WI: "Expendables" type film made in the 90s?

[The Vulture]

Schwarzenegger would likely have a fight scene with Sven Ole-Thorsen.

It'd be nice to see Richard Dean Anderson in there somewhere, as the cheap version of Harrison Ford.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

It'd be nice to see Richard Dean Anderson in there somewhere, as the cheap version of Harrison Ford.

Would he be big enough to warrant that? I don't know of any films he even appeared in.

 

[The Vulture]

Would he be big enough to warrant that? I don't know of any films he even appeared in.

MacGyver would have only been off the air a year before production began, so he would still be a credible adventure hero. I'm not saying a star, but he could have a role as a tertiary antagonist or something.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

MacGyver would have only been off the air a year before production began, so he would still be a credible adventure hero. I'm not saying a star, but he could have a role as a tertiary antagonist or something.

He's not a film actor, though. Just a TV actor.

 

[TheMann]

So, we start with the trinity of Schwarzenegger, Stallone and Willis and then go up from there:

- Charles Bronson (he'd take this, I'm thinking of him as a veteran hitman, like his character in The Mechanic)
- Clint Eastwood (still capable of action roles, was still doing them until 2000's Bloodwork, and in 1993-94 would be huge because of Unforgiven)
- Steven Seagal (still good at the time, thanks to Under Siege and Out For Justice)
- Tommy Lee Jones (Just did The Fugitive and Under Siege, as well as having Blown Away and Natural Born Killers in 1994)
- Keanu Reeves (Speed was in 1994, and it and True Lies were the biggest action movies of that year, and Speed is IMO one of Reeves' best performances, along with The Matrix series)
- Gene Hackman (still big at the time)
- Robert Redford, Sam Neill, Liam Neeson and/or Michael Douglas (one or more of these guys as a shady CIA-type who always shows up in movies like this one)
- Tom Arnold (For his absolutely brilliant comic relief in True Lies)
- Jean-Claude Van Damme (too big to be ignored at the time)
- Mel Gibson and/or Danny Glover (These two just did Lethal Weapon III, which was excellent)

You get these, as well as some female leads for the role (Sigourney Weaver, Sharon Stone, Jamie Lee Curtis, Linda Hamilton, Sandra Bullock, Bridgette Nielsen and Anne Archer are all options if you want females who have been in such movies recently) and you go from there.

 

[The Vulture]

He's not a film actor, though. Just a TV actor.

That has nothing to do with anything. I'm honestly confused by this statement, are you saying that it's impossible for someone to appear in both television and film? My point is just that Anderson was a moderately recognizable name at the time and would've come cheaper than some of the bigger stars. I doubt he would carry a movie on his own, but perhaps he'd be good in some kind of side role.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

That has nothing to do with anything. I'm honestly confused by this statement, are you saying that it's impossible for someone to appear in both television and film? My point is just that Anderson was a moderately recognizable name at the time and would've come cheaper than some of the bigger stars. I doubt he would carry a movie on his own, but perhaps he'd be good in some kind of side role.

My point is why would a man who was never in a studio film ever be put into a studio film here?

 

[The Vulture]

My point is why would a man who was never in a studio film ever be put into a studio film here?

The dude had been in films by '93.

At any rate, there's really not enough quantifiable difference between filming a television show and a movie to get worked up about. There's not a great big magical difference, it's a matter of doing your thing in front of a camera.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

The dude had been in films by '93.

He was in TV movies and direct-to-video. That's it.

At any rate, there's really not enough quantifiable difference between filming a television show and a movie to get worked up about. There's not a great big magical difference, it's a matter of doing your thing in front of a camera.

He was never in a studio picture. There is not much that's going to be different in this world in that area. So the point remains, I do not believe it would happen because there's nothing especially different to make it happen.

 

[Mike Stearns]

Would he be big enough to warrant that? I don't know of any films he even appeared in.

How about replacing RDA with Kurt Russell, who would have been coming off of Stargate and Executive Decision, both of which were popular and successful, so he looks like credible action star.

 

[AtriumCarceris]

I always thought that the best thing for something like this would be to make it an actual crossover, or at least a spiritual crossover. And don't worry about it being silly.

Like, it's a "Detective Convention" and all the action stars are there, either actually playing their old police roles, or playing fake versions of them. And then villains show up to blow up the convention or something. So Die Hard with multiple protagonists.

When I think old action movies I tend to remember the cop films. And this also gives us some different actors. People keep forgetting. Where's Jackie Chan? Eddie Murphy? Even Whoopi Goldberg would work in this situation.

If you try to lean too hard on just straight up action and use an original story, you might end up with how The Expendables actually was. A boring movie.

