PDA

View Full Version : Alone in the Dark movie Trailer


RobertoOrtiz
12-28-2004, 01:45 PM
Ckeck it out. (http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/575/575102p1.html?fromint=1)

-R

DePingus
12-28-2004, 04:32 PM
I remember playing AItD 3 a looong time ago. It was a great game. But if I remember correctly it was set in the late 1930's or early 40's. And there were cool drunken ghost pirates using a mansion as their base of operations. It all had a very H.P. Lovecraft feel to it (thought maybe not so terrifying). Sadly, this movie looks nothing like what I remember.

Sometimes I think the videogame industry and the movie industry has a bet going...
Who can make the worst product with the other's license!

Spankspeople
12-28-2004, 04:42 PM
Title aside, there was absolutely nothing recognizeable as Alone in the Dark in that trailer...

Stimpy
12-28-2004, 04:57 PM
its got tara reid in it. what could POSSIBLY go wrong.

alphatron
12-28-2004, 05:05 PM
Another film brought to us by the talented Uwe Boll (house of the dead, bloodrayne)

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0093051/

Lunatique
12-28-2004, 05:22 PM
Are we making fun of this guy again? :D

Self-Designer
12-28-2004, 05:29 PM
I think that for achieveing the "alone in the dark" effect, they have to do it with low polygons models, and that strange animation those creatures had in the game (though I've played only Alone in the Dark 1 and 2 at those times...)... I liked this style then, those strange gradiented polygons... -sigh- :)

SheepFactory
12-28-2004, 05:40 PM
Its a Uwe Boll movie , you dont need to see a trailer to know that its GREAT!

Frank Lake
12-28-2004, 05:55 PM
It's like End of Days.... by without Arnold S. to drive sales.

I like the design of the 'monster' but that's pretty much it.

rendermania
12-28-2004, 06:42 PM
I liked this style then, those strange gradiented polygons... -sigh- :)
Its called Gouraud shading. It was pretty much then what pixel shaders are now, lol. I miss the Alone in the Dark games too, particularly the first one. sniff.

Spankspeople
12-28-2004, 07:08 PM
Are we making fun of this guy again?

Again? Oh, it never ends!

DCHAD
12-28-2004, 11:31 PM
Looks like a thrill a minute! NOT! Why do they keep making films like this? it really is a mystery!

Gentle Fury
12-29-2004, 02:37 PM
So, are they actually crediting this as an adaptation of the game??? Seriously what did that have to do with the game, other than the title?? Funny, did you notice a single moment in that trailer that anyone was actually alone......or in more than moderate dark....lol

pthomas72
12-29-2004, 03:03 PM
I wonder If Tara gets CG work done on her mangled nipples.

Stimpy
12-29-2004, 03:09 PM
apparently after seeing the reactions to her famous nipple slip they re-cast her breasts as the final boss monster.
quote: "it was more horrible than anything any of us could have ever come up with"

Shade01
12-29-2004, 11:20 PM
What the hell? He's doing Far Cry and Hunter: The Reckoning movies too?

capone_adam
12-30-2004, 12:08 AM
Wasn't there a sort of revamp though?, the old 'polygon' type games and then the 'cool! and toughguy!' versions on the PSone?...this film could be based more on the Ps1 version? (Not played the later versions of the game so not sure).

Surely its not based on the old ones...kids won't know what it is and fans of the old one will hate the way its nothing like the game (and also are old enough to see through such tack as this)

Hate 'game-films', 'wizard' was the only one for me (STILL not on dvd) but no seriously...its like a game-film HAS to be aimed at people who played the games, when really I think a game-film should be made if the characters and themes have potential movie wise.

So far the only one so far which had potential was Tombraider and Resident Evil, TR could of been the modern day indianna jones...Res evil could of been atmospheric. DAMMIT...I was SO looking forward to Res Evil...I remember seeing a interview with Anderson long before it came out on a PS demo disc and he was like "Oh I have so much respect for the game!!, I'm going to give the fans what they want" etc etc.....I really did believe him. Should of worked it out by the clips of the zombies...zombies aka 'humans with face paint'

I actually just went on to write a essay on anderson...allthough really its the publishers who probably forced him into it...but then if he had so much respect for the game surely you would just run from the job...GRRRRR...the end.

Pixarman
12-30-2004, 06:05 AM
I wonder where he is going to add shots from the game in this movie. Christian Slater walks into a room, then the screen changes to the game and we see this polygonal chap coming into the room and fighting off a couple of gouraud shaded monsters..


Seriously though..Tara Reid as a scientist. Who in the world would make that casting call...

