Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

How does a movie like CHiPs get made?


Jangler

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, dos poptarts said:

Someone built a real Awesom-O 4000 and is using it in Hollywood to pitch ideas.

My Proof: Adam Sandler is still making movies (to be fair, I did enjoy the Cobbler)

 

yeah, I enjoyed The Cobbler also.

But this ChiPs movie, WTF????  This was pure poo! how does it it get 51% on Rotten Tomatoes?? has to be illegal money somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Millions and millions of books out there, with more being written each day, and yet Hollywood relies on reboots, remakes and re-imaginings of old TV shows. It's because Hollywood is illiterate. The fact that they can't read a script well enough to tell it is crap just further proves the point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/13/2017 at 3:10 PM, dos poptarts said:

Someone built a real Awesom-O 4000 and is using it in Hollywood to pitch ideas.

My Proof: Adam Sandler is still making movies (to be fair, I did enjoy the Cobbler)

 

top 10 Southpark Episode ever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2017 at 6:23 AM, Jangler said:

yeah, I enjoyed The Cobbler also.

But this ChiPs movie, WTF????  This was pure poo! how does it it get 51% on Rotten Tomatoes?? has to be illegal money somewhere.

Did you actually go see it / rent it? I knew from the trailer that it was trash. It actually has 51% of RT? I weep for the movie consumer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree, I don't know if this is really a new phenomenon.

I mean, some years back a group of movie executives put their heads together and collectively decided it would be a great idea to spend millions of dollars making movies built around Pauly Shore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disclaimer: Kinda always liked Jane Kaczmarek.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I rarely think about a bad movie once its over. But this one really has me up at nights.  (i work 3rd...) 

the biggest head scratch was Jane Kaczmarek"s 'nude scene' She was in the movie 2 seconds at the front, then you see a body double do a topples scene at the end. Was anybody clamoring to see her topless to begin with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

While I agree, I don't know if this is really a new phenomenon.

I mean, some years back a group of movie executives put their heads together and collectively decided it would be a great idea to spend millions of dollars making movies built around Pauly Shore.

A few years ago Jim Carrey wanted to do a Six Million Dollar Man movie, of course without the adjustment for inflation...But so many of these TV reboots have gone the comedic way, except for CHiPs, that the Six Billion Dollar Man would be the way to go now. Of the few shows for the 70s, I think it could be done, with the right people and no money laundering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...