I wish...


Repairman Jack I: Claws of the Rakoshi by John McTiernan


Peter Jackson is good for "Nightworld", and Guilermo del Toro is perfect to "The Keep".

Decent choice Kenji...McTeirnan is scheduled to release Run with Thomas Jane at Christmas Time. He took quite a few years off after Basic in 2003. It'll be interesting to see Run and judge how well he got "back on the horse" so to speak.

My only question is: do you think that Predator qualifies him to do a monster movie like Rakoshi?

I liked all of his movies except Medicine Man. The only one I haven't seen is Basic. I own all the rest except Nomads.

Cheers,

-Wapitikev

Decent choice Kenji...McTeirnan is scheduled to release Run with Thomas Jane at Christmas Time. He took quite a few years off after Basic in 2003. It'll be interesting to see Run and judge how well he got "back on the horse" so to speak.

BASIC is pretty good thriller. I enjoyed it.

My only question is: do you think that Predator qualifies him to do a monster movie like Rakoshi?

Stan Winston made Predator. McTeirnan is movie director. Anyway, Stan Winston died. Too bad....

McTeirnan's best movie was Die Hard.

I liked all of his movies except Medicine Man. The only one I haven't seen is Basic. I own all the rest except Nomads.

Cheers,

-Wapitikev

Nomads! I want to see Nomads!

BASIC is pretty good thriller. I enjoyed it.

Stan Winston made Predator. McTeirnan is movie director. Anyway, Stan Winston died. Too bad....

McTeirnan's best movie was Die Hard.

Nomads! I want to see Nomads!

I liked Nomads but it was kinda rough compared to his other stuff.

As far as Predator goes, yes Stan Winston "made" that movie...but that's kinda my point...since Rakoshi is a "monster movie" will McTiernan be able to do it justice?

Probably.

-Wapitikev

I liked Nomads but it was kinda rough compared to his other stuff.

As far as Predator goes, yes Stan Winston "made" that movie...but that's kinda my point...since Rakoshi is a "monster movie" will McTiernan be able to do it justice?

Probably.

-Wapitikev

If it's a "monster movie" then it's doomed already. Monster movies are about the monster. RJ has to be about Jack. Period. If it focuses on the Rakoshi..... forget it.

just my humble opinion.

BTW, what's with the title, Repairman Jack I: Claws of the Rakoshi, that you always use? Titleing a movie with the "I" always seemed like a really bad idea to me.

The same idea I have for who should write the script.

[SIZE="4"]F. Paul Wilson[/SIZE]

If it's a "monster movie" then it's doomed already. Monster movies are about the monster. RJ has to be about Jack. Period. If it focuses on the Rakoshi..... forget it.

just my humble opinion.

BTW, what's with the title, Repairman Jack I: Claws of the Rakoshi, that you always use? Titleing a movie with the "I" always seemed like a really bad idea to me.

When I first used it (at the origin of this thread, I think), I explained that: "the horrible B-movie title of this thread...is an homage to Jack's love of old, sometimes cheesily-titled monster movies."

But, after using it a couple of times, it got good to me. Heh.

The I (roman numeral) was intended to: A) insist that there would be a 2, 3, 4, etc... and B) try to clearly show that this movie title was intended to mean The Tomb or Rakoshi, not some other story, and C) Lampoon how incredibly bad the Star Wars sequels (Episode I, II, and III) were.

Perhaps, since the Jack movie will out-earn The Dark Knight and Titanic put together, it will redeem the use of roman numerals in movie titles?

...but, even without the Roman numeral, Repairman Jack: Claws of the Rakoshi still sounds like a cool old monster movie.

I also mentioned somewhere along the line, that I renounce any possible copyright to that movie title or any variation thereof, so if FPW, Beacon, or anyone else wants to use it, then have at it!

