add in floors and ceiling and bigger dice and crazy math and chemistry and... you get the idea. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> I think for this being what it is, a game on a forum, it's more the effective enough. If/When I decide to put this into video game form I will be picking everyone's brains for complex ideas.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astil Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="d_w_w" data-cite="d_w_w" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Just some more discussion (taking the day off of making a movie, I think):<p> </p><p> So, just some more thoughts from my end:</p><p> </p><p> I think that the highly rated movies and awe-inspiring performances are too common right now. For example, Paul Walker's has given some great performances in the game so far... and nothing against Paul Walker, but I've never seen him as that level of an actor (in my mind, his best performance (out of the movies I've seen) is probably in the dog movie, which was good - but not great). </p><p> </p><p> While it would be cool to have some actor quality score that modifies how well an actor performs, I think that this would be a mistake (A, it would take too much work and B, it would be be contentious).</p><p> </p><p> I'm not privy to how the movie rating system works now, but I remember a post by mad stating that he got "6's" for 50 Cent and Lindsay Lohan. I'd suggest moving to a D20 system (or, randomizing 1-20 on random.org, if you don't happen to have a D20 lying about). If a 6 is currently a great performance, this would reduce the baseline probability from 16.7% to about 4% (which makes sense to me). </p><p> </p><p> A score of...</p><p> </p><p> 19-20: Oscar worthy, great film, allows movies to hit the 4.5-5 star rating (if done by lead actors)</p><p> 17-18: Fringe Oscar discussion (e.g., could be a nominee if there aren't 3 or 4 in the score range above), great performance, allows movies to hit the 3.5-4.5 rating.</p><p> 15-16: Good performance. Allows movies to hit the 2.5-3.5 rating.</p><p> 9-14: Average performance. Allows movies to hit 2-3 star rating. </p><p> 7-8: Awkward performance, but not horrible. 1.5-2.5 stars.</p><p> 5-6: Very poor performance. 1 to 1.5 stars.</p><p> <5: Razzie Worthy. For movies under 1 star.</p><p> </p><p> I'd recommend... randomizing the score for each actor and director in the film:</p><p> </p><p> Then applying the following modifiers:</p><p> </p><p> General casting: Is the overall casting of the film (and assignment of director) sensible? -1 if it seems off, 0 it it's okay, +1 if it's an overall good casting scheme (on the theory that having good people around you helps you perform, while having bad people around you hurts your performance)</p><p> </p><p> Specific casting: Is the specific actor/director appropriately cast? Same range of modifiers (on the theory that you'll perform better in roles you are suited for and worse in other roles)</p><p> </p><p> Story: Does the reviewer think that the story is below average (-1), average (+0), or above average (+1) (on the thought process that a good story will allow performers to do better than they otherwise might do)</p><p> </p><p> I just added the modifiers in, assuming that they currently matter (as I seem to remember some movies getting reviews that were worse for casting decisions). This of course means that a wellcasted movie with a great storyline is going to have a 25% chance of producing oscar worthy performances, so maybe the scale should be bumped up to 30 instead of 20? Doesn't matter, just preliminary thoughts. </p><p> </p><p> Again - I know nothing about the current system. Just some general thoughts off the top of my head and nothing that I'm super invested, I'm just concerned about the possibility of seeing too many highly ranked movies in a week (especially if lots of people play and submit a movie each day).</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Without revealing too much behind the curtain.</p><p> </p><p> I know I use a spreadsheet which takes into account some randomness, some opinion. Things like story, casting and direction factor in as much as actor/director chemistry, public reception and actor performance. From there I get a hard result on what your revenue will be. Then there is an overall randomizer which makes the 'x became a prima donna' or 'footage leaked on youtube' effects which may or may not effect revenue.