Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

WWE Films/Wrestlers in Movies Thread

  • 27-12-2009 10:22PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,116 ✭✭✭✭


    what do ye think of the current films wwe are making. i liked the first film cena was in looking forward to the second one. anyone see 12 rounds


«134

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,478 ✭✭✭Bubs101


    Well the flims can't be any worse than the films


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,568 ✭✭✭glenjamin


    Only one I've watched was See No Evil staring Kane and I thought it was decent enough.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,391 ✭✭✭D2D


    Saw most of them

    See no Evil - didn't see
    The Marine - meh, could've been a hell of a lot better
    The Condemned - Pretty good
    Behind enemy lines:Columbia - OK
    12 rounds - I thought it was awful


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,083 ✭✭✭waltersobchak


    i actually thought Walking Tall was a pretty decent flick.. worth a watch anyway


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,588 ✭✭✭JP Liz


    I enjoyed 12 Rounds :D


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    I'd recommend "12 Rounds", actually. It was a decent action flick, with a good enough budget and script. Cena's acting has gotten much better since the atrocious "The Marine" (WWE's worst film; even worse than the pathetic "Behind Kennedy Lines")... I reckon if you didn't tell someone that Cena was a wrestler they'd just think it was another action flick, which is a huge boon if you think about it.

    I thought "The Condemned" was good. Great location, interesting storyline that plays to SCSA's strengths. Even though it borrowed heavily from other films, I enjoyed it start to finish. I'd recommend seeing 12 Rounds and the Condemned.

    Haven't built up the courage to watch "Damage" or "The Marine 2" yet as I reckon they're both awful. From the trailer Ted Jr. looks like a horrible actor.

    I've tried very hard to watch "End Game" starring Kurt Angle and Jenna Morasca but it's one of the worst films I've ever seen. The acting is awful, the production is in the toilet, and the script and story progression is something a(n untalented) high-schooler would put together. Awful, just awful. It's more painful than watching Morasca's Victory Road performance - at least you can laugh at that!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,443 ✭✭✭Red Sleeping Beauty


    Yeah No Holds Barred is savage!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Podge2k7


    I felt 12 Rounds was rip-off of Die Hard: With a Vengeance


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,078 ✭✭✭✭callaway92


    Saw most of them

    See no Evil - ****e
    The Marine - ****e
    The Condemned - ****e Ending
    Behind enemy lines:Columbia - Useless
    12 rounds - Poopy

    FYP


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    what does FYP mean?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,391 ✭✭✭D2D


    jaykhunter wrote: »
    what does FYP mean?

    I think it means fixed your post. Was wondering what it ment myself until I saw 12 rounds as "poopy"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,078 ✭✭✭✭callaway92


    actually people, just in case nobody has seen it before, "The Marine" starring John Cena is on Film 4 tonight at 00:45 but it is on +1 as well..not that I recommend anyone to watch it or atin though :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 416 ✭✭Whiplash


    Damage is a way better film than the condemed imo. prob cos its nothing to do with wwe films. check it out. its worthy of a cinema release, shame it went direct to dvd


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,457 ✭✭✭Cactus Col


    Yeah ... Damage is surprisingly decent.

    as for WWE films though .... I enjoyed See No Evil for the schlock it was.

    The Condemned would have been a much better film if it wasn't constantly lecturing at us.

    The Marine was awful.

    12 Rounds was terrible, but I had higher hopes for it because it had a bit of a name director attached. Unfortunately it that director's name was Renny Harlin.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,492 ✭✭✭EdK


    Saw the Marine 2 last night, DiBiase isn't as forced as Cena. Not a bad effort to be honest it's a decent action film


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    I've seen See No Evil and Walk Tall, thought the former was okay but I felt the latter was very good indeed.

    Anyone have any idea about what films they have in the pipeline?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,391 ✭✭✭D2D


    LZ5by5 wrote: »
    I've seen See No Evil and Walk Tall, thought the former was okay but I felt the latter was very good indeed.

    Anyone have any idea about what films they have in the pipeline?