And, as far as Rakoshi being a monster movie, focusing on the bag-guy worked for all the old Dracula, Mummy (and the new ones too) and Wolfman movies, etc. not to mention Alien, Aliens, and so on and so on.

We'll have numerous movies to get to know Jack...lets only tease the audience with a little bit o'Jack in the first movie.

Heh.

-Wapitikev

The same idea I have for who should write the script.

F. Paul Wilson

If FPW is happy with Chris Morgan's script, then I'm happy.

...love the new sig, Legion.

-Wapitikev

When I first used it (at the origin of this thread, I think), I explained that: "the horrible B-movie title of this thread...is an homage to Jack's love of old, sometimes cheesily-titled monster movies."

But, after using it a couple of times, it got good to me. Heh.

OK. The title isn't bad. I wasn't attacking it, I just didn't know if you had picked it up somewhere, because you seem to use it without exception.

The I (roman numeral) was intended to: A) insist that there would be a 2, 3, 4, etc... and B) try to clearly show that this movie title was intended to mean The Tomb or Rakoshi, not some other story, and C) Lampoon how incredibly bad the Star Wars sequels (Episode I, II, and III) were.

I have never liked the use of the roman numerals. They seem (to me) to reinforce the perception of the movies being unoriginal, imho

Perhaps, since the Jack movie will out-earn The Dark Knight and Titanic put together, it will redeem the use of roman numerals in movie titles?

O ...... K ......

Wap, wake up!!! Wake up!! :p

...but, even without the Roman numeral, Repairman Jack: Claws of the Rakoshi still sounds like a cool old monster movie.

I also mentioned somewhere along the line, that I renounce any possible copyright to that movie title or any variation thereof, so if FPW, Beacon, or anyone else wants to use it, then have at it!

And, as far as Rakoshi being a monster movie, focusing on the bag-guy worked for all the old Dracula, Mummy (and the new ones too) and Wolfman movies, etc. not to mention Alien, Aliens, and so on and so on.

We'll have numerous movies to get to know Jack...lets only tease the audience with a little bit o'Jack in the first movie.

Heh.

-Wapitikev

I had thought of Alien(s) when I posted (though not The Mummy), but I didn't want to give you anything to work with.

However, I still don't think they are analogous situation. The Alien movies can be considered monster movies. I'm not sured I'd label The Mummy movies (recent ones) to be monster movies, though; more pulp adventure, but anyway ......

The Alien movies work as monster movies and sequels because they focus on the monster. They're in every movie. The Rakoshi won't be in every RJ movie, nor the focus even when Scarlip pops up in later episodes. So what I was getting at is that while you could style it as a monster movie, that would necessarily detract from the exposition of the RJ character which would inevitably hurt the future episodes of the series. When people go to see a "monster movie," they go to see the monster. So if the monster isn't in the second (third, fourth, ...) movie, they will be less interested.

Again, just my thoughts. Maybe I'm wrong. Of course, like bones, I'm less than confident that we'll get to see the thing to begin with....

Again, just my thoughts. Maybe I'm wrong. Of course, like bones, I'm less than confident that we'll get to see the thing to begin with....

Me too sadly. Even with Reynolds stardom pushing it, its not likely. I mean what was the last thing he was in besides that flop "Definitely Maybe"?

Me too sadly. Even with Reynolds stardom pushing it, its not likely. I mean what was the last thing he was in besides that flop "Definitely Maybe"?

Your question may have been hypothetical but:

Definitely Maybe
Chaos Theory
The Nines
Smoking Aces

Upcoming movies:

Fireflies in the Garden (with Julia Roberts) 2008
Adventureland (comedy) 2008
X-men origins: Wolverine (with Hugh Jackman) 2009
The Proposal (with Sandra Bullock) 2009

I really like Smokin Aces and thought Definitely Maybe, Chaos Theory, and The Nines were alright, I'm still waiting for a sure-fire hit where Reynolds is the main star.

He's beginning to look like a bit of a lightweight.

-Wapitikev