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="d_w_w" data-cite="d_w_w" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> </p><p> I agree that something should be done to prevent the people that are online early in the day from always getting the big stars, but I'm not sure I like the dibs system. I worry about people calling dibs and not actually posting a movie. I guess, if there was some penalty for doing that (e.g., some income penalty, the actors you called dibs on won't work for you for two weeks, you can't call dibs until next season, etc), I'd be more in favor it. </p><p> </p><p> Penalties add to the mod workload though. Maybe this wouldn't be such a big deal though, if the volume of movies decreased (via only one movie per week or only 2 or 3 movies per week0. </p><p> </p><p> An alternative might be that a movie studio can only use an actor and director once per week. Not sure that would be as effective, but it might still spread the talent around.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I was pretty much implying that the dibs would be done by posting your on the Monday/Tuesday phase but it not actually being released til the Wednesday/Thursday phase. That way people don't have to wait until first thing Wednesday to post their movie (risking losing out to early posters) while not being able to post a Monday/Tuesday movie in order to balance it out. Makes it possible for people to get who they want for a film at the cost of perhaps making less films. Or perhaps more, since they'd actually have a cast to play with. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p><p> </p><p> And now, off to bed. Never shoulda stayed up to play TEW again, it's getting to be a bad habit. <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png"></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_w_w Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 <p>I appreciate mad's position on things. </p><p> </p><p> Here, barring any data entry errors on my part, is the way things currently stand on ratings (apologies on formatting, I'm too lazy to do anything more than copy and paste from sas): </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> Cumulative </p><p> rating Frequency Percent </p><p> </p><p> -1 1 2.17 </p><p> 0.5 1 2.17 </p><p> 1 2 4.35 </p><p> 1.5 4 8.70 </p><p> 2 5 10.87 </p><p> 2.5 7 15.22 </p><p> 3 8 17.39 </p><p> 3.5 5 10.87 </p><p> 4 7 15.22 </p><p> 4.5 4 8.70 </p><p> 5 2 4.35 </p><p> </p></div></blockquote><p> So, about 28% of movies get 4 or more stars. </p><p> </p><p> To me, honestly, that's about 2 or 3 times too high (I'd rather see 10 or 15%, I think, or even lower?). </p><p> </p><p> By central tendency, things look quite good (though the -1 star movie kind of throws things off... as it violates the scale and all): the mods have done a good job of balancing high rated movies with low rated movies. If I were to make a recommendation, it would simply be to have more average (2.5, 3, 3.5) star movies and fewer movies under 2.5 and above 3.5.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><p> Moments</p><p> </p><p> N 46 Sum Weights 46</p><p> Mean 2.88043478 Sum Observations 132.5</p><p> Std Deviation 1.25248545 Variance 1.56871981</p><p> Skewness -0.6204811 Kurtosis 0.72215401</p><p> Uncorrected SS 452.25 Corrected SS 70.5923913</p><p> Coeff Variation 43.4825138 Std Error Mean 0.18466891</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Basic Statistical Measures</p><p> </p><p> Location Variability</p><p> </p><p> Mean 2.880435 Std Deviation 1.25249</p><p> Median 3.000000 Variance 1.56872</p><p> Mode 3.000000 Range 6.00000</p><p> Interquartile Range 2.00000</p><p> </p></div></blockquote> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="d_w_w" data-cite="d_w_w" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I appreciate mad's position on things. <p> </p><p> Here, barring any data entry errors on my part, is the way things currently stand on ratings (apologies on formatting, I'm too lazy to do anything more than copy and paste from sas): </p><p> </p><p> So, about 28% of movies get 4 or more stars. </p><p> </p><p> To me, honestly, that's about 2 or 3 times too high (I'd rather see 10 or 15%, I think, or even lower?). </p><p> </p><p> By central tendency, things look quite good (though the -1 star movie kind of throws things off... as it violates the scale and all): the mods have done a good job of balancing high rated movies with low rated movies. If I were to make a recommendation, it would simply be to have more average (2.5, 3, 3.5) star movies and fewer movies under 2.5 and above 3.5.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> Someone has to much time on their hands <img alt=":p" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/tongue.png.ceb643b2956793497cef30b0e944be28.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /> ... Wanna help with the reviews?