^ Oh really? That must explain why critics aren't allowed to see it before it comes out in theatres. HEY. POTC2 WAS GOOD.

^ POTC2 was awesome and hardly formulaic.

This might not belong here but whatever. Has anyone ever heard of...

SNAKES ON A TRAIN?

It's a total ripoff of Snakes on a Plane but it looks a lot more gory.

quite possibly the next "plan 9 from outer space"

Uhhhm. Let's get some things straight. First of all, the title of the screenplay and original idea of the production name, was, to begin with, Snakes on a Plane. It was not choosen by the fans as such. But, because of the impression a title like this gives off, the studio wanted to change it. Which they did. However, Mr. Jackson came on board specifically because of the title. He was an immediate fan. He also showed that the buzz and hype generated by this title was far reaching. Note the already imense following. Because of this, the studio did a few things.

The studio and investors involved did some reshoots, despite the fact that principle shooting had already taken place. These were done in order to raise the film to the expectations of its already cult following. The film moved from a PG-13 rating (a rating desired to raise box office numbers) to an R rating, so as to calm the nerves of the people already dumb enough to want to see the film. For all its hype, a PG-13 rating would actually hurt the production at the box office, rather than help it. Its fan-base wants it to be R, and expect it to be R. Thus, the studio conforms in order to make money.

The reshoots include more swearing, a healthy amount of nudity, and more than enough gore. Without these, the film fails to have a fan base. It's a commercial choice, nothing else. Ontop of the reshoots, the still commercial choice to revert the name back to Snakes on a Plane, as opposed to the PG-13 geared Pacific Air Flight 121. It's about a market and a demographic, and they have done a fine job in finding these.

Now, there really isn't anything fundementally different about the production of Snakes on a Plane in comparison to most hollywood "formula" made movies. In fact, Snakes on a Plane may be more formulaic than many. The real difference is in the promotional sense. The actual creation of the film is no different, however their promoters have been innovative. Although innovative, it certaintly is still trash.

They used fan based competitions to spread the word. Not only do they not have to pay for a score, or spend much time on one, but they create even more buzz for the film. The more rediculous the better. And, observing the history of the film, it was very much a serious flick at one point, and may still be to a degree.

It would be as if you were to deliver a joke seriously (believing the joke to be humorous), but were met with the assumption that the joke was never intended to be funny. Instead, people belive that, that you would tell it in the first place is hilarious, for it is so far from clever, and so clearly bad. Instead of facing embarrassment, you put on a facade. Yes, clearly you knew that the joke was poor in the first place.

A demographic always plays a large role in a commercial film, this isn't exactly new. When a film is being made commercially, people are interested in making money. When they want to make money, they always consider the fan base. Always. It isn't exactly a new concept.

However, Snakes on a Plane has made it a step further. They have pretended to now be in on the joke. A joke that was never good in the first place. And, they now realize the commercial possibilities of a wide theatrical release. It's a commerical ploy.

I remember a few years ago, Sprite or 7-up (I can not, for the best of me, remember which) put on an add with a famous basketball player. The add was a joke on advertisements itself. It flashed prices and cheesy slogans all over the screen in a shameless manner. The spokesperson intended to be overly excited about the product. It was a hit with audiences. They thought it was hilarious. But, the sorry truth of the matter was that the addvertisement was still just that, an addvertisement. In a psychological twist, it was trying even more desperately to appeal to consumers. I'm telling you this because it reminds me so much of the promotional campaign for Snakes on a Plane.

It's just another hollywood film, but with a piss poor plot. A god awful, disgusting disgrace for a plot. And, I could imagine that a thousand better concepts were passed up by that same New Line Cinema executive who decided to streamline Snakes on a Plane. And, that's what makes me sick. The idea that this, of all things, was chosen to be made. Of course it's a commercial enterprise. What can I expect? But, seriously, Snakes on a Plane?!

Sure, I could be wrong, which is a possibility. Maybe it is an honest commerical enterprise, if that even makes sense. Maybe it was never ever meant or shot to be serious, although it does indeed appear to have once been. Maybe this is something great for hollywood and audiences alike. But... I just don't see it.

Blasphemy!

Yes, it is.

*gag*

[moved]

After browsing through the vast land of myspace I repeatedly stumbled across an intriguing ad for a movie, Snakes on a Plane. "What on earth could this be?" I wondered. I didn't think much more about it until I found another ad and clicked on it. SNAKES ON A PLANE!!! CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE TRAILOR. umm, okay...I guess (Once again I was sucked in by a mindless advertising scheme.)

The trailor begins.
I couldn't really tell what was going on. Basically what goes down is some guy gets pissed off and lets a bunch of snakes out on an airplane everyone freaks out including the average black guy who will probably make at least three humerous references to him being black.

Oh, and.. Samuel L. Jackson is in it.
I went to the IMDB to see why on earth someone like Samuel L Jackson would destroy their career with a movie like Snakes on a Plane and what I found was mildly comical.

In the trivia section of the movie it said that the only reason he went for the movie was because of the "catchy" title... and whenever they thought about changing it he was going to sign off of the film. I guess when you're Mr. Jackson you just want a bunch of cool movie titles to add to your repertoire.

The soundtrack?
Panic at the disco, fall out boy, the all-american rejects and about 10 other terrible bands. That dont make any music that is worth listening to at all but all have a fanbase of about 8437532475243578 13 years olds.

I guess it just goes to show that with an action superstar, a catch title, a funny black guy, and a soundtrack that preteens love; you'll have a hit movie!

lolololol everything is racist~

are the snakes poisonous?

all of my friends want to see that but it doesnt look good to me...like, at all. so i think i will pass especially with all the critisism Im hearing

It comes out in New Zealand on the 28th
I can't wait to go laugh my ass off at it

I don't want to waste $7 to watch that movie.

ditto.

"they" must be running out of things to make movies out of. lol.

f**k it, I'm seeing it.

my friend just got done watching this, she told me it was really funny and everybody in the theatre was yelling for the snakes. ohh makes me want to watch it now!

Seems like a good comedy to me.

doesn't look funny..I will wait till it comes out on DVD

It surprises me how they get the money to make these crappy films.

I'm not wasting my money to get it or go see it. I'm sure it was funny atleast. The preview always makes me laugh a little at the end

anyone who cannot appreciate this film is entirely too serious about life.

don't wait for the DVD though, that'll ruin the effect.

This movie looked like a piece of trash in commercials.

It pissed me off that an actor like Samuel L. Jackson went from Pulp Fiction to...this.

DOWNGRAAADE.

i think they could have at least come up with a better name.

movie titles are really beginning to suck.

I do that with a lot of movies. I think I will do that too.

Pfffffffft. I don't think so at all.
I can enjoy genuine B-movie goodness.
Granted I havn't seen this movie, but it isn't genuine B-movie anything.
The film has an estimated $35,000,000 budget. This is a hollywood movie. It's a big production.
What I don't think the fans get is that this is just another commerical experiment, and like flies to shit, people are flocking to the theaters to see it. It's all in the marketing, this movie isn't B, it's just money-scheming-trash. What exactly is there to be appreciated?

Sorry, but I'll stick with true B-movie classics for my not "too serious about life" kicks. Give me some Premutos Lord of the Living Dead, give me some Dead Next Door, give me El Topo, give me classic John Waters! Give me anything but Snakes on a Thirty-five-million Dollar Plane!

I just got back from seeing it. I mean, it wasn't the best thing ever made, but that was a thoroughly enjoyable movie. There was some stuff that wasn't needed (i.e. the random sex scene between the stoner couple) but hell if it wasn't funny seeing them get bit over and over again by those snakes. And the guy in the other bathroom...

whoa ive actually seen one of those movies! dead next door! man! that was stupid. lol