 

[thekingsguard]

So, we start with the trinity of Schwarzenegger, Stallone and Willis and then go up from there:

- Charles Bronson (he'd take this, I'm thinking of him as a veteran hitman, like his character in The Mechanic)
- Clint Eastwood (still capable of action roles, was still doing them until 2000's Bloodwork, and in 1993-94 would be huge because of Unforgiven)
- Steven Seagal (still good at the time, thanks to Under Siege and Out For Justice)
- Tommy Lee Jones (Just did The Fugitive and Under Siege, as well as having Blown Away and Natural Born Killers in 1994)
- Keanu Reeves (Speed was in 1994, and it and True Lies were the biggest action movies of that year, and Speed is IMO one of Reeves' best performances, along with The Matrix series)
- Gene Hackman (still big at the time)
- Robert Redford, Sam Neill, Liam Neeson and/or Michael Douglas (one or more of these guys as a shady CIA-type who always shows up in movies like this one)
- Tom Arnold (For his absolutely brilliant comic relief in True Lies)
- Jean-Claude Van Damme (too big to be ignored at the time)
- Mel Gibson and/or Danny Glover (These two just did Lethal Weapon III, which was excellent)

You get these, as well as some female leads for the role (Sigourney Weaver, Sharon Stone, Jamie Lee Curtis, Linda Hamilton, Sandra Bullock, Bridgette Nielsen and Anne Archer are all options if you want females who have been in such movies recently) and you go from there.

All good but I would not include Keanu Reeves - one action movie makes him as much as an action star as it makes Mark Wahlberg one.

 

[Mike Stearns]

All good but I would not include Keanu Reeves - one action movie makes him as much as an action star as it makes Mark Wahlberg one.

Four, actually. Speed, The Matrix, The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions.

 

[thekingsguard]

Four, actually. Speed, The Matrix, The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions.

Three of which did not exist in the mid 1990s like we're talking about.

Replace him with Kurt Russel. He's another 1980s early 1990s action star that was huge until he went out in the late 90s. Escape from New York, The Things, Stargate - he's a great pick.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

Would Burt Reynolds be possible? His 90s career was mostly bad, and he could be the sly figure with potential for comic relief in a straight man sort of way. A film like this would seem like something you could get him for cheap enough (price with all these proposed actors becoming a problem at this point, I think since everyone is just getting piled on), as well as something that can revitalize his career. I mean, even if this film isn't critic good, it's gonna be good by audience and popular sentiment like Rambo II or any of those the critics didn't liked but audiences did and made classic.

 

[cortz#9]

When I was a kid I always thought that Clint Eastwood, Charles Bronson, James Coburn, Lee Marvin and James Caan should’ve done an action flick together with Christopher Lee, David Carradine and John Saxon as the villains. Didn’t give the script much thought, just thought it’d be kind of a Magnificent Seven-Dirty Dozen type thing. This would be a late 70s film.

Now of course I’m thinking it would make a great Expendables Movie. Throw in Gene Hackman, Burt Reynolds and maybe Roger Moor, George Kennedy and Richard Roundtree and you’ve got one hell of a film! Then in the 90s you do the remake with all the other actors already mentioned in this thread. Hell now that I think about it, you could throw in Stallone and shwarzenegger in the 70s flick as well.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

When I was a kid I always thought that Clint Eastwood, Charles Bronson, James Coburn, Lee Marvin and James Caan should’ve done an action flick together with Christopher Lee, David Carradine and John Saxon as the villains. Didn’t give the script much thought, just thought it’d be kind of a Magnificent Seven-Dirty Dozen type thing. This would be a late 70s film.

Now of course I’m thinking it would make a great Expendables Movie. Throw in Gene Hackman, Burt Reynolds and maybe Roger Moor, George Kennedy and Richard Roundtree and you’ve got one hell of a film! Then in the 90s you do the remake with all the other actors already mentioned in this thread. Hell now that I think about it, you could throw in Stallone and shwarzenegger in the 70s flick as well.

Arnie would have been terrible in it. He was totally green at that time, and unable to speak English well, let alone act (say what you will of his voice, but Arnie can actually act perfectly good and I don't understand how anyone can say different).

 

[Tyr]

Too soon I think.
By the late 2000s the 80s had became kitsch and cool.
In the 90s the 80s were just plain naff and outdated. I doubt it would have done well.

 

[cortz#9]

Arnie would have been terrible in it. He was totally green at that time, and unable to speak English well, let alone act (say what you will of his voice, but Arnie can actually act perfectly good and I don't understand how anyone can say different).

I agree but I was thinking it be a small part since his career had just started, maybe a minor villain.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

Too soon I think.
By the late 2000s the 80s had became kitsch and cool.
In the 90s the 80s were just plain naff and outdated. I doubt it would have done well.

The action flick was an 80s and 90s thing. It's not just an 80s thing. So this would be a continuation of that tradition rather than a call back to it after it was mostly dead, as the actual Expendibles was.

I agree but I was thinking it be a small part since his career had just started, maybe a minor villain.

Maybe. But it'd be a really, really bit part. No major studio will put in the effort on who Arnold was to make them an actual player. He'd be Henchmen #2.