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 17, 2011 Author Share Posted May 17, 2011 <blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jingo" data-cite="Jingo" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="31201" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div><strong>The Worlds Not Round Studios: Balance: $5,180,000.</strong><p> </p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Title</span>- <strong>Happy, Happy Fun Land.</strong></p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Lead Actor</span>- Joseph Gordon-Levitt - $50,000</p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Lead Actress</span>- Anna Faris - $25,000</p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Supporting Actor</span>- Steve Buscemi - $45,000</p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Supporting Actor</span>- Jason Lee - $10,000 (discount for having a 4 star film).</p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Director</span> - David Cronenberg - $125,000</p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Genre</span>- Horror</p><p> </p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Plot</span>-</p><p> </p><p> Private Detective Ryan Gabriel (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is hired by Sandra Kessing (Anna Faris) to find out just what happened to her son. He was alone in the living room while she was putting the washing out and when she came back he had slipped into a coma but with an odd smile on his face that just wouldn't go (real creepy looking) docters and the Police didn't know what had happened to this boy and that was 3 weeks ago and now ... They are cropping up everyday, each day a different child from any background rich, poor it didn't matter.</p><p> </p><p> It turns out a new childrens TV show called Happy, Happy Fun Land was being run by interdimensional soul sucking demon puppets who were using the children to feed and when they fed on a soul the victim died with a smile on their face.</p><p> </p><p> Cue lots of fighting of Childrens TV Puppets and when finally Gabriel and Kessing shut the network down and track down the producer of the show Martin Davids (John C. Reilly) he is sat amoungst half sewn puppets and it seems he sold his soul to make his tv show the most watched in America Gabriel tries to handcuff Martins but in the short fight he loses his gun and Davids has needls pointed at Gabriels throat and Kessing shoots the gun and Davids is dead the children come out of their comas and they all live happily ever after ....</p><p> </p><p> .. Or do they!? After the end credits Martin Davids body is seen moving, it rolls over and a puppet crawls out from his shirt and it had its hand up his back seemingly controlling him all along!</p><p> </p><p> Jason Lee voiced the evil puppets.</p><p> </p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Location</span>- Hollywood.</p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Budget</span>- Actors/Actresses - $255,000 + production - $425,000 marketing - $300,000.</p><p> </p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Duration</span> - 1 hr 36.</p><p> </p><p> <span style="text-decoration:underline;">Additional Info</span>- Josh Holloway was originally wanted to play Ryan Gabriel, Joseph Gordon-Levitt was actually 3rd choice when Jensen Ackles also turned down the role.</p><p> John C. Reilly was the original choice to play Producer Martin Davids but Steve Buscemi was thought to of turned out better suited to play the weasly character that sold his soul for rating.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Happy Happy Fun Land is one of those cheesy made of TV movies where it’s almost more funny than it is scary. Sadly, The Worlds Not Round Studios has decided it’s in everyone’s best interest to release it to the big screen. Cronenberg does a decent enough job directing the film, however it fails to ever really grasp the attention of the audience. Overall, a decent attempt at a movie but one that I wouldn’t waste my money to see.</p><p> </p><p> Rating: 1.5 out of 5 stars</p><p> </p><p> Revenue: 700,000</p><p> </p><p> Effects:</p><p> None</p><p> </p><p> The Worlds Not Round Studios: now has a balance of 4,900,000</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 17, 2011 Author Share Posted May 17, 2011 <p>Just a reminder all submittions are closed for the night.