Cheaper.
You can say it.
I thought that was the way for them to say it was more of a passion project than a full AAA film. Like, when directors know the material and do a trial run of what their view is to test the waters for a massive sequel.
Also probably cheaper.
You had me for the first ninety-three point nine percent.
I mean, it probably will be cheaper while also being a logical move for what could be a dope passion project.
Good movies don’t need big name actors to be good, they need a good story, good world, and a cast that can pull off the immersion with a director that knows how to harness it all together. Big name actors are just a draw and I would argue a lot of the time they don’t help so much as ruin immersion a bit.
Like in nineteen ninety-eight when the undertaker threw mankind off the top of hell in a cell.
Counterpoint:
Sydney Sweeney’s tits are worth every penny.
Well, yeah. But that’s an exception to the rule not the rule itself.
If it was just her dumping a No. 10 can of creamed corn on herself it’d probably sell well.
Yeah but you could say the same about a lot of people. Doesn’t mean it’s a “good movie” so much as a lot of people want to see that person in a thing and would pay regardless of what the thing is.
That’s the attitude that gives us the race to the bottom in creative work
We’re going for less production design and actor salary to keep things cozy.
Deadpool started out on an insufficient budget and only made it because of fans. The 2nd one did better but fell short. The 3rd one knocked it out of the park and set the franchise up for greatness.
Bioshock can become a fantastic movie franchise, if it doesn’t die in infancy.
He’s filming something else, so it’s still in development hell.
I originally wanted to say “it’s an action game, a low budget, drama adaptation will suck” but maybe it can be like event horizon being a Warhammer 40k movie; having it be set on new years eve 1959
