Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Doom Movie Update

Posted by michael on Sun Dec 05, 2004 04:16 PM
from the floating-eyeball dept.
WeAz writes "Dark Horizons has an update on the currently filming Doom Movie. The article sums up the history of the production thus far and also includes a cool tidbit that reveals 'a large number of sequences will be shot purely in "first-person" perspective of the leading character (Karl Urban).' Unfortunately, the article also reports that 'The monsters aren't from hell, but rather people mutated by some nasty super-virus although the monsters look very similar to those in the game.' Sounds like a version of 28 Days Later based on Mars to me."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by lordsilence (682367) * on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:17PM (#11003116) Homepage
    Look at the possibilities. They can save lots of money without having actors on screen. But... we can take it further! If they just put this in a really dark setting or envoirment.. We'll simply pretend there's lots of pretty monsters and scenery everywhere.
  • On Mars (Score:5, Informative)

    by Vokbain (657712) * on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:18PM (#11003123) Homepage
    I read yesterday somewhere that the movie doesn't take place on Mars anymore either. It supposedly happens on some planet or base somewhere else in the galaxy or something. =[
    • Re:On Mars (Score:5, Insightful)

      by EpsCylonB (307640) <`moc.bnolycspe' `ta' `spe'> on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:25PM (#11003167) Homepage
      Yeah, according to bluesnews its just a regular old military scientific complex somewhere on earth.

      It's fairly obvious that whoever put up the money wants the film to have the widest possible appeal in america, and that means they don't want to risk offending middle america with the kind of religous imagery used in the games.

      It might still turn out to be a decent film, it won't be Doom though.
    • Re:On Mars (Score:5, Insightful)

      by spectre_240sx (720999) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:38PM (#11003254) Homepage
      Personally, I have very little interest in this as a "doom" movie. If it doesn't have to do with devils and other creatures from hell then it's NOT DOOM!
      • Re:On Mars (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Skrybe (818148) on Sunday December 05 2004, @09:34PM (#11004831)

        Exactly! Why bother paying for the license when they're not really making use of it? It could be any one of a dozen cookie cutter sci-fi/action movies. If they don't keep the core (demons from hell invading Mars) then it just ain't Doom.

        I'd assume the marketing suits figure all the "geeks" will want to go and see it because of the name alone. Be interesting to see if they change it too much whether it'll have the opposite effect and all the Doom fans will boycott the movie...

    • Re:On Mars (Score:5, Informative)

      by Pxtl (151020) on Sunday December 05 2004, @06:04PM (#11003743) Homepage
      Lets see:

      a) not set on mars
      b) aliens infected with super virus, not demons
      c) not about "space marines" but more SWAT team members.
      d) character named "Pinky" in cybernetic wheelchair.
      e) BFG is "Bio Force Gun".

      so, this movie has what to do with DOOM exactly? 1st person perspective? Wow, because there aren't other games with that perspective.
      • Re:On Mars (Score:5, Interesting)

        by DerWulf (782458) on Sunday December 05 2004, @06:26PM (#11003855)
        I don't think its political at all. I think its just a cheap production. Look, now they say: well, they are not from hell but mutated by a virus. Before release it'll be: 'look, did we say monsters? We meant zombies that look like normal people with an attitute'. The Inq has an article about it, they say the movie isn't gonna take place on mars and the space marines will be swat guys. So, essentially it's going to be 'Resident evil vs. SWAT' - the Movie and cost 5 bucks for the 8mm film because the props are all donated.
  • super v irus? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zalas (682627) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:18PM (#11003125) Homepage
    What... did the producers look at R.E. and went wow, let's incorporate some ideas from that as well so that we have a bigger fanbase!
  • by IO ERROR (128968) <error.ioerror@us> on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:18PM (#11003126) Homepage Journal
    ...not because the movie will be bad, but because the first-person perspective is likely to upset your inner ear balance and cause you to feel queasy. Think Blair Witch Project.
  • by sH4RD (749216) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:19PM (#11003128) Homepage
    The first person view sounds cool, could inspire a new film technique (much like the Matrix's bullet time), but the old fashoned film technique of messing with a well-loved plot seems to be going strong.
    • What plot? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Goonie (8651) <robert@merkel.benambra@org> on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:24PM (#11003164) Homepage
      but the old fashoned film technique of messing with a well-loved plot seems to be going strong.

