RocShemp

Oh and ridiculously extreme close-ups of fingers pushing buttons that are accompanied by a seat-shaking LFE thump.

Bob_Bobbson

The alien ship is in orbit and has a com-link open with a general. They taunt each other (Yeah the alien knows english). The alien is trying to fire on the general's ship fleet, but they're in a patch of heavy fog.

The General and alien go back and forth firing at each other by targeting random co-ordinates, occasionally hitting ships in the other's fleet. Eventually the alien leader takes out the lead ship of the general's fleet.

Cut to the general. He turns to the camera, takes the cigar from his mouth and yells, "Someone get Washington on the phone. I need reinforcements. They sunk my Battleship!"

...Then a drunken Randy Quaid flies a fighter jet straight into the mothership and saves the planet.

Drexl

They should get Samuel L. Jackson so it could be "you sank my muthafuckin' battleship!"

toddly6666

DRG

I'm only interested if she sings all her lines, a la Shy Ronnie on SNL.

<object width="512" height="288"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/gtvz-AoXbxGs9Rb9b6MJ4g"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/gtvz-AoXbxGs9Rb9b6MJ4g" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="288" allowFullScreen="true"></embed></object>

"Our battleship is about to sink... oh no..."

dsa_shea

Shy Ronnie was funny as hell!

RocShemp

Is that the new Lars Von Trier movie?

tommyp007

Coming next summer...Mel Gibson and Lindsay Lohan star in "Sorry"

Hokeyboy

No no, even better, Mel Gibson directs Lindsay Lohan in "Sugar Tits: 3D".

Based on the boardgame "Push!" by Sapphire.

sauce07

Mel Gibson and Rihanna in Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots

RocShemp

Believe it or not, there is a Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots movie in the works. And I'm not talking about Real Steel.

devilshalo

The $200 million gamble on 'Battleship' film
Universal plays game of high risk, high reward
By Borys Kit and Kim Masters
Aug 13, 2010, 07:00 AM ET

As Universal's "Battleship" steams toward a start date this month, the pricey adaptation of the Hasbro board game is entering deep, treacherous waters. With a budget of $200 million or more and no major movie stars on board, the project is raising eyebrows among industry insiders who question whether this expensive gamble will pay off.

"It's a big bet like many, many big bets from many studios," Universal chairman Adam Fogelson acknowledged to THR. "We will be nowhere near the high point and nowhere near the low point of what people are spending."

But several huge questions hover over "Battleship," which begins filming in 15 days in Hawaii, that simply didn't apply to other big-ticket movies. In "Battleship," Universal has a director, Peter Berg, with some experience in action films, but he's not a brand name in the genre. And the concept is based on a board game that has sold more than 100 million units and raked in $1 billion-plus. This comes at a time when some studio execs are questioning whether the public is tiring of the presold concepts to which Hollywood has been clinging.

By far the most significant entry from the relatively new regime of Fogelson and co-chairman Donna Langley, "Battleship" is based on the Hasbro game about naval strategy that's been around since World War I. Berg has come up with a modern twist: making "Battleship" a movie about an alien invasion at sea. But the grief and financial woe brought about over the years by oceanic epics -- think "Waterworld" -- is a part of Hollywood history.

Adding to the pressure: new bosses at Comcast waiting to finalize the acquisition of NBC Universal. Aside from "Despicable Me," the film studio has been on a cold streak and at the same time is developing a reputation for bloated budgets.

Universal's "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World," opening Friday, cost $80 million-$90 million (the studio puts the number at closer to $60 million) -- rather pricey for a genre movie. Last year, the studio spent $100 million on the Adam Sandler comedy "Funny People," compared with the more modest $60 million that Paramount, DreamWorks and Spyglass recently spent on a comparable film, "Dinner for Schmucks."

Execs even considered pulling the plug on "Battleship" in June, sources said. Such a move isn't unprecedented: Universal did that with "Cartel" five weeks before the Josh Brolin crime drama was to shoot this year in Mexico City, and with "American Gangster," the Russell Crowe-Denzel Washington crime drama that came back to life with a smaller budget.

Fogelson denied the project was ever in jeopardy and said the studio is firmly committed based on Berg's vision for the film. Berg, whose previous movie was 2008's "Hancock" for Sony, is the son of a naval historian, and he wrote a high school essay about how the Japanese could have won the Battle of Midway. He also directed the 2004 feature "Friday Night Lights" and 2007's "The Kingdom," both for Universal.

