The Power and the Glitter!
- Thread starter vultan
- Start date
A two-parter! Drawing out the Oscar results... how fitting 
Looking forward to the Oscars! (At least movies I actually care about are nominated at these awards.)
That score seems about right. A lot of beloved pre-Internet classics have surprisingly low scores on RT, for whatever reason.
I agree that Ebert would give it four stars (this seems like the kind of movie that he would give either four stars or two stars). Nice use and re-purposing of his OTL quote! And it fits his ethos - It's not what a movie is about, it's how it's about it - very nicely.vultan said:
It's going to be a very strange world indeed, one in which Bruce Campbell becomes a mainstream representation of big-screen "cool" - almost on the level of Brando or Eastwood, the way you're describing him here - though obviously in the short term. How you choose to move his career forward is going to be one of the more challenging arcs, I think.vultan said:
Points for mentioning Siskel, but a shame that you couldn't work a proper Siskel & Ebert review into your update.vultan said:
Like Campbell, I eagerly await where Hamill will find himself next.vultan said:
Typical George Lucas - always taking credit for the successes of othersvultan said:
All right, allow me to ask the obvious question: And what the heck is Overture?!vultan said:
Good on you for including Kieslowski. (I've never seen the Three Colours trilogy myself, but cineastes love it to pieces.) And Tarantino pulls a Soderbergh! And he directs Natural Born Killers! (What about True Romance, I wonder?) Obviously, this is going to be the most talked-about award of the night, no matter who wins.vultan said:
Could Hamill pull a Heath Ledger? (Just as long as you don't kill him off.)vultan said:
Wow, you found a way to make it potentially even worse than the Letterman disaster of OTL...vultan said:
Agreed on all points. Though I don't expect you to cover it, vultan, I'm very curious as to who they would cast in Wing Commander III ITTL, in lieu of Hamill. The plot is chock full of homages to the original Star Wars, which would obviously be a good deal less potent without Luke Skywalker himself starring as the player character.
No way Watchmen would get the Best Picture nomination. Even in recent years, The Dark Knight, Wall-E, Star Trek (2009), and pretty much every movie that made more than $100,000 last year have all been snubbed for a nomination. Frankly, we should all be astonished that Pulp Fiction and Beauty and the Beast were both nominated IOTL (and ITTL).
Looking forward to the Oscars! (At least movies I actually care about are nominated at these awards.)
Oh not the double director nod (that kinda thing happens) the fact that ITTL Tarantino directed Natural Born Killers instead of Oliver Stone OTL. Which leaves me very curious as to what Stone is up to ITTL.
Anyway, like Brainbin, I am incredibly intereted in a whole bunch of future careers and Hollywood projects
.Again, I might work it in later. I just wanna watch a few more of their shows from that era so I could better figure out how they'd play off each other.
You'll have to wait for a proper explanation, but a good hint is to look at previous updates...
On the plus side, this could only help the superior comedian in the long run.
I'll see if I can find someone.
Looking forward to the Oscars! (At least movies I actually care about are nominated at these awards.)
Hey, I thought Billy Crystal did a superb job at the most recent one!
Fair enough. Their interplay is definitely worth watching. You never realize how truly awful Roeper was, until after you see Siskel.
Don't get me wrong, I love Billy Crystal, and I think that he should be required by law to host every year. But I don't know, even though they now nominate twice as many movies as they used to, they seem to be getting even worse at picking movies that people actually watch. Look at Four Weddings and a Funeral. That would never get nominated for Best Picture today. It's a comedy!vultan said:Hey, I thought Billy Crystal did a superb job at the most recent one!
Edited my last update to take out Paul Scoffield's nomination for Best Supporting Actor and replace it with Morgan Freeman for The Shawshank Redemption. With a more packed and competitive Best Actor field, Freeman loses out there, but is instead pitched for Best Supporting Actor (one of those roles that could go either way). Normally I'd feel bad for denying a veteran actor like Scoffield a nomination toward the end of his life... but he already got the gold for A Man For All Seasons, so it's good.
Don't know how that got to the final draft, had Freeman for that in my notes. Oh well, that's why their's an edit function.
Don't know how that got to the final draft, had Freeman for that in my notes. Oh well, that's why their's an edit function.
The updates are getting better and better.
Watchmen got snubbed, and The Shawshank Redemption will probably lose it's just desserts as well Hoping anti-Gump votes swing Best Picture towards The Shawshank Redemption, but I doubt it.
Could Cameron win an upset with Best Director? Because honestly, of those five, he definitely isn't the Best Director. Best Picture you could make a case for Watchmen, but Best Director...
Watchmen got snubbed, and The Shawshank Redemption will probably lose it's just desserts as well
Hoping anti-Gump votes swing Best Picture towards The Shawshank Redemption, but I doubt it.Could Cameron win an upset with Best Director? Because honestly, of those five, he definitely isn't the Best Director. Best Picture you could make a case for Watchmen, but Best Director...
Oh and to follow up on my wondering where Oliver Stone went, I'm guessing the alt Natural Born Killers is the half million dollar budget one that Tarantino failed to get moving IOTL but shouldn't it have come out earlier than '94?
Complete aside and assuming it's on the Internet, has anyone read Tarantino's original script for it? I'm curious as to what Stone changed.
Those people. If the movie had ended with the Joker in cop car (and some reshuffling of scenes) than I could argue for a best picture nod. As it was the film muddied everything in the weird third act. In fact, and luckily I was at the back so not to be totally embarrassed, I actually stood up to leave at that scene not having noted the running time. Oops.
Complete aside and assuming it's on the Internet, has anyone read Tarantino's original script for it? I'm curious as to what Stone changed.
Those people. If the movie had ended with the Joker in cop car (and some reshuffling of scenes) than I could argue for a best picture nod. As it was the film muddied everything in the weird third act. In fact, and luckily I was at the back so not to be totally embarrassed, I actually stood up to leave at that scene not having noted the running time. Oops
.Well, a quick check would say that the original script focused more on the reporter (in our timeline, played by Robert Downey, Jr. Here... we'll see), than on Mickey and Mallory.
I think, though, that after a couple of script revisions on his own, Tarantino would probably tend toward making the murderers the main characters, just because of the kinds of films he's done in our timeline. The potential was probably stronger in that direction anyway. The main differences would be that QT wouldn't take the path Oliver Stone did and make it an obvious, anvilicious social commentary on the media's fascination with morbid news items (seriously- the audience isn't dumb, we can make the connections on our own without having to be beat over the head with them!)
A leaner, meaner Natural Born Killers, with less of the extraneous stuff Stone threw in (though I gotta admit, I thought the scenes with Rodney Dangerfield as Mallory's abusive father, told in sitcom form, were brilliantly hilarious) would stand a better shot at Academy recognition.
Maybe this is a personal choice, but I'd take that over Stone's highly... experimental use of editing he tried out historically.
The Punisher certainly. Aside from that I'd take a look at graphic novels of the early '90s would my suggestion.
Taking your challenge to mean no conventional superheroes, or something directly spun off one of them, and taking into account only stuff already on the printed page, I would like to suggeest:
Alan Moore era Swamp Thing
Garth Enis era Hellblazer
A History of Violence
V For Vendetta with Anthony Stewart Head as V, and Winona Ryder (or her closest British Equivelant) as Evey, directed by Eric Idle or Paul Greengrass
Jon Sable: Freelance
Warlord
Starslayer
Our Army At War/Sgt. Rock and Easy Company in the style of either an 80's/90's action movie directed by Paul Veerhoven or one of the Scott brothers, or else in the style of Saving Private Ryan.
Grimjack
American Flagg!
A Punisher reboot closer to the original comics.
Moon Knight
Spawn done without the Ham and Cheese
Savage Dragon
Stormwatch
WildCATS
(And when they get off the presses, maybe Preacher and Transmatropolitan.)
Not that I think all of them need to be made in the same timeline, it's just a few suggestions out there for comic properties
Last edited:
Agreed on Spawn. Image Comics in general, I imagine, will be even more phenomenally successful ITTL, though obviously their bureaucratic ineptitude will catch up with them eventually. But McFarlane has enough business savvy to exploit greater success, I think. A butterfly would be a longer-lasting animated series, which by all accounts is the finest incarnation of the Spawn mythos.