      Um, we're talking about Doom, right? What plot? From what I can recall the plot went something like "Demons. Bad. Kill them all."...

      • Re:What plot? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by EpsCylonB (307640) <`moc.bnolycspe' `ta' `spe'> on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:30PM (#11003198) Homepage
        The first Doom was great, unlike its third incarnation there was a lot of variation in the levels. One level might be totally enclosed whilst the next offers you views of the martian landscape.

        Admittedly after the basic set up of being on mars in a base after a gateway to hell has opened, the plot is fairly thin from there on. Which makes it even more amazing that the makers of this film have done away with pretty much the only plot elements Doom has.
      • What plot? From what I can recall the plot went something like "Demons. Bad. Kill them all."...

        As simplistic as the plot is, they've still managed to fuck it up. Also, your plot is a little thin. It's more like, "You, Space Marine. Them, Demons from Hell. On Mars. Kill them all." And yet, the movie does not have space marines, demons, hellspawn, or Mars. It may not be the strongest of plots, but it's what makes Doom recognizable. Without at least space marines and hellspawn, you don't have a Doo

      • Re:What plot? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Coryoth (254751) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:50PM (#11003326) Homepage Journal
        Um, we're talking about Doom, right? What plot? From what I can recall the plot went something like "Demons. Bad. Kill them all."...

        That's where the original game started, but if you read the intro text, and the text and the various ends of stages you would have realised there was plot. That plot was further expanded upon in Doom3.

        Let's be realistic here, you could easily take the plot that you discover on PDAs and from talking to people in Doom3 and create a film where only the final third of the film has anyone running around killing demons. Think about it:

        We can start with the marine arriving on base and hearing the rumpours about weird things and the "dig site", spend plenty of time slowly revealing the teleporters, and the fact that there seems to be something/someplace in between leaving one teleporter and arriving at another. Add to that lots of creepy moments wandering around the base hearing voices occasionally, and incidents with marines and workers (ie teleporter test subjects) going insane, and attacking people etc. and you could easily fill and hour with nary a hell gate opened. That leaves you a nice 30 minutes of of hectic "demons everywhere" conclusion.

        Doom could be made into a very good film. It won't be made into a very good film, but that's hardly the game's fault.

        Jedidiah.
    • Dark Passage from 1947 with Humphrey Bogart was shot mostly in first person, so it's not very new.
  • No hell? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Eric(b0mb)Dennis (629047) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:20PM (#11003134)
    Why the choice not to have the monsters we know and love from HELL, not another MSV (Mutated Super Virus).

    Are people afraid to mention the word HELL anymore? Jesus christ, Jesusland is taking over!
    • Can you point out one time that a major Christian org has gotten upset about the use of Hell as a location in the past 25 years?
  • by sonicattack (554038) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:20PM (#11003136) Homepage
    Sounds like a version of 28 Days Later based on Mars to me."

    It's already done, and called "Ghosts of Mars".

    And it came the year before "28 days later".
  • by desau (539417) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:21PM (#11003144)
    I always thought 'BFG'[9000] was an acronym for something else ......
  • Not another virus! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nEoN nOoDlE (27594) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:23PM (#11003155) Homepage
    The virus plotline is so played out these days. I don't understand why Hollywood feels the need to change an element like monsters coming from Hell to monsters being mutated by a virus. Has Hell somehow become taboo? For the Dawn of the Dead remake, I was worried that they would change the whole zombies from hell concept because the original tagline was "When there's no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth." Fortunately, they left it intact. It's disappointing that a game so based off of demons from Hell is being changed over into the old virus mutation thing. It's already so overused.
  • Why bother? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FiReaNGeL (312636) <fireang3l@hotmail. c o m> on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:34PM (#11003228) Homepage
    It isn't on Mars.
    Monsters aren't from Hell.
    SWAT instead of space marines.
    Super-virus?

    Can you REALLY call this DOOM? Why do they bother? Doom fans are gonna be angry, and for the rest, the movie could have been called Resident Evil IIV : It gets crappier anyway.
  • Things to do (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cubicledrone (681598) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:34PM (#11003231)
    For any Hollywood executive:

    1) Acquire creative control
    2) Change everything except the name
    3) Profit!

