Tron 2.0

[WDWspider]

Great new article on the Toys with Pictures of all of them.

I will post a few shots here too.

http://www.mwctoys.com/REVIEW_031903a.htm

 

[WDWspider]

Here's the latest and greatest in Cyber Babe Technology: :lol:

 

[WDWspider]

What's a great Sci-Fi movie without the Evil Bad Guy. His Lava Rock Cracks should show up fantastic in the game and anything else that may come our way:

 

[WDWspider]

Finally, the new ultra cool take on the Henchmen in the game. These guys look very sharp, and the Toy company pulled off the levitation effects very well:

 

[MKCustodial]

Those look great! I hope the sequel comes out soon.

 

[MicBat]

Does anyone know when the sequel comes out?? I still haven't seen the first one, actually... I'm waiting for it in the mail. I ordered in that free dvd promotion they had around Christmas and I still haven't received it.

 

[WDWspider]

Currently just a game is coming out, hopefully a movie is being considered still.

 

[FusionAddict]

Okay, Here's Some SOLID Info...

Okay, since there seems to be some confusion, here are all the official details to date, as well as some speculation regarding development on the project.

1) For all intents and purposes, the Tron 2.0 film project is DEAD. Mainly because Steven Lisberger is having a lot of trouble securing funding for the film. There is a script he has written that supposedly includes Flynn as a Colonel Kurtz from Apocalypse Now-type who got trapped in the system some time ago and is now sort of worshipped as an electronic messiah. A new team of video warriors then has to go in to extract him before bad things happen.

2) The movie's greenlight is going to GREATLY depend on the success of the PC game. The game's storyline is completely different from Lisberger's script, but Lisberger does have final approval over the story and design, and is reportedly very happy with what he's seeing. For now, Tron 2.0 will live solely as a video game (although, it's nice that Bruce Boxleinter is reprising his role as Alan in the game...and supposedly, he recorded some lines for the Tron character as well!).

3) The failure of Treasure Planet at the box office has the studio VERY skiddish about greenlighting any massive new projects such as this. The third Fantasia film is rumored to be in SEVERE jeapordy, and both HOME ON THE RANGE and BEARS/BROTHER BEAR reportadly have severe script issues. Those two films WILL determine the future of the studio as an animation warehouse. If those films fail, we very well may see Disny pulling out of hand-drawn animation completely.

4) Pixar's contract with Disney is coming to an end, and rumor has it that Steve Jobs is a little irritated with Eisner's treatment of Pixar...in that it's rumored that Disney is demanding a Toy Story 3 for a direct-to-video release, and Jobs and Lasseter both believe the film could stand alone as a theatrical release, just like TS2. Both are (as I am, I might add) sick and tired of Disney's whoring out of its characters for cheaply-made DTV sequels (Cinderella 2? Please kill me). In fact, it's rumored that Pixar's next project after FINDING NEMO will likely be a project made and marketed on its own, to see if the studio has legs to make and market a successful film on its own coin .

5) How does #4 apply to Tron? Since the demise of DreamQuest, Pixar has been the fontrunner to do the effects for the Tron sequel. Their environments and characters would simply be composited with live action plates shot by Lisberger, and VOILA - instant Oscar. It's rumored that Pixar and Dreamquest both did some footage for Lisberger Studios to test with (likely shooting with Lucas' HD cameras and the same "instant digital set technology" used for Episode II and A.I.). NowInc, this is likely some of the footage you saw. Disney's CGI department is used to doing cel-shaded animation, Pixar does more photorealistic, and Lisberger was going to a synth of both, which Pixar allegedly does better. If they leave on bad terms with Disney, Lisberger may try to convince them to do the effects anyway, and try to get funding for the film independently and use Disney as a distributor (as with the first film).

 

[MrPromey]

Re: Okay, Here's Some SOLID Info...

Originally posted by FusionAddict

4) Pixar's contract with Disney is coming to an end, and rumor has it that Steve Jobs is a little irritated with Eisner's treatment of Pixar...in that it's rumored that Disney is demanding a Toy Story 3 for a direct-to-video release, and Jobs and Lasseter both believe the film could stand alone as a theatrical release, just like TS2. Both are (as I am, I might add) sick and tired of Disney's whoring out of its characters for cheaply-made DTV sequels (Cinderella 2? Please kill me). In fact, it's rumored that Pixar's next project after FINDING NEMO will likely be a project made and marketed on its own, to see if the studio has legs to make and market a successful film on its own coin .

5) How does #4 apply to Tron? Since the demise of DreamQuest, Pixar has been the fontrunner to do the effects for the Tron sequel. Their environments and characters would simply be composited with live action plates shot by Lisberger, and VOILA - instant Oscar. It's rumored that Pixar and Dreamquest both did some footage for Lisberger Studios to test with (likely shooting with Lucas' HD cameras and the same "instant digital set technology" used for Episode II and A.I.). NowInc, this is likely some of the footage you saw. Disney's CGI department is used to doing cel-shaded animation, Pixar does more photorealistic, and Lisberger was going to a synth of both, which Pixar allegedly does better. If they leave on bad terms with Disney, Lisberger may try to convince them to do the effects anyway, and try to get funding for the film independently and use Disney as a distributor (as with the first film).

I’m not sure where you got your information but the problems between Disney and Pixar are a bit simpler than you outline. Actually, the main problem between the two companies can come down to a single keyboard character: ‘$’.

Disney has wanted Toy Story 3 made under the original Toy Story contract the way Toy Story 2 was made. This is favorable for Disney because they make the lion’s share of the money that way…

On the other hand, Pixar was very insistent that it count as one of the 5 movies from the new contract and the profits would be split in the same manner as the other movies in the new contract… Since all three of the remaining movies are already in some stage of the production process, it seems unlikely that we will see a Toy Story 3 released as a joint effort although Disney does have the option of making it on their own without Pixar…

In the current rounds of re-negotiation, Pixar is looking for a deal with Disney (or someone else) where they will make the movies and pay the company that releases it a small percentage like the deal George Lucas has with 20th Century Fox for the release of the Star Wars movies… Disney is not too thrilled with this idea and they have a bit of negotiating room themselves since they offer the best promotional opportunities of all of the potential suitors out there. Not going with Disney would probably amount to a bigger piece of a smaller pie. How much bigger the piece and how much smaller the pie is still up in the air. There is also the financial risk of funding the whole thing themselves – something that could be disastrous when (not if) they finally release a movie that isn’t a huge hit.

I would also be a bit skeptical of Pixar doing the animation for a project like this. To date, they have never really done any serious work like this and would not be the best suited for it when there are other companies out there that are much more experienced with this kind of work (Industrial Light and Magic) which Disney has worked with in the past.

Even if Pixar were somehow working on this project it would currently be exclusively through Disney directly due to contract restrictions. I don’t know but I would guess that Disney could put a MAJOR legal wrench in the works based on whatever current involvement they may have in any project such as this not to mention that a project such as this would not be consistent with the company that Pixar is trying to become - a studio that can produce entire feature length animated productions on their own.

 

[FusionAddict]

Again, much of what I posted has been speculation. But the facts are still the same:

1) The scriptment is done, but still has to be polished. Until this happens, no Tron 2.0 movie.

2) Disney Interactive (now Buena Vista Games) has put a lot of money into the Tron 2.0 PC game from Monolith. If it succeeds, then it (along with the surprising success of the Tron 20th Anniversary DVD) may get Disney to commit to the film project. Keyword being MAY. Studios don't tend to pin their financial hopes on a cult following.

3) Disney has blown a LOT of cash on inhouse projects (namely TREASURE PLANET, the SANTA CLAUSE 2 and COUNTRY BEARS, which all bombed BIG TIME). All signs are pointing toward HAUNTED MANSION doing the same (I've heard the script referred to as "laughably bad"). Meaning Disney's live-action division is pinning its hopes on PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN to keep it afloat (however, on the bright side, this film has MAJOR positive buzz). However, the days of the big-budget mega-project from Disney may be over.

4) Disney's business decisions as of late have alienated a LOT of its core partners, including Pixar. There's too much corporate turmoil right now for the company to want to risk its funding on anything but what they think will be a sure thing (great...we see how THAT's working out). Disney is supposedly looking even now for a quick sale of its holdings in Miramax and Dimension films. Until someone other than Eisner is in charge (like, say, Al Weiss...or, of the gods be in our favor, Roy Disney), this movie ain't happening. Disney is too interested in promoting the parks (or, rather, building RESORTS for the parks) to put a decent amount of cash into what could potentially be a kickass movie project.

5) Pixar has actually been rumored for a while to have been interested in branching out into doing some live-action oriented 3D rendering projects...at least it was, until its troubles with the Mouse. By the same token, Lisberger Studios has long been petitioning for a greenlight on a Tron sequel (whose performance at the box office, like John Carpenter's THE THING, can mostly be blamed on Spielberg's TO REMAIN NAMELESS RECENTLY PC-IFIED ALIEN MOVIE). Once Disney's inhouse CG studio fell by the wayside, Pixar is the next best thing to doing everything within the walls of Disney. Otherwise, the project will have to go to ILM or Digital Domain, meaning the budget will...I repeat, WILL...skyrocket.

In summary: There is a treatment, but it's unfinished. Disney's business decisions of late cannot be considered sound by any means. The one possible trump card that the project could have remotely had is now ticked off at Eisner (aren't we all?). Disney wouldn't know a good movie project if it punched Eisner's momma in the face.

However, there is hope. If the past few years have taught us anything, now is the perfect time to be doing offbeat projects. THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE and LILO & STITCH both proved to be major sleeper hits, and both have VERY weird premises and executions. If HOME ON THE RANGE manages to pull off a successful box office take, it may prompt Disney to switch gears away from the big, bombastic theatrical events that it usually releases every year, toward smaller, more odd projects...could Tron 2.0 be one of these? We shall see.

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by FusionAddict
3) Disney has blown a LOT of cash on inhouse projects (namely TREASURE PLANET, the SANTA CLAUSE 2 and COUNTRY BEARS, which all bombed BIG TIME). All signs are pointing toward HAUNTED MANSION doing the same (I've heard the script referred to as "laughably bad"). Meaning Disney's live-action division is pinning its hopes on PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN to keep it afloat (however, on the bright side, this film has MAJOR positive buzz). However, the days of the big-budget mega-project from Disney may be over.

4) Disney's business decisions as of late have alienated a LOT of its core partners, including Pixar. There's too much corporate turmoil right now for the company to want to risk its funding on anything but what they think will be a sure thing (great...we see how THAT's working out). Disney is supposedly looking even now for a quick sale of its holdings in Miramax and Dimension films. Until someone other than Eisner is in charge (like, say, Al Weiss...or, of the gods be in our favor, Roy Disney), this movie ain't happening. Disney is too interested in promoting the parks (or, rather, building RESORTS for the parks) to put a decent amount of cash into what could potentially be a kickass movie project.

I don’t mean to come across as a total jerk but I’m afraid I have to contradict some of your information again.

According to the recent articles, there is trouble with Mirimax but it doesn’t seem like Disney is at all interested in selling it of at this time.

http://www.nypost.com/business/69875.htm

I’m not really sure where you got the idea that The Santa Clause 2 and Country Bears “bombed BIG TIME”. The Country Bears grossed about $30 million which is by no means spectacular but it was more than it cost to make the film and the DVD release managed to push it well above the red line. This movie was made on an almost nonexistent budget and wasn’t really expected to be a major hit anyway. In the case of The Santa Clause 2… The movie had a production budget of $65 million and grossed nearly $140 million. It is actually #127 on the list of top grossing movies of all time. That’s above hits like Minority Report, Sweet Home Alabama, Charlie’s Angels, and well above the heavily anticipated 8 Mile.

While I find your speculation interesting, you seem to have some of the facts a bit mixed up.

 

[FusionAddict]

First of all:
My information about Miramax came from CNN a few weeks ago (which I don't normally watch), and I see you got yours from the NY Post, a Newscorp subsidiary...so it could simply be that each source has its own take. In which case neither of us is right or wrong.

Secondly (note: these are all domestic figures):
Actually, COUNTRY BEARS was indeed a box office failure. The production budget of the film was $20 million, the promotional budget was the same, for a total of $40 million. The film grossed $17 million leaving it -$23 million net.

SANTA CLAUSE 2 did indeed have a $65 million production budget, but also had a $35 million production budget, for a total budget of $100 million. Meaning the film's net take was only about $40 million. Once you apply that to the deficit from COUNTRY BEARS, between these two movies you only have a $15 million net profit. Plus, Disney was indeed hoping for an even bigger take, especially since the film had a teaser IN THEATERS two years prior to its release.

Then, look at the fact that TRESURE PLANET took $140 million to make, and another $40 million to market, for a total of $180 million. The film only did a little over $38 million in business, leaving a $142 million debt. Add the previous $15 million for a net so far of -$127 million.

LILO & STITCH was the other 2002 success for the studio. Its production budget was $80 million, its promo $40 million. True, the film did $146 million worth of business at the box office. But its net profit was still only $26 million. Leaving, between these four films, a net profit of -$101 million dollars.

That's right, between these four films at the box office, the studio lost $101 million domestically.

These are of course discounting DVD sales, since SC2 and TP are not currently available in the format.