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> THE LIST:</p><p> ***Early Dawn - Pound Puppy Studios*** Please see posts 374, 375</p><p> I Love Rebecca Black 5 Times - Because of the Influence</p><p> The Relentless - Burning Pegasus</p><p> Forza Italia - Ascending Numbers Productions</p><p> Andromeda - Revenant Productions</p><p> Three Up, Three Down - Way Out In Left Field Productions</p><p> The Last Chance - JTandSilentBob</p><p> If Winter Ends - Pretty OK Films</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mad5226 Posted May 17, 2011 Author Share Posted May 17, 2011 I Love Rebecca Black 5 Times Now onto my film: Because Of The Influence Productions Presents: Title- The Inner Workings Of The Hardcore Society Lead Actor- Christopher Walken - $100,000 Lead Actress- Kaley Cuoco - $150,000 Supporting Actor- 50 Cent $20,000 Supporting Actress - Megan Fox - $60,000 Director - Quentin Tarrentino - $175,000 Genre- Crime Plot- Desmond Evans (Christopher Walken) is the mayor of Detroit, Michigan who is loved by all except the crime world and this is due to the fact that he is infact a huge mob boss who works under a mask and alias known as: The Slaughter when performing his immoral deeds. Everything goes swimmingly for him until his daughter: Amelia (Megan Fox) finds out about this "other life" and wants to be part of it. Reluctantly and after a lot of persuading he agrees but only if his personal bodyguard: Century Killa (50 Cent) teaches her what is needed. So CK teaches Amelia all she needs to know in training sessions held in a warehouse in a rough area during the evenings after Killa finishes his day job of a successful rapper. The two becomes increasingly close and Desmond finds out about this and warns Killa that you don't form relations with anyone in the crime world except your boss. A week later Killa & Amelia run away to London in the United Kingdom. Desmond decides that he must sort the problem out himself and follows them. When he arrives he is met by the young female mob boss: Jacqueline Mires (Emma Watson) who decides to help out Desmond fulfill his plan if he pays her £5,000,000 which he accepts after a failed attempt at haggling. Soon enough after many bloody interrogations and street fights, Jacqueline and Desmond find where Killa and Amelia are hiding. When Desmond finds the two of them, Amelia refuses to leave him so Desmond shoots them both dead. He wipes his face and turns to see Jacqueline pointing a gun to his forehead who pulls the trigger after saying three words: Cout De Grace Location- Detroit Michigan, USA & London, England Budget- Actors: $310,000 + Director: $175,000 + Production: $130,000 + Marketing: $350,000 = $985,000 Duration - 2 Hours & 10 Minutes Budget After This Film: $898000 Because of the Influence Productions is back and this time they mean business. Their film The Inner Working of the Hardcore Society is star studded and action packed. Christopher Walken plays the mayor of Detroit, and a bad ass mob boss. When his daughter Amelia, played by Megan Fox, wants to get involved in the family business her father tasks his top bodyguard effectively named Killa, 50 Cent, to see that this goes off without a hitch. However, complications arise and the two fall in love then run off to the UK to get away. Evans follows them there and meets with their mob leader, Jacqueline, played by Kaley Cuoco, and the two set off on a bloody path to finding Killa and Amelia. The Bottom Line: Seeing Megan Fox half naked sweaty and kicking ass is every teenage boy’s fantasy. That is sure to get a rise, no pun intended, from the demographic. Having Oscar winner Kaley Cuoco should add to the box office numbers for this film, and while I like the range she shows in this film it’s apparent it’s out of her comfort zone. Tarrentino’s direction in this film was second to none and he captured the fight scenes beautifully. Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars Revenue: 4,250,000 Effects: Christopher Walken now wants 150,000 per movie Kaley Cuoco now wants 200,000 per movie Megan Fox now wants 100,000 per movie and is demanding to be the star of her next film Quentin Tarrentino now wants 225,000 per movie TheEffect now has 5,148,000 and he really loves Rebecca Black THE LIST: ***Early Dawn - Pound Puppy Studios*** Please see posts 374, 375 The Relentless - Burning Pegasus Forza Italia - Ascending Numbers Productions Andromeda - Revenant Productions Three Up, Three Down - Way Out In Left Field Productions The Last Chance - JTandSilentBob If Winter Ends - Pretty OK Films Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLLK Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 Title- Relentless Lead Actor- Bruce Willis (75,000) Lead Actress- Ashley Olsen (25,000) Supporting Actor- James Marsters(25,000) Supporting Actress- Sophia Bush(50,000) Supporting Actor- Ryan Reynolds (75,000*) Director - JJ Abrams (175,000) Genre- Action Plot- When Police Officer John Basham(Willis) receives a phone call that his daughter Kate(Ashley Olsen) has been kidnapped, he will stop at nothing to get answers. When trying to enlist his fellow policemen to help him, he's told not to worry it and that it will be handled "by the book" to which Basham replies "Kidnappers dont kidnap