    I think there's 2 films still to come

    Big Show is in the next one. It's called Knucklehead and John Cena is begining filming his next film called "Brother's Keeper"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 230 ✭✭DHYNZY


    condemned was good fun, as was walking tall. hated see no evil.

    i dont think these films were made to be taken as ground-breaking cinematics.. just a laugh to enjoy with some popcorn!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,256 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    Why did you knock the tower....cus it was blocking my sun....liked Condmened mindless violence


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,689 ✭✭✭sky88


    the condemnand was a really good film none have intrested to even watch them


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,083 ✭✭✭waltersobchak


    I know its not a WWE movie but Stone Colds next flick The Expendables looks all kinds of awesome..


  • Posts: 14,266 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Looks like Austin has a pretty minor role in that film, by the looks of the ad...?


    A three minute ad though. I've no idea why films do that. If a film ad is anymore than 20 seconds they usually show you every half-decent bit in it, and pretty much give you the entire story and a good idea how it ends, leaving you pretty underwhelmed when you actually see it. Thats my opinion anyway. Although that's very off topic.


    Anywho...


    See No Evil was the first film of WWE's that i seen. Expected it to be pretty crappy, but it wasn't too bad. A little on the silly side though (I thought Kane's parts were OK, but a lot of the stuff with just the kids on their own just seemed like real filler stuff to me, where they tried to mention sex and drugs as much as they possibly could, and also thought it was a little silly that they have one (disabled) guard for, what was it, eight prisoners? little odd to say the least).


    The Condemned was better I thought, and much more watchable. I think they made Austin a little TOO invincible in it though, which kinda hurt it for me, as the film was really taking itself seriously for the most part.

    Don't think I've seen any of the others, though I've been considering watching the Marine. I don't like Cena's face, odd as it may sound. He just looks really hammy or something. Everytime he delivers a serious line, it just seems so... I don't know... as though he was appearing in a parody of a film or something.

    For example, in the ads for The Marine, on RAW they always showed a clip of him talking to some guy, and he just turns around and, really, really seriously, looks straight at the guy and exclaims... "I'm a marine", and the guy has a real look of shock on his face over it. Just seems so over the top.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,083 ✭✭✭waltersobchak


    Looks like Austin has a pretty minor role in that film, by the looks of the ad...?


    A three minute ad though. I've no idea why films do that. If a film ad is anymore than 20 seconds they usually show you every half-decent bit in it, and pretty much give you the entire story and a good idea how it ends, leaving you pretty underwhelmed when you actually see it. Thats my opinion anyway. Although that's very off topic.


    Anywho...


    See No Evil was the first film of WWE's that i seen. Expected it to be pretty crappy, but it wasn't too bad. A little on the silly side though (I thought Kane's parts were OK, but a lot of the stuff with just the kids on their own just seemed like real filler stuff to me, where they tried to mention sex and drugs as much as they possibly could, and also thought it was a little silly that they have one (disabled) guard for, what was it, eight prisoners? little odd to say the least).


    The Condemned was better I thought, and much more watchable. I think they made Austin a little TOO invincible in it though, which kinda hurt it for me, as the film was really taking itself seriously for the most part.

    Don't think I've seen any of the others, though I've been considering watching the Marine. I don't like Cena's face, odd as it may sound. He just looks really hammy or something. Everytime he delivers a serious line, it just seems so... I don't know... as though he was appearing in a parody of a film or something.

    For example, in the ads for The Marine, on RAW they always showed a clip of him talking to some guy, and he just turns around and, really, really seriously, looks straight at the guy and exclaims... "I'm a marine", and the guy has a real look of shock on his face over it. Just seems so over the top.

    Yeah im not too sure how much he'll be in it.. it could be a similar amount to his role in The Longest Yard, but its a pretty large ensembled cast so id imagine he wont be in it too much


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 938 ✭✭✭HorseRadish


    EdK wrote: »
    Saw the Marine 2 last night, DiBiase isn't as forced as Cena. Not a bad effort to be honest it's a decent action film

    Granted it wont win any Oscars,but some of the fight scenes near the end were vicious enough!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 685 ✭✭✭Cactus Colm


    Sorry to ressurect an old thread ... but I saw Steve Austin's Hunt To Kill the other day ... and I tell you, it was a great B movie. Probably doesn't have half the production values of The Marine (1 and 2) or 12 Rounds, but was far more entertaining than any of those. Also features Eric Roberts and Gary Daniels (both of whom were in the Expendables) and a couple of other familiar faces (colonel tigh from bsg!).

    With this, Expendables, and Damage, I think Austin is actually putting out some pretty decent films.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_X9ay-qEa4


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    Haven't seen it yet as still have Damage and The Stranger on the backlog. I think it's because it's another Austin action flick. Heard decent enough things about Hunt to Kill. Does anyone else hear "Shoot to Thrill" by AC/DC every time they read that?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 685 ✭✭✭Cactus Colm


    Got River of Darkness on at the moment.

    It stars Kurt Angle, Kevin Nash, Sid Vicious, and Ray "Glacier" Lloyd!

    And it's awful! Late night horrorthon awful.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,600 ✭✭✭✭CMpunked


    WWE has signed Eric McCormack of "Will and Grace" fame to star in their latest film Barricade, according to Hollywood Reporter. The movie will be directed by Andrew Currie, and is listed as a supernatural thriller. The film will not feature a WWE wrestler. To read more on the story, visit HollywoodReporter.com. [Thanks to Dot Net reader Rocky from Fresno]

    Powell's POV: The movie will begin shooting in Vancouver next month. There's no word yet on whether any WWE talent will have smaller roles, but the story stated that no wrestlers will be featured in starring roles. It's an interesting move by WWE. They can still give the movie the usual hype on their television shows, and it's possible that the lack of WWE talent will lead critics and some movie goers to take it more seriously. Of course, the concern is that the WWE audience won't be as receptive to the movie if they don't have a WWE wrestler attached to it.


    Good move by WWE IMO.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,469 ✭✭✭✭GTR63


    CMpunked wrote: »
    Good move by WWE IMO.

    Clearly you forgot The Chaperone.I believe it was the funniest field trip of the year or last years knockout comedy Knucklehead. Seriously I just wished wwe stopped making films & keep there eyes on the product instead of trying to win elections or make money on crap movies so bad Tv3 wouldn't show them at 4:20 in the morning.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,116 ✭✭✭✭cena


    one or of them have not been that good. Been nice too see taker in some horror flim though.

    Also i can't get over i started this thread over a year ago. how time flies by


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 90,392 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/s-what-i-am-film-176796
    A sensitive performance from Ed Harris lends a core of quiet integrity to writer-director Mike Pavone’s gentle coming-of-age drama, That’s What I Am. But this well-intentioned tween-friendly message movie is earnest to a fault.
    Bearing the sanitized feel of a Sundance entry that got hijacked in development by the Hallmark Channel, the movie’s measured sentimentality and carefully mapped moral ground make it more likely to resonate as a family cable entry than in theaters. Distributor Samuel Goldwyn’s best shot at finding an audience is to tap into today’s heightened awareness of the blight of adolescent bullying.
    Set in small-town California in 1965, the story is told through the voice of 12-year-old Andy (Chase Ellison). He gradually absorbs parallel lessons of tolerance from ridiculed eighth-grade outsider Stanley (Alexander Walters) and the school’s compassionate English teacher, Mr. Simon (Harris).
    The infectious stigma of geekdom threatens Andy when Mr. Simon pairs him on an end-of-term assignment with brainy Stanley, a freakishly tall pariah whose ginger hair earns him the name Big G. But Andy finds inspiration in the courage of his unwanted companion. His outlook is expanded partly by the caring words of his mother (Molly Parker), and partly by witnessing the cruel abuse of Stanley and his fellow outcasts from school bullies.
    When one such incident prompts the temporary suspension of pipsqueak punk Carl Freel (Cameron Deane Stewart), he retaliates by spreading an unsubstantiated but professionally damaging rumor about Mr. Simon’s sexuality. Carl gets his moralizing dad (Randy Orton) on board his hate campaign, cornering the sympathetic principal (Amy Madigan) into a difficult confrontation.
    In his steadfast refusal to dignify the accusation with a denial, widowed Mr. Simon’s martyrdom is emphatically underlined by having him read a Joan of Arc biography to the class. Also heavy-handed is the blanket of literary voiceover dialogue from grown-up Andy, who naturally has become a writer.
    The film was produced by WWE Studios, which explains the casting of third-generation wrestling personality Orton in a decent acting debut as Carl’s manipulative dad. That this meathead is such an able negotiator, even with someone as sharp as Madigan’s principal, stretches plausibility. Too often, Pavone’s screenplay slaps contemporary perspective onto characters whose behavior doesn’t seem entirely true to their time.
    Right down to the tentative romance between Andy and school beauty Mary Clear (Mia Rose Frampton, daughter of ‘70s rocker Peter Frampton), the script feels somewhat formulaic. But there’s enough genuine poignancy and tender insights into the pangs of adolescence to make the drama affecting. And despite mawkish moments, performances by the young cast members are appealing.
    The film has a crisp, clean look, with decent period production values. But its chief distinction is Harris’ empathetic work in an uncharacteristically subdued role, striking stirring notes especially in some strong scenes with his real-life wife Madigan.

    A review of Orton's debut film


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,973 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bounty Hunter


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »

    apart from the mention of Orton that does not sound at all like a WWE film, should be interesting to see how it does / is recieved.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 90,392 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭jmolloy


    JP Liz V1 wrote: »
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/s-what-i-am-film-176796

    That this meathead is such an able negotiator, even with someone as sharp as Madigan’s principal, stretches plausibility.

    Is meathead directed at orton or the character?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭stiffler123


    Most WWE movies fall into the so terrible it's good category for me. This one with Kurt Angle is my personal favorite to date, although I have yet to see The Chaperone:D

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1421049/


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,492 ✭✭✭EdK


    Kurt Angle isn't in any WWE films,The films he is in are made by a low budget Pittsburgh based company called Northshore pictures


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,888 ✭✭✭Charisteas


    Not a WWE film, but has anyone seen The Rock in the new Fast and Furious movie yet? It's gotten majority of positive reviews from what i've read and heard so far.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭stiffler123


    EdK wrote: »
    Kurt Angle isn't in any WWE films,The films he is in are made by a low budget Pittsburgh based company called Northshore pictures

    Yes I know. He owns part of the production company as well. I've seen all of WWE's films except Behind Ememy Lines. The best of the bunch for me were Walking Tall and See No Evil. Lower down the list are The Condemned and 12 Rounds which weren't great but were watchable. Then there's The Rundown, The Marine and Legendary which were just God awful.

    The most unfrogivable part of The Marine for me was when Robert Patrick failed to blow up John Cena and his crew said "he was like the terminator or something". Awful!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55,452 ✭✭✭✭Headshot


    Do WWE make a profit from the films ? (god knows if they are tbh)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,083 ✭✭✭waltersobchak


    Headshot wrote: »
    Do WWE make a profit from the films ? (god knows if they are tbh)

    I think they make a small profit from them once they hit the video stores. "The Chaperone" took in under $2000 from its Theatrical release..


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    From 2008 :

    The WWE Films division has made a grand total of $300,000 in profit with their three movie releases; See No Evil, The Marine and The Condemned. Between See No Evil and The Marine, the company made $16 million in profit. However, Steve Austin's movie The Condemned was a huge money loser as it almost put WWE Films' profitability in the red. WWE is estimating losses at $15.7 million for the release of The Condemned.


    I'm asking around/search the net for more recent info but in general; profits are down this year and last and there's a few 'backstage' hidden costs (eg restructuring our projections/distribution methods etc) which mean that basically it's not making much money at all; i think it's heading towards the red and is barely breaking even right now.


    Here's a snippet from this month's PWTorch

    For the second consecutive quarter, WWE reported a loss in their films division under the new distribution model.

    "Under our self distribution model, we record a film’s advertising costs and distribution expenses in our results as incurred. As a result, our financial statements reflect a loss of $1.5 million related to 'The Chaperone' primarily due to the recognition of advertising costs," WWE reported in their first quarter 2011 revenue.

    WWE reported Studios revenue of $8.6 million in 2011-Q1, as compared to $3.4 million in 2010-Q1. The comparability is skewed by WWE not releasing any movies under their new distribution model in the prior year quarter. WWE launched the new model in fall 2010.

    WWE reported the current year quarter's revenue was driven by "The Chaperone." WWE also reported the revenue total included receipts from "12 Rounds," which was distributed under the old model.

    Beyond revenue, WWE reported a $2.8 million "impairment charge" from "12 Rounds" due to "revised, long-term, ultimate projections for this film."

    WWE noted: "Film profits declined $5.5 million from the prior year quarter driven by the aforementioned impairment charge, lower receipts from our other licensed films, and the previously disclosed change in our distribution model for films."

    Caldwell's Analysis: The $2.8 million impairment charge, film profit declining $5.5 million, and a $1.5 million loss on "The Chaperone" all raise questions on the long-term viability of the division. Granted, Chaperone's DVD sales/rentals (and other new-distributed movies) could generate enough revenue over the next several quarters to offset the loss, but WWE has to prove to their shareholders that it's feasible to continue investing in the movies division. WWE will say the right things about taking a long-term approach to this and needing time to essentially start over with the new model, but the early returns are not there.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,469 ✭✭✭✭GTR63


    Could anyone answer why wwe makes these films.I'm not being ignorant but I don't see the point of making them.They are going straight to dvd & are mainly met with negative reviews.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    GTR63 wrote: »
    Could anyone answer why wwe makes these films.I'm not being ignorant but I don't see the point of making them.They are going straight to dvd & are mainly met with negative reviews.

    Vince has a hard on for films. He wants to be in the entertainment industry, not the wrestling industry. He hates being 'that rasslin' guy'. It's a shame since only WWE's wrestling portion brings in the cash.

    If you watch the start of Beyond the Mat -- bear in mind, this is from early 1999 -- the first snippet with Vince (in his board room) he says "well wrestling is stepping stone so people can see what we're really about......making movies".

    Why did Vince try and fail with the WBF? Or the XFL? Or WWF NY/WWE The World? Or Movies? Or Linda's Senate Campaign? He wants to do everything that isn't wrestling because he wants to be something more than wrestling. It's a shame his vision is completely impotent for anything outside the wrestling bubble. This Gerwitz sh!te is only (barely) passable in the punch and judy world of pro-wrestling and is (rightly so) mocked by actual moguls of entertainment.

    Go to 3:20. Frightening!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,600 ✭✭✭✭CMpunked


    I know the title says no chat, but just saying that I always thought the whole "we make movies" line was more about how wrestling is what people see wwe/f as when they don't know what it is. But in fact they make entertainment with the storylines and acting that's involved.
    Doesn't the next shot show him going over a shot with dude love?

    Not saying that's not what you meant Jay but that's how I took it when I saw it first.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21,296 ✭✭✭✭gimmick


    Moved from the "questions" thread


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    w00t now we're free to chat :)

    Ah, CMPunked, as soon as I finished that quote, within seconds I was already on the internet registering my disgust :p

    That does make much more sense why those things would be together; the casual fan might not appreciate how much work/creativity goes into the shots WWE create. They might assume WWE's camera just constantly are able to get a really nice shot, lol.

    It'd hard to think WWE labour so hard over these scripts with a team of writers and most of the time the wrestlers say absolutely nothing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭MitchKoobski


    I still don't see how The Condemned lost so much money. Maybe the budgeted too high?
    I think it's the best one they've been associated with, and it was just a plain 'ol action film where Steve kicked the crap out of everyone. As far as I know it made a LOT more money on dvd sales.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    The Condemned is my favourite WWE film as well, thought it was a surprisingly good action film. My guess is that names sell the film, not the quality of film. So Cena (active wrestler/top babyface) everyone'll flock to see The Marine even though it's horrible, but since Austin is a 'wwe legend' not an active wrestler, the general WWE public wouldn't go out of their way.

    I think it squeaked pretty much a break even/minor loss thanks to DVD sales but it really put the kibosh on other action films being made. I think it's part of why we're seeing a "Stand By Me" feelgoodery with Orton today.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 15,238 ✭✭✭✭Diabhal Beag


    According to the Observer they get tax breaks on the films too so any loss they make is a minor one.

    They keep making these films in the hope that one day they'll have a new Rock.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,013 ✭✭✭✭jaykhunter


    You mean a guy who'll leave for 7 years? :pac:

    If u were making a WWE film, what kind of film would u make and who would u star in it?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement