Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City (2021)
- Thread starter Jonipoon
- Start date
I understand why many fans feel that way, believe me, but like KManX89, i'm one of the fans who liked it and think that it was pretty good, but the dialogue in it was bad in many parts, and apparently earlier versions of the first script by Alan McElroy suffered from same problem. But honestly i'd still take either of those two scripts over not just first film but anything else Anderson did with the movies, and Capcom did with the franchise with some of the games. That's MY opinion.
If there was any other problem i had with Romero's script, then it would be the way background for Chris and his entire character was changed so that he is almost typical native American, but from what i heard Romero changed that in his later drafts and turned him back to STARS member, and i also heard that his final (fifth or sixth) draft he wrote in mid 1999 was very good and much better than first draft from October of 1998, which is the one everyone knows about.
There is a scanned copy of first draft, and you can read transcript of it here;
http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/resident_evil_romero.html
This is the only draft which leaked out, although i heard on RE forums like this one that there was one more Romero draft which was available years ago but it's nowhere to be found today.
Game Informer guys did very fun script read of Romero's first draft, you can find their video on Youtube, and i also included it in my thread about Alan McElroy's and other rejected RE scripts from 90's. If you or any other fans here want to know more about what could have been, check that thread, maybe you'll find all the info and background interesting.
Last edited:
KevinStriker
"Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?"
I like Extinction for its cinematography and visual style, that's the one I return to. But mainly because I enjoy the director's earlier works.
Johannes Roberts recently mentioned the reboot in an interview, looks like they dropped Greg Russo's script and could be going with his story ideas instead;
https://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/director-talks-super-scary-resident-evil-reboot
Sounds like history could be repeating itself, meaning they still could go through different writers and directors before they get a script and direction they're happy with, just like what happened to the first film, or they could just cancel the whole project.
https://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/director-talks-super-scary-resident-evil-reboot
Sounds like history could be repeating itself, meaning they still could go through different writers and directors before they get a script and direction they're happy with, just like what happened to the first film, or they could just cancel the whole project.
Well, at least they're not turning down the f*cking zombie movie God's script for that hack, Paul WS Anderson this time, but it's still not a good sign.
James Wan is still attached as a producer, though I wonder just how much influence he'll have.
James Wan has some serious horror move creds.
If they did a real Resident Evil adaptation - I'd prefer them to go back to their roots. Give me the Spencer mansion. Give me Chris, Jill, Becca, Barry, and Wesker (and the remaining cast). Include Lisa Trevor. The Tyrant.
I think they would obviously have to be slightly less action focused and more story focused if they went this route because the movie would other wise be like 5 hours long, but it is not too hard of a task!
I didn't mind the first RE movie. I thought it was okay when I saw it in theaters and still own it. I just thought it was such a cop out to have a mutated Licker as the "final boss" of the film. So much more could have been done!
If they did a real Resident Evil adaptation - I'd prefer them to go back to their roots. Give me the Spencer mansion. Give me Chris, Jill, Becca, Barry, and Wesker (and the remaining cast). Include Lisa Trevor. The Tyrant.
I think they would obviously have to be slightly less action focused and more story focused if they went this route because the movie would other wise be like 5 hours long, but it is not too hard of a task!
I didn't mind the first RE movie. I thought it was okay when I saw it in theaters and still own it. I just thought it was such a cop out to have a mutated Licker as the "final boss" of the film. So much more could have been done!
Everytime I hear "scary" with Resident Evil now, it's hard to get excited because it literally says very little about the project. Resident Evil 7 is proof that scary doesn't equal Resident Evil.
If you had mentioned James Wan 14 years ago I probably would've been really excited about him being involved, but I really can't stand much of any of his projects since the likes of Dead Silence and Death Sentence. Granted Dead Silence was pretty campy and I'm so sick and tired of puppets but Donnie Wahlberg entertains me. But I digress. Since then it seems like nothing he is a part of has a solid plot and relies mostly on jump scares for shock value and, if Leigh Whannell is involved, a wicked twist ending (I adore Leigh as well to be honest but as he goes hand in hand with James a lot, I face the same issues with him.) rather than any real substance. So... I know James has it in him to helm a good horror flick, but it's been a while so I'm a little iffy.
Where's the recent source that says that James Wan is still attached as producer? I can't find it.
Nevertheless, when Johannes Roberts says "super scary" it doesn't really mean anything. Every horror movie director will tell you that their movie is the scariest sh*t you'll ever see.
