Bill and Ted 3

When have I said that? The only thing I've been vocal about "not liking the idea of" is ignoring everything that has happened around us all between 1991 and today and thinking a movie like this could get made now without a story that addresses this.

edited 4th Oct '13 2:08:41 PM by SeanMurrayI

The story does address this, though. Like, the entire story actually revolves around this. Everything we've heard about this film suggests that it's about the fact that the song still hasn't been written.

But you've also rejected that, so...

What I've rejected is your defense for the "same old Bill & Ted" saving the day and uniting a world in the same spirit and style from twenty years ago—as if they were stuck in a void for the past two decades and only just came back out of thin air and started behaving the same old way—and believing audiences would flat out accept this.

What you have defended of this project, so far, has NEVER advocated or outlined anything like the deconstruction and "unintentional punchline to their own schtick" theme that I just described. (Shit, you couldn't just cut the bullshit out about the Muppets and superhero movies and just talk about these themes I just brought from the start?)

Which means this also means you're not getting a Bill & Ted movie that is much like the previous two, so...

edited 4th Oct '13 2:27:59 PM by SeanMurrayI

Please find where, exactly, in my own words, I suggested the new film completely ignore the past twenty years.

Maybe it turns out they have to invent a whole new kind of music?

That would be a neat trick. Seeing as how no-one has done that since Stockhausen. Not many folks liked it either.

I'd like to know why a third Bill & Ted film is being made this late aside from the likeliest reason.

Yeah, Keanu Reeves is pretty hard up.

Seriously, the people on board right now are him, the original writers (both of whom have had steady work), and Alex Winter, who played Bill and is actually doing fairly well as a documentary filmmaker. There is absolutely no money coming in right now and no funding has been secured yet.

It's not like a studio has mandated this. Bill and Ted are creator-owned characters. I suspect the guys who created them just want to go back to their roots or something.

Or they honestly feel like they need a conclusion to the story, or want to revisit the characters.

Obviously, I highly doubt they won't aim to make some sweet sweet money out of this, but yeah, this seems to be an effort of love above everything else. Which, in today's Hollywood, it's actually great and refreshing. I wish them good luck.

Fun fact: The first movie cost 10 million to make and made four times that. The second movie cost 20 million to make and made twice that.

40 million is hardly "mad stacks" in the current Hollywood landscape. The idea that a studio will greenlight it with expectations of it being a blockbuster is kinda hilarious.

The first two films made a ton of money abroad though. I remember seeing both either on VHS or at the cinema over here in the UK, and the characters were very popular further afield than here as well.

I would say the two films topped around 100 million in domestic and foreign receipts at the box office combined with the vhs, blu ray and dvd sales and rentals. Box office mojo is useless as it doesn't show international receipts and I really don't know where to look to get an accurate picture of how much money the films made overall.

100 million may not be all that big when you measure it against the bloated take that Cameron and Bay's efforts seem to haul in but it is still a sizeable chunk of change nonetheless.

100mil for both 50mil per movie, roughly, which is only 10mil above the domestic theatrical gross of each, and that home video money is gonna take a while to add up.

...oh god what if this ends up going straight to video

edited 5th Oct '13 11:24:59 PM by Wackd

I think some people's apparent passion for Bill & Ted is based on its faint resemblance to some british show. Aw hell, it starts with "Do" and ends with "Ctorwho" I think?

Just sayin'.....

edited 6th Oct '13 12:27:54 AM by johnnyfog

If I've said anything unspeakably stupid, lemme know.

Yeah, it does, doesn't it? The time machine was supposed to be some sort of Detroit built van or other but that was felt to be too close to teh De Lorean in Back to the Future so they scrapped that idea.

So they made it into a glass fronted TARDIS ripoff instead.

Okay, so it can be a van in the third movie!

...not really? It's just funny, is all. We're getting more Doctor Who regularly, if I liked B&T simply for being a rip-off of it I wouldn't be so eager for a third movie.

Actually, both of the Wayne's World movies came out during the grunge/alternative era, yet those movies didnt really reflect that time period, but were and are hugely succesful and iconic.

So, I was thinking about what the franchise would need to update for the modern day, and it occurred to me that the logo is kinda dated and cheesy. So I Googled some recent movie posters and fashioned a new logo (complete with hypothetical subtitle) real quick. Here you go.◊

That does look pretty good.

Thanks!

Ah, the perils of being an independent production.

That picture of Keanu actually hurt to look at. What the hell went wrong with him?