    Hollywood, like all business, is only interested in brands, not products. Therefore it is only the title that matters, not the plot.
    Happens with nearly every adaptation of any existing book/comic book/game into a movie.

    Creative people should have creative control. Irrefutable example of success: The Incredibles

    Business people should not have creative control. Irrefutable example of total failure: Lion King 1 1/2
    • Re:Things to do (Score:5, Informative)

      by Coryoth (254751) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:55PM (#11003365) Homepage Journal
      Creative people should have creative control. Irrefutable example of success: The Incredibles

      Business people should not have creative control. Irrefutable example of total failure: Lion King 1 1/2


      Except you get odd cases like Fight Club. The fact is that, relatively speaking, Fight Club bombed at the US box office. That meant that Brad Pitt got told he was only to take safe roles from here on in, and David Fincher was told no one was going to bank roll him for any creative projects anymore - that's why we got Panic Room.

      Of course, in the end, Fight Club has become a huge cult success and is probably raking in money n DVD sales. It took a while to find its market.

      It is for that reason, however, that the business people get to make their demands: even great creative projects don't make the initial cash that the business people bank rolling the project desire.

      Jedidiah.
      • Re:Things to do (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Queer Boy (451309) <dragon.76NO@SPAMmac.com> on Sunday December 05 2004, @08:17PM (#11004464)
        I totally disagree. Fight Club was MARKETED out of the theatre. They marketed the movie as a completely different idea than what the movie was actually about. None of the previews actually tell you anything about the movie except that there's a fight club and you don't talk about it. That is NOT what the movie was about.
  • by Katravax (21568) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:41PM (#11003268)
    To the other posts blaming this on the "Religious Right:" If they talk about Hell, you complain. If someone else REMOVES the word "Hell", you complain. Which is it? They're talking about Hell too much, or not enough?

    Besides, the "Religous Right" is a myth. They're religious alright, but they're not Christian, and they're not conservative. They would do good to read what the Bible has to say about religion.
  • by Magickcat (768797) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:55PM (#11003368)
    Sounds like a version of 28 Days Later based on Mars to me."

    Funny, it sounds like a market share placed, demographically targeted pile of cliched froth from where I'm siting.

    To think that Phillip K Dick never made a cent on his books and died poor before recieving a cent on Bladerunner - and this thin "plot" from a video game makes it to the movies.

    The boys at ID will be glad for the money, but it doesn't sound like great sci-fi, let alone art.
  • by crazyphilman (609923) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:57PM (#11003381) Journal
    "The monsters aren't from hell, but rather people mutated by some nasty super-virus although the monsters look very similar to those in the game" Oh, and it's not on Mars anymore.

    Ok, show of hands: who here is sick and tired of directors or producers who want to do a movie based on a game, but who can't get around their personal preferences and start making major changes to the story? Take this "they're not from Hell" and "it's not on mars" thing.

    Whoever made the change is probably thinking "Oh, I don't like religion, and I don't believe in Hell, so let's come up with a pseudo-scientific premise instead... Viruses seem to be pretty popular lately, and 28 Days Later was a big hit... It'll be easier to convince the money people if we're copying a successful franchise... Let's do a virus. Hell is so passe..."

    And he's probably thinking "Mars? There is nothing on mars but red dirt. And it isn't sexy enough. Let's make it a planet far, far away. And let's make the Pinky demon a loveable character so people will be conflicted when it attacks! Yes, that will be interesting."

    And as far as the armor goes, well, they're probably just being cheap. It's easier to Ebay for used SWAT team armor than to build realistic DOOM armor, isn't it? Course it is. And all movie directors/producers "know" that we're all too stupid to know the difference, anyway. Bastards...

    If I could get a few of these boors into a tiny, windowless room and apply a cluebat to them, I would simply say that if you're going to adapt a game, KEEP THE FUCKING STORY. Keep the characters and technology. KEEP THE LOOK OF THE ENVIRONMENT. Keep the main idea intact. You don't have to make the movie a shot-by-shot copy of the game, but for Christ's sake, don't change everything! Tone down the ego, boys, and up the humility.

    Not like there's any chance of that. VIdeo-game movies are going to continue to suck forever more because of the immense egos of the people with enough power and money to produce/direct. There's no help for it.

    We're better off just playing the games themselves, and letting the movies die out from disappointing box office returns.

    NOTE, and COUNTEREXAMPLE: I thought Alien Vs. Predator wasn't bad, because they staged the movie in "the past" (still our future), predating all the games and other movies, and adding in some tasty backstory (how Weyland-Yutani got started, why they're so interested in aliens and predators, etc). So obviously SOME people can get it right.

    That movie's only problem was insufficient Predator-Alien whoop-ass. Maybe they had a shortage (only a few cans got delivered?).

  • Wake me up (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ann Coulter (614889) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:59PM (#11003387) Journal

    When they make something on par with Alien, Aliens, or Event Horizon. Aliens was part of what Doom was based on. In fact, Doom originally used an Aliens license.

    The next time I go to a horror or horror action film, I want to be deeply disturbed. The new Texas Chainsaw Massacre did that for me. Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection both missed it entirely (even though Resurrection did have some xenoeroticism, hehe). We need more original horror films.

    Hell and body mutilation tend to be pretty good ways to disturb me. Event Horizon had both. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre had both. Aliens a Hellish evironment plus body mutilation. Alien had the latter.

    If Doom the movie has people being cut open, internal organs spread out on the operating table, hung by hooks, and surrounded by Satanic symbols, I might watch it. If Doom has wall textures that look like spinal cords, sewn skin, pipes of blood, behemoth demon brains, and decorations based on tortured human bodies, I might watch it. But if it is just another zombie film with the good guys being chased by zombies for the rest of the film, I'll just make my own film to disturb.

    In conclusion, H. R. Giger (the man who designed the artwork for Alien) should design the atmosphere for Doom the movie.

  • by HarveyBirdman (627248) on Sunday December 05 2004, @05:03PM (#11003424) Journal
    THEN DON'T GO SEE IT!

    Don't rent it, either. Wait until it's can be seen someplace where your viewing of it does no contribute any extra to it's coffers. Encourage others to give it a miss.

    I lost track long ago of the number of times I have heard people say, "It's going to suck! I *have* to see it!" And then the same people wonder wny most movies blow white hot chunks.

    If you must have the needs and character of a three year old, at least have some patience (is it *that* emotionally difficult to avoid seeing a suckfest?) and view it in a way that does not encourage Hollywood to make any more.

  • by Mitleid (734193) on Sunday December 05 2004, @05:42PM (#11003648)
    People, people! There is a reason that they've changed so much about the new DOOM movie, and that reason is the fact that DOOM was already made into a movie [imdb.com]. They gotta look orignal now, don't they?

    All sarcasm aside, this movie is going to totally blow. DOOM is the type of intellectual property that I think can only be made into a movie ONE WAY, and this way sure as hell ain't it. The best us die-hard DOOM fans can do now is sit back and watch it crash and burn horribly, never to be spoken of again. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have given it to someone who could at least butcher it in style like Uwe Boll [imdb.com], but he was probably busily turning another videogame liscence into pure tripe.
  • by Nine Tenths of The W (829559) on Sunday December 05 2004, @05:43PM (#11003653)
    Which of these forthcoming game adaptations is going to be the worst:
    Doom
    Duke Nukem
    Dungeons and Dragons 2
    Vampire:The Masquerade
    • by cubicledrone (681598) on Sunday December 05 2004, @04:44PM (#11003284)
      It's mainly for the same reason that books aren't written in first person more often. It is very very difficult to do well.

      There are a number of things an author can't write into a story without a narrator. It also limits all knowledge of the world to the interpretation of one character. Very difficult to write a good story in first person.

      Now, the REAL accomplishment would be to produce the movie in second person. :)
    • by cozziewozzie (344246) on Sunday December 05 2004, @07:13PM (#11004092)
      Screenwriter Dave Callahan claims "everyone was keen to keep the game's atmosphere", though there are some "minor" changes done to the film's concept: The monsters have nothing to do with hell, the plot is not taking place on Mars and "space marines" are not well "space marines" as their outfits are more like SWAT team members.

      In related news, the producers of the movie "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" said they wanted to keep the books' atmosphere, though there are some minor changes to the film's concept. The character Arthur Dent is an American drag queen, Ford Prefect's name will change to Dodge Vpier, Zaphod will not be a two-headed alien, but a purple dinosaur, and Marvin will become the comic relief. And instead of space, the story will take place on a luxury ocean cruiser. Other than that, they said, the movie will stay true to the books.