I haven't really checked out any of his movies yet, but 47 Meters Down seems to be his biggest hit so far. The reviews however says that the main characters are boring, the premise gets old too fast, and every shark attack is a jump scare with loud music. Going by those checkmarks, I'd say the Resident Evil reboot isn't in particularly good hands. But hey, whaddyaknow, miracles have happened before ey?
What worries me aren't those things though. What worries me the most are Roberts's earlier remarks that he's going back to the series roots and mentions RE7 as a big inspiration. That to me sounds like a big pile of BS, and is basically just taken word for word from all those RE7's reviews on YouTube. NO, RE7 is NOT a return to the series roots!
Nevertheless, when Johannes Roberts says "super scary" it doesn't really mean anything. Every horror movie director will tell you that their movie is the scariest sh*t you'll ever see.
I haven't really checked out any of his movies yet, but 47 Meters Down seems to be his biggest hit so far. The reviews however says that the main characters are boring, the premise gets old too fast, and every shark attack is a jump scare with loud music. Going by those checkmarks, I'd say the Resident Evil reboot isn't in particularly good hands. But hey, whaddyaknow, miracles have happened before ey?
What worries me aren't those things though. What worries me the most are Roberts's earlier remarks that he's going back to the series roots and mentions RE7 as a big inspiration. That to me sounds like a big pile of BS, and is basically just taken word for word from all those RE7's reviews on YouTube. NO, RE7 is NOT a return to the series roots!
Last edited:
An aside, sure, but having seen 47 meters down and enjoying it, don't be too quick to dismiss him yet. Don't get me wrong, the film isn't mind-blowing but there is one standout part that was done brilliantly and had my heart stop for a split second - I guess to seasoned horror lovers, it may have been predictable, but the film itself wasn't really marketed as a solid horror, more a thriller. Given what I watched, I'd say in my opinion that Roberts has a chance to do something cool with a reboot. Zombies as opposed to sharks give you more scope anyway so it might be he pulls a rabbit out of a hat.
Having said that, I've not seen anything else he's done as far as I know, I'm just going off 47 meters down...I also love sharks so, yknow, biased :lol:
Having said that, I've not seen anything else he's done as far as I know, I'm just going off 47 meters down...I also love sharks so, yknow, biased :lol:
https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies...yed-play-jill-valentine-resident-evil-reboot/
So apparently Abigail Breslin from the Zombieland films are being considered for the role of Jill Valentine. Apart from her eyes she neither looks or feels like Jill at all, so if the casting directors are going with her they must be smoking crack. I could see her as Rebecca, though.
Nevertheless, it's interesting that Jill is among the first rumored casting choices. Could this mean that the reboot will actually follow the story from the games more faithfully?
So apparently Abigail Breslin from the Zombieland films are being considered for the role of Jill Valentine. Apart from her eyes she neither looks or feels like Jill at all, so if the casting directors are going with her they must be smoking crack. I could see her as Rebecca, though.
Nevertheless, it's interesting that Jill is among the first rumored casting choices. Could this mean that the reboot will actually follow the story from the games more faithfully?
Looks more like Jill than whatever that character design in RE3 Remake is XD. That said, I don't think it's a bad casting. Some of the most memorable castings in history were met with fan backlash at first. People seem to forget that Heath Ledger's Joker was actually a HATED casting before the film came out. Lots of people thought that was a mistake. Now he's the most iconic live action Joker out there (Much to my chagrin). Hell, even Bruce Willis in Die Hard, arguably the most notable action hero/movie combo of all time, was looked upon with ire by people. At the time, Bruce Willis was known for the TV show Moonlighting, which was a comedy. He wasn't a big jacked dude like Schwarzenegger or Stalone. No one thought he could do it. Now the name Bruce Willis is synonymous with Action Movies. So all in all, I rarely ever worry about the casting until the final product, because I've been pleasantly surprised quite frequently.
I never liked the Heath Ledger argument because it's constantly whored out, even when people have every right to be against a casting like Jared Leto's Joker or Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor. Not everyone is Heath Ledger and Christopher Nolan. Being a great actor doesn't mean you can't be miscast, given sh*t material, or be poorly directed. Personally, I think she's an awful choice. I've only ever seen her in the Zombieland films and after seeing her grown up in part 2, yeah, hell no.
Yeah, I'm also tired of hearing the Heath Ledger argument. Heath was already a great and versatile actor before being cast in the role, so that was never going to be any problem. The people who b*tch about casting decisions tend to do so more because they're unable to accept change no matter the actor/actress, or they're just sour because their personal fan casting didn't happen.
