Galt's Gulch
13

Should the Movies not have been made when they were because they couldn't secure the same cast for all three?

Posted by Ibecame 8 years, 10 months ago to Ask the Gulch
83 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

In other words should the Producers have held off to some future year when enough money could have been put together to retain the cast?

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by joy-123 8 years, 10 months ago
    I must agree with another comment that part III was inferior. I thought Parts I and II were very good, although I too would have preferred the same cast in all three. I think that Part II could have run just a bit longer and ended the story. Part III was disappointing and had the least good cast overall.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ sjatkins 8 years, 10 months ago
    I think it would have been much better to secure the same cast for all three. There were many things that could have been better including not cutting most of the substance of the "Money Speech" which I think is one of the shorter pieces that needs a very wide hearing.

    Part 3 would have benefitted immensely by including more of the dialog in the Gulch as much of it is philosophically rich and short in the book.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago
      I now agree with the other side. Two movies I enjoyed were Goal 1 and Goal 2. Another example Major Leagues 1 and Major Leagues 2. James Bond stopped with From Russia With Love for me others found it wildly popular especially in Japan. The same with copy cat books with many authors following the popular trend and producing trash when once they provided brilliance. The producers focus on advertising dollars and always manage to go just one step or more too far and having no creativity...bomb. Young Guns and Back To The Future were just right. The few that did do well featured brilliantly talented directors and actors.
      Politics aside if Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks paired up again I wouldn't ask I would just by the DVD. Sleepless in Seattle, Little Shop/You've got Email and Joe vs. the Volcano. Remember Top Gun? What's his name went on to ruin Jack Reacher. Meg Ryan became something special. The other duds are automatic no no's and reasons to stay away. so....? It's not necessary to have the same actors and actresses. The point was to get the story out where eventually it will be seen by millions and not only in the USSA. If the story gets out some will follow the path. That is the point of AS I, II, III X
      + Y does not always equal Z. No matter how hard modern education tries to make the formula work.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by davidmcnab 8 years, 10 months ago
    AR would be puking in her grave if she saw how the trilogy actually turned out.

    In my opinion, they needed to wait till they had enough funding to produce all three movies, with quality actors, contractually committed to the whole trilogy.

    Better yet, they should have had some respect for the book's volume of plot material, and done it as a 30-hour miniseries. Then, they would have been able to include all the childhood segments as well, and not skip over so many areas.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Ibecame 8 years, 10 months ago
      My understanding is that they were on a limited budget and at the end of a firm deadline when they started, but I bet if you would cut them a check for $350M to finance the deal they would be more than glad to fulfill your desires.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by davidmcnab 8 years, 10 months ago
        Slightly beyond my asset position, but I wonder if we could crowdsource it?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by Ibecame 8 years, 10 months ago
          They actually did that for ASP3 or you never would have seen it. The problem with crowdsourcing is that the largest amount raised so far was only $87M, and that really is the exception. I'm sure it would do better now than then simply because it is so much better known.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by davidmcnab 8 years, 10 months ago
            It wouldn't be the first time that a later adaptation of a book has been more successful than earlier ones.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by Ibecame 8 years, 10 months ago
              A good example of this was Joss Whedon's TV show "Firefly" - It got limited distribution, but he went on to make the movie from this concept "Serenity". Which also got limited distribution. ( I believe because the free speech regulators don't like material that promotes independent thought). However the DVD and Blu-Ray sales made a killing, and still are years later.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 10 months ago
    No. It's the story, and the story behind the story that counts. Neither actors nor special effects are the film's forte, but the revelation of the ideas that are important, so that each part of the story must be put forth in a timely manner in order for it to make sense.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GeoffreyH13 8 years, 10 months ago
    It was kind of strange but the main thing in would change was the actor whonplayed Galt. Terrible casting for him and the speech was underwhelming to say the least. If you decide to make a series let me know, I'd like a shot at that part.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo