Missy Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 Click to see the trailer. From what's been shown, the film looks like nothing special. However, Kane looks awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted February 5, 2006 Report Share Posted February 5, 2006 Click to see the trailer. From what's been shown, the film looks like nothing special. However, Kane looks awesome! I see a huge crossover storyline on Raw soon. I don't know if it's a good idea for the WWE to get into movies though. They are holding back their stars by making them play roles as their characters. They could have at least billed him as his real name. Are they afraid people will start leaving like the Rock did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-T Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 They are holding back their stars by making them play roles as their characters. They could have at least billed him as his real name. I agree. It makes the company look really stupid to list them by their character's name. I mean, really: you didn't see Pierce Brosnan listed as Remington Steele. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 Heh "See No Evil......Starring Kane" Damn strange thing to see. Doubt I'd watch it, tho' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James D. Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 I'm sorry--I know most people won't agree with me on this, but I think this movie looks surprisingly good. Not saying it WILL be good, but I'll be seeing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drqshadow Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 I'm sorry--I know most people won't agree with me on this, but I think this movie looks surprisingly good. Not saying it WILL be good, but I'll be seeing it. It's a trailer, created by the same production team that crafts the very same promotional vignettes you see on RAW every week. They could craft a twenty minute scene of flies festering on a pile of dog crap into something totally amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Keith Posted April 30, 2006 Report Share Posted April 30, 2006 Damn the reviews, I'll probably see this movie regardless of how bad it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-T Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 Did anyone actually go see this? I was meaning to, but piddled around too long and it isn't in my local theater any more. I guess I will wait for the DVD... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFetch Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 Did anyone actually go see this? I was meaning to, but piddled around too long and it isn't in my local theater any more. I guess I will wait for the DVD... I was bored after 20 minutes into it, so I didn't even get to Kane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missy Posted June 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 Waiting 'til it hits the local bargain theater, or On Demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Keith Posted June 21, 2006 Report Share Posted June 21, 2006 I did. Wasn't that bad for a slasher movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kariyanine Posted June 22, 2006 Report Share Posted June 22, 2006 They are holding back their stars by making them play roles as their characters. They could have at least billed him as his real name. I agree. It makes the company look really stupid to list them by their character's name. I mean, really: you didn't see Pierce Brosnan listed as Remington Steele. But the WWE produced the film and using brand recognition they promoted the film. It's kind of the same reason The Rock still gets billed as The Rock and not Dwayne Johnson. It's also why The Rock resigned with WWE, despite him not wrestling a whole lot anymore. The WWE owns the rights to the name. People know the name Kane, they don't know who Glen Jacobs is. Do you really think Glen Jacobs would get top billing for a horror film? I don't. See No Evil had very little buzz around it to begin with but with Kane attached to it the film made money ($8 million production budget, currently just under $15 million box office take). I don't know if the same could be said about it if it was not billed with Kane as the star. All speculation of course but.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chops Posted June 22, 2006 Report Share Posted June 22, 2006 It's kind of the same reason The Rock still gets billed as The Rock and not Dwayne Johnson. It's also why The Rock resigned with WWE, despite him not wrestling a whole lot anymore. The WWE owns the rights to the name. Actually he bought the rights to the name "The Rock" off of the WWE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-T Posted June 26, 2006 Report Share Posted June 26, 2006 The WWE owns the rights to the name. People know the name Kane, they don't know who Glen Jacobs is. Do you really think Glen Jacobs would get top billing for a horror film? I don't. See No Evil had very little buzz around it to begin with but with Kane attached to it the film made money ($8 million production budget, currently just under $15 million box office take). I don't know if the same could be said about it if it was not billed with Kane as the star. All speculation of course but.... But in reality, how many people know who "Kane" is? The Angry German has a very good column a while back on wrestling video games. Basically, the point was that the video game market is much bigger than the wrestling market, and by making good video games WWE (or other promotions) can get video gamers interested in their product. The movie industry is certainly a lot bigger than the wrestling industry, so the obvious strategery here should be to make good movies. Perhaps people not at all interrested in wrestling will tune in on Monday or Friday night to see the guy they saw at the local Showplace 12. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kariyanine Posted June 27, 2006 Report Share Posted June 27, 2006 The Angry German has a very good column a while back on wrestling video games. Basically, the point was that the video game market is much bigger than the wrestling market, and by making good video games WWE (or other promotions) can get video gamers interested in their product. The movie industry is certainly a lot bigger than the wrestling industry, so the obvious strategery here should be to make good movies. Perhaps people not at all interrested in wrestling will tune in on Monday or Friday night to see the guy they saw at the local Showplace 12. Good point, it does work both ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-T Posted June 28, 2006 Report Share Posted June 28, 2006 I guess my main point is that WWE's main goal should not be to get people who watch wrestling to see their movie, the main goal should be to get people who do not watch wrestling to go see the movie. Using the character's name detracts from that goal, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.