WI Battlefield Earth was critically acclaimed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's say that the crew of Battlefield Earth put actual effort in, doing whatever changes to the story, and thus the film was actually good. What effect, if any, would this have for the likes of John Travolta and scientology?
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Let's say that the crew of Battlefield Earth put actual effort in, doing whatever changes to the story, and thus the film was actually good. What effect, if any, would this have for the likes of John Travolta and scientology?

The problem are that while the book are entertaining, it's suffer from several idealogical and scientific problems* which are almost impossible to remove, because they would destroy the purpose with the book to introduce pseudo-Scientological ideas among the readers. These element are tolerable in the book because they can be explaned away, while in the movie they can't, because of the limited time of the film. It's important to remember that the Battlefield Earth books are a trilogy the size of Lord of the Rings, and that they tried to fit in a 2 hours movie. They can't be removed from the movie because that would destroy the purpose with the movie.

The only way to rise the movie over lousy was to make it either a serie or multible movies, and even when I doubt it could be raised over mediocre (The character in the book are simply too 2D and strawmanish). Which would a finansial fiasco, but less destructive for Travoltas career.

But to make it good you need it to be something other than a idealogical showpierce, which are impossible in a world where Hubbard has founded Scientology.

*the atmosphere of the aliens world, their psychology, idealogy, technology, and way of warfare.
 
Let's say that the crew of Battlefield Earth put actual effort in, doing whatever changes to the story, and thus the film was actually good. What effect, if any, would this have for the likes of John Travolta and scientology?

It is probably not ASB to make it a cult classic due to hilarious dialog or other zaniness.

I can't see how Battlefield Earth would wind up being a good movie. This isn't a question of star power, its one of a plot that spells out that its fuglys are looking for GOLD. It is a hero story, but one that is utterly mental to start with.
 
Perhaps make it even worse and ensure it becomes a 'so bad its good film'?

IMO its already skirting the edge of Plan 9 from Outer Space Territory, just without the same level of utter ineptitude, so maybe all we need is for somebody on the production crew to realize this and guide it towards self-parody.
 
Here's a novel suggestion for improvement: It can actually follow the book!

Make it so Johnny learns about the attack on Earth from the Psychlo histories as he did in the book. It could be an extended flashback, so we could see the futile nuclear and conventional attacks on the gas-drone, the Psychlos arriving in the gas-drone's wake and fighting with the survivors, and the last stand of the Air Force Academy against the Psychlo tank.

Then he can travel to Scotland and meet the descendants of the Scottish soldiers who did some real damage--they tricked a Psychlo tank force into running over some nuclear mines. That could be a flashback too.

And make the Psychlos less human-looking. They look like the human actors who play them, only with dreds.
 
Sorry for mild necromancy, just want to revisit this:
Originally, John Travolta asked Quentin Tarantino to direct, but he refused. Now, let's use some handwavium and say he accepts.
What if Tarantino makes this film do for old sci-fi B-movies what Inglourious Basterds did for 1970's nazi exploitation films? Since he was, even then, an A-list director, he would probably attract a larger budget and would definately get some better camerawork abd cinematography going on. We'll even be generous and say Tarantino's involvement makes the acting improve somewhat, probably replacing some of the lesser cast with better actors.
While it won't be some multi-Academy award winning film, it will probably be far more enjoyable and more commercially successful

*The only question is whether Travolta would agree to this less-than-serious approach, which is in question, but let's say for the sake of conversation he does.
 
Sorry for mild necromancy, just want to revisit this:
Originally, John Travolta asked Quentin Tarantino to direct, but he refused. Now, let's use some handwavium and say he accepts.
What if Tarantino makes this film do for old sci-fi B-movies what Inglourious Basterds did for 1970's nazi exploitation films? Since he was, even then, an A-list director, he would probably attract a larger budget and would definately get some better camerawork abd cinematography going on. We'll even be generous and say Tarantino's involvement makes the acting improve somewhat, probably replacing some of the lesser cast with better actors.
While it won't be some multi-Academy award winning film, it will probably be far more enjoyable and more commercially successful

*The only question is whether Travolta would agree to this less-than-serious approach, which is in question, but let's say for the sake of conversation he does.

"Does he look like an intergalactic bitch?!"

I can see it now.
 
Let's say that the crew of Battlefield Earth put actual effort in, doing whatever changes to the story, and thus the film was actually good. What effect, if any, would this have for the likes of John Travolta and scientology?
In theory, they could do a reverse 'Starship Troopers' (i.e. make a movie that shares only the name and a couple of minor plot points with the book). But whereas ST took great SF and made bad SciFi, you could have BE take bad SciFi and make it great SF....

In which case it would have no intersection with Scientology at all....
 
Then we'll be having Battlefield Earth 2 by 2008 at the latest
Battlefield Earth 2: Extraterrestrial Boogaloo*

I'd imagine that being more accurate to the books wouldn't necessarily make it critically acclaimed. The book itself received a very polarised reception. I read the book myself and thought it was okay (not terrible but not brilliant either) at best. I'm not suggesting that I'm the single representation of humanity itself, but I think you get the idea. It should also be worth noting that L. Ron Hubbard was the one to suggest a film version of the book to begin with: he gave an interview in February 1983 to the Rocky Mountain News in which he told the reporter, "I've recently written three screenplays, and some interest has been expressed in Battlefield Earth, so I suppose I'll be right back in Hollywood one of these days and probably on location in the Denver area for Battlefield Earth when they film it." An author by the name of Stewart Lamont suggests that Hubbard may even have envisioned directing it, having previously helmed Scientology training films.

The Quentin Tarantino idea sounds very interesting.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Battlefield Earth 2: Extraterrestrial Boogaloo*

I'd imagine that being more accurate to the books wouldn't necessarily make it critically acclaimed. The book itself received a very polarised reception. I read the book myself and thought it was okay (not terrible but not brilliant either) at best. I'm not suggesting that I'm the single representation of humanity itself, but I think you get the idea. It should also be worth noting that L. Ron Hubbard was the one to suggest a film version of the book to begin with: he gave an interview in February 1983 to the Rocky Mountain News in which he told the reporter, "I've recently written three screenplays, and some interest has been expressed in Battlefield Earth, so I suppose I'll be right back in Hollywood one of these days and probably on location in the Denver area for Battlefield Earth when they film it." An author by the name of Stewart Lamont suggests that Hubbard may even have envisioned directing it, having previously helmed Scientology training films.

The Quentin Tarantino idea sounds very interesting.
You have been here long enough to know not to click through the warning box and necro an EIGHT YEAR OLD thread (which the warning box indicated).

Do NOT do this again.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top