by the book, rapists dont rape by the book, and murderers dont murder by the book. Why should I have to worry about the book?" Basham leaves the police station for what he says is a patrol, instead he ends up shaking down a few known criminals, putting quite the hurting on them, finally, when he's about to shoot one in the knee the guy talks. He told him the man who kidnapped his daughter is a crime lord from Pennsylvania trying to expand his territory. The crime lords name is Anthony Rogers(James Marsters) and where he goes his girlfriend(Bush) isnt far behind. After getting the info, he tells the rest of the police department whats going on, and stars speeding around the city looking for Rogers' base of operations. At certain points Rogers is messing with Basham, having gotten into the same signal as Basham's police radio, taunting him, tormenting him about how much hes torturing his daughter, the screams echoing loud through the radio as Basham is forced to turn the radio off. Basham talks to the dirtiest cop on the force Jim Harris(Reynolds) and makes the "if it were your daughter" speech, which causes Harris to say he'll help Basham. They shake down one of Harris' regular informants who tells them exactly where Rogers is. Harris then shoots the informant in cold blood, following the line "If it were my daughter in trouble, I wouldnt trust this guy not to tell Rogers were coming." With guns readied, the begin the drive to Rogers base of operations. When they get their, they crash through the gate, and run over a bunch of the "hired guns" and quickly jump out the car to shoot a few more. Bad guys galore get shot, and finally they make their way to the back room where it appears as if Marsters is possibly forcing himself on Kate, which makes Basham snap and unload 5 bullets into Rogers, 1 in the back of the head and 4 in the back. Basham is relieved to find out, through the screaming, that it wasnt Kate that Rogers was on but just his girlfriend, who they decide to arrest as Rogers "crime partner" after he rescues his daughter, he finds out he has been fired. However, 3 months later, he seems to be doing fine. Now working in a police department in Pennsylvania. Location- New York Budget- 1.5 Million (250,000 actors + 175,000 director + 1000,000 production + 75,000 marketing) (Leaves me with 1.5 million... if I remember correctly) Duration - 1 hr 25 minutes Burning Pegasus is back with Relentless, a JJ Abrams movie about a rogue police after going after a crime lord that has kidnapped his daughter. Bruce Willis has seen better days, but he shows his old tail-kicking self in this film, blasting and bruising bad guys until he gets some answers. He certainly is the shining light in this film. The bad news for Burning Pegasus is the so-so performance of...well, everybody else. This movie might has well have been about Bruce Willis' character John Basham only, as the rest seem to sleepwalk through the script. Well, except for Ashley Olsen. She kinda came out of the woodwork in this one and managed to get her career rolling a wee bit. Not enough to stop the presses, but good enough. Like many JJ Abrams movies, this one is well-made. But it feels like a shinier version of the same-old story, similar to movies like Taken. It looks good, the action is wonderful, but it's waaaaaaaay too predictable for this reviewer. Given a storyline with a few more twists and turns, we would have a great one on our hands. But "meh" kind of acting from everyone but Bruce Willis (with the occasional burst of character by Ashley Olsen) and pretty weak marketing is going to hurt this film in the long run. Bottom Line: Bruce Willis does what Bruce Willis does. Everyone else seems to feel generic in a low-key story. Not enough publicity to get folks in seats, I'm afraid. Rating: 2.5 out of 5 Stars Revenue: $1.7 Million Effects: - Bruce Willis is back in that groove again...get him in a 4-star or higher action movie and he'll make those box office receipts soar. But he comes with a new, higher price tag: $150,000. ($100,000 for any other genre.) - JJ Abrams is now asking for $225,000 per movie following this well-directed flick. - This film had little marketing. Burning Pegasus, in order to turn their fortunes around, has hired a new marketing department. Their next three movies must have at least $250,000 invested in marketing. Burning Pegasus Productions now has $3.2 Million in the bank. THE LIST: ***Early Dawn - Pound Puppy Studios*** Please see posts 374, 375 Forza Italia - Ascending Numbers Productions Andromeda - Revenant Productions Three Up, Three Down - Way Out In Left Field Productions The Last Chance - JTandSilentBob If Winter Ends - Pretty OK Films Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.