When it comes to Jared Leto's Joker and Jesse Eisenberg's Luthor, those had more to do with the overall quality of the films they were in and not their actual performances - because both Leto and Eisenberg are actually proven to be great actors. Of course like Turo said, even great actors can be miscast but the overall quality of the film itself is what matters the most. For example, I'm sure that Leto's Joker would've been much better received by fans and media if that film (Suicide Squad) didn't sideline him completely. If you put Joaquin Phoenix's Joker in Suicide Squad but didn't change anything about the story, it would've still been terrible.
That being said, it's perfectly OK to question a casting choice when the actor/actress isn't considerably "good". I mean sure, obviously a Resident Evil film isn't going to be able to attract big names, but Abigail Breslin? Come on. She can't act outside the "snarky teen" trope, and physically she's just no Jill Valentine.
Yes, looks do matter. You wouldn't cast Vin Diesel or The Rock as Joker, right? Or what about Tom Holland as Superman?
When it comes to Jared Leto's Joker and Jesse Eisenberg's Luthor, those had more to do with the overall quality of the films they were in and not their actual performances - because both Leto and Eisenberg are actually proven to be great actors. Of course like Turo said, even great actors can be miscast but the overall quality of the film itself is what matters the most. For example, I'm sure that Leto's Joker would've been much better received by fans and media if that film (Suicide Squad) didn't sideline him completely. If you put Joaquin Phoenix's Joker in Suicide Squad but didn't change anything about the story, it would've still been terrible.
That being said, it's perfectly OK to question a casting choice when the actor/actress isn't considerably "good". I mean sure, obviously a Resident Evil film isn't going to be able to attract big names, but Abigail Breslin? Come on. She can't act outside the "snarky teen" trope, and physically she's just no Jill Valentine.
Yes, looks do matter. You wouldn't cast Vin Diesel or The Rock as Joker, right? Or what about Tom Holland as Superman?
Given the direction of Leto's Joker, there was absolutely no way in hell he would have ever been recieved positively whether the film was good or not. Everyone loved Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn in Suicide Squad despite how bad it was. That version of the Joker was just never destined to be great given all the sh*tty creative choices they made with him beforehand, which is probably why they even cast Leto in the first place. And considering Leto went all "method" for the role and gave us what he did just absolutely solidifies how miscast he was with that awful voice and laugh.
Eisenberg on the other hand never had any business being Lex Luthor. When I think of Lex, I hear Clancy Brown. There was never any way Jesse Eisenberg was ever gonna match up with that physically or vocally. The guy is good at acting awkward because he's so goddamn awkward in real life and that's exactly what he gave us, but with a Mickey Mouse voice sprinkled in every now and then. Batman v Superman could have been The Godfather and Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor would have still been terrible.
Looking the part plays a huge part in casting for me because it's the first thing anyone is gonna notice in any performance. If I don't buy an actor's physical appearance as the character they are playing, then the illusion is automatically broken. They can give Oscar-worthy performances, but it still won't do a goddamn thing for me if it doesn't look or act like the thing they're supposed to be portraying.
YES. The Jared Leto thing is such an annoyance. Jared Leto did a fine job of playing the character that they created for the film. But the character they made wasn't The Joker. It was a parody of The Joker. Of course, it is great to take artistic license with characters so they don't get stale, but the writers and directors did NOT create the Joker character... at all. The look and the writing for the character were both bad choices. Jared Leto added some flare to the character and in the hands of a lesser actor, the Suicide Squad Joker could have been even worse.
From a different viewpoint though, Jared Leto didn't have to be a ****ing creep to the other actors in the film. I get wanting to get in to the mind of the character. But you don't have to be a real life villain. Especially when your character is a minor plot device in the film. Yikes.
From a different viewpoint though, Jared Leto didn't have to be a ****ing creep to the other actors in the film. I get wanting to get in to the mind of the character. But you don't have to be a real life villain. Especially when your character is a minor plot device in the film. Yikes.
Nah, both of you are forgetting all the praise both media and fans were giving Leto's Joker before the movie came out. Of course there were some people who hated him already, but all in all there was lots of hype - especially after that first leaked teaser which ended with Leto's "I'm just gonna hurt you, really ,really bad." It even became a meme that people kept posting on other, unrelated videos.
He got the same amount of praise that fanboys and shills give anything that ever exists no matter how awful. The majority of people were against it.