[J James]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

Why not? That's basically what they were in ARAH.

*looks at own signature*

[ScottyHawkeye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megastar

Because the general audience is tried of war, especially nowadays.

You can have characters with military backgrounds and even flashback to them in combat, unless it's a World War I/II film, the GA doesnt want to see it right now, IMO.

I don't know if the general audience is tired of war perse. Top Gun: Maverick was a billion-dollar hit. What folks are tired of is a lack of nuance and straight-up propaganda. I'll make this point in a way that's consistent with rule #3. If, in 2024, you release a film that parrots the propaganda sold during the Iraq & Vietnam Wars, even though we now know that the justifications for those wars were pure lies. Then, it will likely fail. If you recognize that stories like Saddam's WMDs or ties to Al Qaeda used to justify invading Iraq or the Gulf of Tonkin incident to sell the Vietnam War were just falsehoods, and still recognize that those who enlisted were good people and were duped by their governments. The GI Joes (I'm using the slang here) who fought for America, the Frank Castles and Lonzo Wilkinsons weren't your Jugglers, the William Rawlinses, or Thurstons. Then you could have a successful film. It depends on how the subject matter is handled. Also the bulk of GI Joe is a top-secret counter-terrorism unit fighting a non-state terror group, so it can be treated like the Captain America franchise.

[AWOL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

the bulk of GI Joe is a top-secret counter-terrorism unit fighting a non-state terror group, so it can be treated like the Captain America franchise.

Kirk Bozigian's crew cracked this code back in the early 80s. They were also fighting an uphill battle against parents groups and the like.

Given Hasbro's current state, it's probably best they license out the property to someone who cares.

[J James]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

I don't know if the general audience is tired of war perse. Top Gun: Maverick was a billion-dollar hit. What folks are tired of is a lack of nuance and straight-up propaganda. I'll make this point in a way that's consistent with rule #3. If, in 2024, you release a film that parrots the propaganda sold during the Iraq & Vietnam Wars, even though we now know that the justifications for those wars were pure lies. Then, it will likely fail. If you recognize that stories like Saddam's WMDs or ties to Al Qaeda used to justify invading Iraq or the Gulf of Tonkin incident to sell the Vietnam War were just falsehoods, and still recognize that those who enlisted were good people and were duped by their governments. The GI Joes (I'm using the slang here) who fought for America, the Frank Castles and Lonzo Wilkinsons weren't your Jugglers, the William Rawlinses, or Thurstons. Then you could have a successful film. It depends on how the subject matter is handled. Also the bulk of GI Joe is a top-secret counter-terrorism unit fighting a non-state terror group, so it can be treated like the Captain America franchise.

Agree entirely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AWOL

Kirk Bozigian's crew cracked this code back in the early 80s. They were also fighting an uphill battle against parents groups and the like.

Given Hasbro's current state, it's probably best they license out the property to someone who cares.

Yeah, that's the sad part. Hasbro has this mix of "don't care / don't like our own property."

[ScottyHawkeye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AWOL

Kirk Bozigian's crew cracked this code back in the early 80s. They were also fighting an uphill battle against parents groups and the like.

Given Hasbro's current state, it's probably best they license out the property to someone who cares.

Do to Paramount what they did to IDW a few years ago. Terminate Paramount's film license.

[AWOL]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

Terminate Paramount's film license.

[shishi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottyHawkeye

I don't know if the general audience is tired of war perse. Top Gun: Maverick was a billion-dollar hit. What folks are tired of is a lack of nuance and straight-up propaganda. I'll make this point in a way that's consistent with rule #3. If, in 2024, you release a film that parrots the propaganda sold during the Iraq & Vietnam Wars, even though we now know that the justifications for those wars were pure lies. Then, it will likely fail. If you recognize that stories like Saddam's WMDs or ties to Al Qaeda used to justify invading Iraq or the Gulf of Tonkin incident to sell the Vietnam War were just falsehoods, and still recognize that those who enlisted were good people and were duped by their governments. The GI Joes (I'm using the slang here) who fought for America, the Frank Castles and Lonzo Wilkinsons weren't your Jugglers, the William Rawlinses, or Thurstons. Then you could have a successful film. It depends on how the subject matter is handled. Also the bulk of GI Joe is a top-secret counter-terrorism unit fighting a non-state terror group, so it can be treated like the Captain America franchise.

The thing about Top Gun and it's sequel was they weren't really war films. They crossed over between romance and drama, and almost had a sports movie feel to them. It just happened that the sport was flying military planes.

[flashtronaut8]

I'll stick with the title, even if it's just to get the first collected volume. More of that tank-building and potentially grease-monkeying Cover Girl would suit me, along w/ Stalker's survival.