"He has a very strong passion and affinity for this material," Fogelson said. "He is a fan of the history and the current state of the military. He knows that world really, really well, and he is inspirational when he is talking about it."

Fogelson said he wasn't concerned about Berg's relative lack of experience on action films.

"He made 'Hancock,' so Will Smith thought he was a good choice for an effects-driven spectacle that cost a lot of money," he said. Hancock grossed $624 million worldwide on a $150 million budget. Unlike "Battleship," however, it featured a big movie star in Smith.

Sean O'Hara

I smell "Heaven's Gate."

rexinnih

Damn that's a costly gamble.

Hokeyboy

Honestly: would you spend $200 million on a Peter Berg movie... no matter WHAT the subject matter? His films are a paradigm of mediocrity.

islandclaws

Not that it would ever happen, but I'm amused at the irony that this bloated tentpole could "sink" the studio if/when it tanks big time.

lamphorn

You know she'll do a "Yo Battleship!" single to promote the film. Can't wait til it "drops".

adrenaline78

This!!

Ropes Pierre

Perhaps a "Producers" esque scheme is behind this, and they want to lose tons of money.

tylergfoster

I hope it's not lost on people that Ridley Scott is actually making a Monopoly movie, and that he described it as "futuristic" at one point, which is pretty much completely baffling.

Universal keeps gambling. I hope they don't go under (remember back in 1999 when the studio was in danger, and The Mummy rescued them?). They've made some great movies recently and nobody's gone to see them. Drag Me to Hell, Funny People, Scott Pilgrim, and to a lesser extent, some others all deserved to earn more at the box office than they did.

Which is not to say I think they made all the right decisions. I think they let Apatow run a little wild on Funny People (all the clubs in the movie were constructed from scratch at great expense -- why!?), and I don't know what in Will Ferrell's only-four-of-my-movies-have-ever-topped-$100m-and-only-one-over-$150m filmography suggested (despite my light enjoyment of it) that dropping $100m on a special effects extravaganza like Land of the Lost was a good idea. And I don't know that anyone's going to give a crap about Battleship. It sounds like a massive risk and it would be a good idea to reel it back to $150 or even $100 million if possible.

On the other hand, Rihanna is mega-hot.

Matthew Chmiel

I love how Drag Me to Hell, a film written and directed by three of the highest grossing films in history, cost only $30 million to make.

Yet, Funny People, a film written and directed by a guy who's had two surprise sleeper hits and success as a producer cost $75 million. Even better, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, a film directed by a cult director about an extremely cult comic, cost $60 million to make.

Look, I'd give Apatow and Wright to do free reign to do whatever the fuck they wanted. However, I'd be limit that budget as I know there'd be little-to-no return on an investment that's a passion project (ahem Funny People).

GreenVulture

That's not a really fair comparison, though, is it? Adam Sandler and Seth Rogen don't come cheap (even if they are longtime friends of the director); Alison Lohman, on the other hand, does.

In all fairness to Apatow, his first two directing efforts brought in something like $400 million in box office receipts, plus another $200 million in video sales. If I was running Universal and Apatow asked me if he could have the money to build some sets (as opposed to redressing an actual comedy club after hours), I'd find it odd but would nevertheless consider it a small price to pay when the guy is a money-making machine for the studio.

tylergfoster

Yeah, but still...? The budget for Funny People was like $70m which is just sort of ludicrous for a movie that's basically people standing around talking to each other.

Hokeyboy

Half of that budget went to Sandler, Rogen, and Apatow. Then the aforementioned vanity set pieces. And the 2.5 hour running time.

And the film was pretty bad IMO but that's neither here nor there.

devilshalo

August 17, 2010
Victoria's Secret model boards 'Battleship'

Brooklyn Decker, the Victoria's Secret model who was also the 2010 Sports Illustrated cover girl, has joined the cast of Universal's "Battleship." Latino Review got the skinny first.



Pete Berg is directing the adaptation of the Hasbro game, which is going into production at the end of August in Hawaii.

Decker will play one of the female leads, a character named Sam who is described as being able to "surf, fight, dance and crush the NY Times crossword puzzle. (She) has driven a motorcycle around the world twice."

The character is the love interest to the naval commander played by Taylor Kitsch, who stars in the big-budget tentpole.

The actress, repped by Gersh and Marilyn Management, was on the short list to replace Megan Fox in "Transformers 3" (the role went to fellow model Rosie Huntington-Whitley) and just wrapped the comedy "Just Go With It," a Columbia picture with Adam Sandler and Jennifer Aniston.