Re: Halloween 2 Remake a Go
I suppose that's where you and I are at disagreement. At that point, it's all up to the director IMO.
Casino Royale had a $150 million budget, and Quantum of Solace had $225 million. Both are big budget films, but when watching both movies, it becomes hard to figure exactly where the money all went to in QoS, but Casino Royale is much more understandable. Martin Campbell took the right approach and still spent that "little" for a 145 minute movie, when Forster tried to replicate a Greengrass approach (it's the only action movie I've seen him direct) and failed, filming just north of 100 minutes.
If the director finds a good way to manage the budget and how to spend it wisely, he or she can make a big budget movie (assuming a decent storyline) much better than we are used to.
Just look at The Dark Knight. Nolan uses minimal CGI and camera cuts, tries to put everything into perspective exactly how they shoot it, and relies on atmospheric elements as well as any other director.
I suppose that's where you and I are at disagreement. At that point, it's all up to the director IMO.
Casino Royale had a $150 million budget, and Quantum of Solace had $225 million. Both are big budget films, but when watching both movies, it becomes hard to figure exactly where the money all went to in QoS, but Casino Royale is much more understandable. Martin Campbell took the right approach and still spent that "little" for a 145 minute movie, when Forster tried to replicate a Greengrass approach (it's the only action movie I've seen him direct) and failed, filming just north of 100 minutes.
If the director finds a good way to manage the budget and how to spend it wisely, he or she can make a big budget movie (assuming a decent storyline) much better than we are used to.
Just look at The Dark Knight. Nolan uses minimal CGI and camera cuts, tries to put everything into perspective exactly how they shoot it, and relies on atmospheric elements as well as any other director.
Comment