OMG!OMG!OMG! Del Toro! Cameron! Lovecraft!

[TerrorScribe]

[SIZE="5"]Guillermo Del Toro And James Cameron Ready To Climb 'Mountains Of Madness'[/SIZE]

EXCLUSIVE: Since he left The Hobbit, Guillermo del Toro's next film has been a hot topic of conversation. I'm hearing he will next direct At The Mountains Of Madness, an adaptation of the HP Lovecraft tale that will be shot as a 3D film for Universal Pictures. The big surprise is that Avatar director James Cameron will come aboard as a producer. Del Toro was non-committal when I asked him about the prospect of Mountains days ago as we discussed the Comic-Con reaction to Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark. But when del Toro announced at Comic-Con he'd cowrite and produce Haunted Mansion, he told the crowd he'd set his next film shortly, and that it would be scary. At the Mountains of Madness fits that bill, even for del Toro and Universal. The film will be a big ticket item, shot in 3D where Cameron's expertise can really help. Cameron has said he won't put his name on many future movies outside of the 3D reboot of Fantastic Voyage at Fox, but I've heard he's making an exception for del Toro. Cameron's presence helped win over the studio. I'm told the film will begin pre-production in the next few weeks, and shoot next summer.

Read the entire article here.

[mrblue]

Ill pass on the 3D.

[TerrorScribe]

OK, 3-D notwithstanding (though personally I think 3-D shoggoths would be pretty damn cool), you've got to admit a tentpole horror movie with these heavy hitters behind it is an exciting prospect. C'mon, it's not like it's Michael Bay and Platinum Dunes.

[mrblue]

James Cameron hasn't made a good movie since T2.

[TerrorScribe]

That's as may be, but he's only producing. I think that benefits Del Toro in a couple of ways. One, he's got Cameron's clout behind him. The gods willing, that means MAYBE the studio will leave GDT alone and make the movie he wants to make, faithful to Lovecraft's story - which in GDT's own words would be with no love interest, a period piece (1920s), set in Antarctica and rated R.

Two, and I know this is the part that makes you crazy, he get's Cameron's 3-D experience. If you're going to do it, at least do it right. And with Cameron, he's got the mutha fuckin' 3-D masta. It's not going to be any shitty post production stuff.

Three, the man has the Midas Touch. Maybe it'll rub off.

[mrblue]

Until I see a trailer or something I'm not sold over.

[TerrorScribe]

I can dig that - especially how difficult it is to adapt Lovecraft, but I think this gives them a pretty good chance to succeed.

[NicoleMayCanaday]

Blue & Freddy, why you gotta be such 3D haters? Who pissed on your 3D glasses?

[mrblue]

Cuz its a money gimmick. If Avatar didn't make 2 billion dollars there would hardly be any 3D movies coming out. 3D belongs in animated films and not horror and everything else. Its even more gimmicky when they try and slap on fake 3D and pass it off as the real thing.

[NicoleMayCanaday]

Of course it's a marketing niche for the studios, but right now, it's a marketing tactic that's making them money in order to produce bigger budgeted movies with better quality films.

There are a few movies that can pull off the small budget, but lets be honest....how many "shakey home filmed" flicks can you watch?

Don't get me wrong, I love the classics, and I appreciate gritty-raw-homemade movies, but sometimes change is good.

[mrblue]

Making films in 3D so they can make more money for better quality films isn't what there doing it for.

[Dr. Briggs]

Of course it's a marketing niche for the studios, but right now, it's a marketing tactic that's making them money in order to produce bigger budgeted movies with better quality films.

There are a few movies that can pull off the small budget, but lets be honest....how many "shakey home filmed" flicks can you watch?

Don't get me wrong, I love the classics, and I appreciate gritty-raw-homemade movies, but sometimes change is good.

That depends... in all honesty once you get a certain amount of cash (say, a good bit more than the Polonia brothers use) you can make a whole variety of films, good or bad. They don't have to have higher quality or appeal to a certain standard.

I'd welcome more gritty films personally, but that doesn't mean they have to be "Blair Witch Project" style. Think of the original TCM or Evil Dead, some of the best horror out there. Likewise, you can make a good high budget horror film and not need that much spectacle/3D stoof

[TerrorScribe]

While I'm generally not a fan of how 3-D is generally use (which is exactly how Mr Blue says- just as a gimmick to make more money) I think there are some cases where it can be used to create a beautifully immersive and unique environment. "Coraline" is the first movie to come to mind when I think of this. In this case of "Mountains", I think they have the opportunity to create something truly spectacular, especially given Lovecraft's penchant for "non-Euclidian geometry." I would love to see impossibly angled buildings jutting out from the screen.

They have the varsity team working on this one. I'll have my fingers crossed that they don't fuck it up.

[NicoleMayCanaday]

^ isn't that what I said? :reading:

TS you have a wonderful vocabulary of adjectives...mine spans from "small" to "shakey".

I totally agree with you guys. If used correctly it can enhance a movie. Yes, a movie can be made on a low budget; original TCM. Having a high budget flick doesn't equal a stellar movie. We've seen those.

What I am saying is, 3D allows studios to produce larger films and market it to larger audiences to make more money. So? More people get to enjoy horror. Cool. Unless you're a horror snob and you want it all to yourself. Then I say.....

[YOUTUBE]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5Qi4ZhLgj3w&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5Qi4ZhLgj3w&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

[FreddysFingers]

I'm not going to lie... this sounds pretty fucking awesome!!!

[mrblue]

Putting 3D on a horror film doesn't open it up to more of an audience, a lot of people can't watch 3D movies and others would be turned away cuz in 3D horror films all that happens is stuff comes flying at you. Seen it done it before. Nothing new to offer I rather jus save the extra money and see it in 2D.

[FreddysFingers]

It doesn't open it up to more of an audience but sometimes, and this happens a lot, theaters will play more of the 3D version than the 2D version. That way, it doesn't open to a specific audience but rather forces you to watch it in 3D. Had the same problem with Tory Story 3; there were 5 showings of the movie in 2D and about 15 showings of it in 3D.

[Dr. Briggs]

Putting 3D on a horror film doesn't open it up to more of an audience, a lot of people can't watch 3D movies and others would be turned away cuz in 3D horror films all that happens is stuff comes flying at you. Seen it done it before. Nothing new to offer I rather jus save the extra money and see it in 2D.

Not necessarily... first of all they can use the 3D process from Avatar wherein the whole film is 3D, and second of all they can do that anyway sometimes, just without it being convincing

[Bojangles]

I dig 3D, honestly.

[FreddysFingers]

I dig 3D too... I dig it a grave so that I can bury it.