True, two of these films could indeed be counted as successes. But as the four big Disney releases this past year, altogether they cost the company over a tenth of a billion dollars.

 

[WDWspider]

I think Santa Clause 2 was a success as well. Heck just from a solid movie stand point, at least Santa Clause 2 was a solid story. Plus when DVD sales go into account I'm sure it will have a much larger profit margin.

Hey, the only important thing here is to Buy Tron 2.0 and show Disney that TRON 2.0 the movie could be very successful if done properly and with the right effects and feel.

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by FusionAddict
First of all:
My information about Miramax came from CNN a few weeks ago (which I don't normally watch), and I see you got yours from the NY Post, a Newscorp subsidiary...so it could simply be that each source has its own take. In which case neither of us is right or wrong.

Secondly (note: these are all domestic figures):
Actually, COUNTRY BEARS was indeed a box office failure. The production budget of the film was $20 million, the promotional budget was the same, for a total of $40 million. The film grossed $17 million leaving it -$23 million net.

SANTA CLAUSE 2 did indeed have a $65 million production budget, but also had a $35 million production budget, for a total budget of $100 million. Meaning the film's net take was only about $40 million. Once you apply that to the deficit from COUNTRY BEARS, between these two movies you only have a $15 million net profit. Plus, Disney was indeed hoping for an even bigger take, especially since the film had a teaser IN THEATERS two years prior to its release.

Then, look at the fact that TRESURE PLANET took $140 million to make, and another $40 million to market, for a total of $180 million. The film only did a little over $38 million in business, leaving a $142 million debt. Add the previous $15 million for a net so far of -$127 million.

LILO & STITCH was the other 2002 success for the studio. Its production budget was $80 million, its promo $40 million. True, the film did $146 million worth of business at the box office. But its net profit was still only $26 million. Leaving, between these four films, a net profit of -$101 million dollars.

That's right, between these four films at the box office, the studio lost $101 million domestically.

These are of course discounting DVD sales, since SC2 and TP are not currently available in the format.

True, two of these films could indeed be counted as successes. But as the four big Disney releases this past year, altogether they cost the company over a tenth of a billion dollars.

Actually, I got the Miramax info from about half a dozen different sources. If you do a search on news.google.com for “Disney Miramax”, you should still be able to find a few of them…. As for Santa Clause, you can’t factor in the cost of other movies when determining how profitable this one was. At the time of the release, Disney considered the movie to be doing very well and actually blamed the continued success of that one as having a small part in the failure of Treasure Planet. I mean, they are moving forward with plans for a part 3 and saying that Santa Clause didn’t do well because any other movie didn’t is like saying Signs was a financial flop for the same reason. The fact is, that movie made more than *most* movies released in theaters ever do and that isn’t even taking into account, what it will pull in on DVD sales. Again, I remind you that it currently ranks #127 in the list of highest grossing movies of all time. It is also worth pointing out that the previously mentioned gross was domestic only and has not taken into account any over seas box office takes – I was unable to find any info anywhere on that.

As for Country Bears, if you look around a little, you’ll see that your figure is for the domestic release of that movie only. There are a few places that are listing it as the total gross but if you look at the weekly breakdown of the figures, it becomes obvious that the figure is US only. The total take with international box office figures included is $29.040 million. With that figure, assuming the total costs were $40 million, I can say that it is pretty much a safe bet that they more than made a profit after the marketing deals with McDonald’s and other partners as well as on merchandise sales and that figure would most likely be boosted by at least 50% by DVD and VHS sales which can in some cases account for more than the box office totals for movies geared towards a family/child audience. This is how Atlantis was able to pull a profit. It is also how the release of Return to Neverland which was originally intended to be a direct to video release became profitable. In the case of Return to Neverland, the entire (though modest) box office take was icing on the cake…

Another point about Country Bears is that it was not an “in house” project. It was produced by Gunn Films. While the money trail does in fact lead back to Disney, the only thing that really separates this particular movie from dozens of others released by Disney last year is that it featured the Disney label.

I don’t think I ever disputed anything you said about Treasure Planet. I’m pretty sure it will take years for them to turn a profit on that movie (unless it manages to win the Oscar it was nominated for tonight) if ever at all but again, you can’t look at the failure of that movie when looking at the success of any others. If you take into account everything released through Disney, you’ll find that they had the highest profits of any major media company for theatrical release last year as they have for a total of seven out of the last ten years.