I can't believe this guy gets to do all this game to movie adaptations

LoTekK
12-30-2004, 07:18 AM
Good lord. Not only does the movie look to have zero in common, plotwise, with the first two games (never bothered with the followups), since when was AITD an action-filled game? It was all about the dread, the terror, the suspense. I mean, it could be a fun movie still, but naming it Alon in the Dark is simply a load of crap.

SpiralFace
12-30-2004, 08:08 AM
wow,

Iether someone realy likes making horror / Zombie action video games into movies, or the studio just hands them off to this guy. I mean come on, House of the Dead and then his next 4 movies are based off games.

just wow.

RowanW
12-30-2004, 08:41 AM
He'd better stay away from Far Cry. :eek:

kmest
12-30-2004, 09:47 PM
he had done "blood rayn" and is going to make farcry,but maybe dungeon sieg.

and i just read somewhere that the movie costs only 20 milloin $.isnt that too much low for these kind of movies these years?
i mean look at special effects(anyone saw the VFX shots of the movie in the NIGHWISH "i wish i had an angle" video clip?)they are cool,but not as good as most of these years monsters and effects(perhaps some are very good).i mean couldnt the studio pay more money?maybe it could be much much more better.

and one of the things that makes me feel this is going to be a bad movie,is his previous movie:house of the dead :hmm: :banghead:

kmest
12-30-2004, 09:48 PM
he had done "blood rayn" and is going to make farcry,but maybe dungeon sieg.

and i just read somewhere that the movie costs only 20 milloin $.isnt that too much low for these kind of movies these years?
i mean look at special effects(anyone saw the VFX shots of the movie in the NIGHWISH "i wish i had an angle" video clip?)they are cool,but not as good as most of these years monsters and effects(perhaps some are very good).i mean couldnt the studio pay more money?maybe it could be much much more better.

and one of the things that makes me feel this is going to be a bad movie,is his previous movie:house of the dead :hmm: :banghead:

but the design of the monsters are realy cool

Gentle Fury
12-31-2004, 07:49 PM
he had done "blood rayn" and is going to make farcry,but maybe dungeon sieg.

and i just read somewhere that the movie costs only 20 milloin $.isnt that too much low for these kind of movies these years?
i mean look at special effects(anyone saw the VFX shots of the movie in the NIGHWISH "i wish i had an angle" video clip?)they are cool,but not as good as most of these years monsters and effects(perhaps some are very good).i mean couldnt the studio pay more money?maybe it could be much much more better.

and one of the things that makes me feel this is going to be a bad movie,is his previous movie:house of the dead :hmm: :banghead:
oh wow! If the dungeon siege movie is as exciting as the game we should be in for some total boredom!!

Stimpy
01-28-2005, 10:49 PM
Reviews don't come any worse than those for the horror film Alone in the Dark. Stephen Holden in the New York Times writes that it "is so inept on every level, you wonder why the distributor didn't release it straight to video, or better, toss it directly into the trash." Similarly, Jack Mathews writes in the New York Daily News that it "is no better than whatever you might pick up while wearing a blindfold at Blockbuster, even if you happen to reach into a trash can." How bad is it really? "So bad in ways the people who coined the word never even thought of," writes Chris Kaltenbach in the Baltimore Sun, "that it's hard to imagine anyone over the age of 10 was involved with it." Janice Page in the Boston Globe remarks that the film has reached the lowest "level of pee-yew."

from imdb.com

i say: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH... *cough*

hypercube
01-28-2005, 11:15 PM
Even better.. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/alone_in_the_dark/

After the first "trailer" or whatever it was, I literally sat and stared at my computer for 5 minutes trying to figure out what I had just seen, it's really mind boggling that something that bad can even exist..it's like someone gave a fanfilm nutjob $20m. I had the same feeling after unfortunately watching the entirety of Ecks vs. Sever. That is still holding a perfect 0% I think..I had to lysol out my dvd player after that..woof.

What's odd is that RT lists this movie at 3%, 1 fresh and 31 rotten, but I can't see the fresh review anywhere on the page. Must be that one guy the imdb article was saying LOVED it. :p

Gentle Fury
01-29-2005, 03:11 AM
"The three stars have seen better days, but I'd like to think they could still do something classier and more dignified than this. Like gay porn." (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/movie-1141103/reviews.php?critic=columns&sortby=default&page=1&rid=1356483) <<---Link to review

That has to be the funniest quote from a movie review ever!

Looks like this movie may very well be more hated than Gigli!

Dennik
01-29-2005, 04:05 AM
That has to be the funniest quote from a movie review ever!

Looks like this movie may very well be more hated than Gigli!

There is one reason why that may not happen. Simply because people won't see it.
After so many bad reviews, you have to be bored to death and filthy rich to waste 7 bucks and more than one hour of your precious life to go see it.


Edit:
Quote: "As video game adaptations go, even Pong: The Movie would have a lot more personality." - Michael Rechtshaffen, HOLLYWOOD REPORTER

Hehehe, these are the days (only these) that i love seing movie critics doing their job.

capone_adam
01-29-2005, 04:29 AM
It really is a shame, people who don't know games (especially critics) must think games have no substance at all. That the film makers haven taken all the best bits of the game and put it onto film. When in truth just about if not every videogame film is either based on a videogame which doesn't make good movie material (mario bros, streetfighter, alone in dark) or is handled by typical movie big budget companies who mold the film into what their research tells them will make most profit...(resident evil, tombraider)

Saying that, I'm way past caring, hoping that one day there is a videogame-film which is oscar material. Would it really change peoples mind towards videogames?, probably, but it would be for the wrong reasons.

Lunatique
01-29-2005, 06:30 AM
Hollywood big studios are notorious for being vampires when it comes to acquiring rights to IPs from comics or games. They know they have the upperhand, as most IP owners would kill to get a movie made of his creation, and would give up a lot of what they should be entitled to in a contract. I'm guessing Uwe Boll is offering these game companies a greater percentage of the profit--the kind they couldn't get from Hollywood studios, and in turn, the game companies agree to sell their IPs to him for less, and allow him to mangle the story, characters, and basically make crappy films that makes enough money to make both parties happy. The game publishers also get the added bonus of wider media awareness for their games. None of this is about making quality films--it's all about making money.

Bentagon
01-29-2005, 10:26 AM
I wonder if the rights of videogames are bought of the publisher or the developer. If it's the publisher, I can see why they would do that, but if it's the developer, I don't think they would like their "baby" to get so messed up.

- Benjamin

wrench000
01-29-2005, 07:22 PM
Well look what they have done to Doom the Movie. No Hell or Zombies or 1 Kick ass space marine. Now its like Aliens from space with robots.. WTF?!?$#@

capone_adam
01-29-2005, 07:26 PM
Oh is doom the movie for real then? (there seems to be loads of game movies in production)...again its hardly shakesphere, could of done it without the license...so again, another film where the license is the most important element.

Got any links to this doom movie?, I never really believe anything till I see pictures.

Bulldog
01-30-2005, 03:28 AM
I am very curious to see how much money this'll make over the weekend.

Dennik
01-30-2005, 04:18 AM
I am very curious to see how much money this'll make over the weekend.

And I'm very curious what its going to make compared to Alexander. Care to bet on a zombie horse race? :D

slaughters
01-30-2005, 10:43 PM
...Got any links to this doom movie?, I never really believe anything till I see pictures.Plot Summary from IMDB

"When a Special Ops squadron answers a distress call from a science lab on the planet Olduvai, their investigation reveals that a series of mutant beings are systematically killing off the population there..."

"Olduvai" ??? WTF ??? This may end up beating Alone in the Dark for worst Movie adaptation of a video game ever made.

Here is a quote about it from Dark Horizons

"Originally, the $70 million film was supposed to be helmed by Enda McCallion. Later, he was replaced by Andrzej Bartkowiak. 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."

>>> Dark Horizons Link <<< (http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/041203i.php)

Geta-Ve
01-30-2005, 11:33 PM
Are we making fun of this guy again? :D

did we ever stop?;)

Jackdeth
01-31-2005, 12:07 AM
In 2,100 theaters across the US it made only 2.5 million is 3 days.... placing it 14th in its opening weekend. Yikes!

Dennik
01-31-2005, 12:09 AM
In 2,100 theaters across the US it made only 2.5 million is 3 days.... placing it 14th in its opening weekend. Yikes!

Thank God people read reviews before they invest 7 bucks in a movie. :applause:

tredeger
01-31-2005, 02:05 AM
Thank God people read reviews before they invest 7 bucks in a movie. :applause:


Which introduces us to the ultimate irony:

After all the money that went into this (alleged) stinker, more man hours will be spent writing and reading negative reviews and crits (which aren't actually reviews since most people writing them will have never actually seen anything more than the trailer) of the movie, than will ever be spent actually watching the darn thing.

I mean, who hasn't devoted at least a couple minutes of their life crapping on Gigli and Glitter. Yet how many hours have been spent viewing either of them? Far fewer. How sad for the creators if they ever think about it this way.

Now excuse me while I go unsubscribe from this thread so I devote no MORE time to a movie I will likely never see. Grr! Argh!

furre
01-31-2005, 02:20 AM
I'm going to have to see this movie now. It'll be just like when me and my girlfriend sat down with a bottle of vodka to watch Gigli and Crossroads! :scream:

CGTalk Moderation
01-31-2006, 03:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.