I honestly don’t think that the results of any of the three movies mentioned will have much of an affect on the release of a sequel to Tron because Treasure Planet was a full animated release that is almost entirely separate from live action, The Santa Clause 2 which was both produced and released by Disney was successful and much more profitable than the vast majority of movies made. (If you can actually say “the film's net take was only about $40 million” with a straight face, you obviously aren’t away of what the profits for most movies are). I mean, the Matrix which was considered to be highly successful (enough to warrant back to back theatrical sequel releases) “only” made $171.4 million in domestic box office totals and cost nearly $100 million to produce and market. And lastly, the Country Bears was pretty much released on a direct to video budget. Clearly, there were no expectations for this movie to bring in high box office figures.

If you want to talk about real flops for Disney, I have two words for you: Bubble Boy

 

[FusionAddict]

Originally posted by MrPromey
If you want to talk about real flops for Disney, I have two words for you: Bubble Boy

Point conceded

My reasoning is simply this: Disney has been having financial problems for a while now. This years domestic film market (the only one that really matters in the film industry) was just a part of it. It doesn't matter how much money The Mouse made worldwide. Between the film studios, the parks, the resorts, and other bizarre business decisions, money is leaving the company (hence the shareholder's meetings last year which threatened to give Eisner the boot).

The next few years are going to be a rebuilding process. No matter how you slice it, Tron 2.0 is a risky proposition as a film, because the cult audience may just not be enough to rationalize the cost of what we can all agree would most likely be a very expensive film.

What we're looking at is a recylcling of what happened in the 80's, when movies like Tron, Flight of the Navigator, Black Cauldron, and The Great Mouse Detective were released (those four, while great films, make up a group of Black Sheep in the Disney film family). It's happening again. Treasure Planet has already joined this club. Disney is very wary about this happening again. Hence don't look for Tron 2.0 to happen anytime soon.

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by FusionAddict
Point conceded

My reasoning is simply this: Disney has been having financial problems for a while now. This years domestic film market (the only one that really matters in the film industry) was just a part of it. It doesn't matter how much money The Mouse made worldwide. Between the film studios, the parks, the resorts, and other bizarre business decisions, money is leaving the company (hence the shareholder's meetings last year which threatened to give Eisner the boot).

The next few years are going to be a rebuilding process. No matter how you slice it, Tron 2.0 is a risky proposition as a film, because the cult audience may just not be enough to rationalize the cost of what we can all agree would most likely be a very expensive film.

What we're looking at is a recylcling of what happened in the 80's, when movies like Tron, Flight of the Navigator, Black Cauldron, and The Great Mouse Detective were released (those four, while great films, make up a group of Black Sheep in the Disney film family). It's happening again. Treasure Planet has already joined this club. Disney is very wary about this happening again. Hence don't look for Tron 2.0 to happen anytime soon.

Perhaps not soon but there are a lot of other factors these days that play into the whole thing. At the time Tron was released, the industry was frightened by the movie because they didn’t understand it. It was literally a case of being ahead of it’s time. I don’t think concern for that kind of issue is much of a barrier today and if 2.0 has a solid of enough script it should be able to stand on its own. If they did it smartly, it could be more of a remake or new story than a true sequel (perhaps with a healthy dose of nods to the original for those who remember it) which would open the franchise to a younger audience who doesn’t find computers as mysterious and rigged as their parents did twenty years ago.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that with the original release, Tron was a risky movie to make. The subject had limited appeal and was terribly expensive to make due ironically enough, to all the traditional work that went into making the whole thing look digital.

I think a good story could be made into a good movie with a modest budget for this film and with so many movies that have been made over the years that garnished ideas from the original Tron I think if anything, 2.0 would run the risk of seeming standard and unoriginal (which seems a sure thing in Hollywood these days) rather than risky…

Obviously, it isn’t up to either of us and we could banter back and forth till our fingers go numb but I think if everything else were to come together (reasonable budget request, good script, and good staring actors) this is a movie that would get the green light. I mean, there are no shortage of dogs that have been released by all of the studios in recent years and this is one that comes with at least a small built in cult audience already established. If the game is successful that audience will obviously grow but if given the old summer block buster treatment, it is hard for me to fathom how they could $crew it up badly enough not to make a good chunk of change even if they do go more the Triple X than Lord of the Rings route if you know what I mean.

 

[Woody13]

I really didn't read all the details of the posts. However, Disney has NEVER lost money on any of its movies! Sure they use "Hollywood Accounting" to make the actors, writers and others think they lost a bundle. Even if they have a box office bomb, they make up the money in the video and DVD releases. In the "old days" they made their money from repeated re-releases of their "timeless" movies. Heck, they're still making money from Snow White! As for Tron II, you can bet it will happen because of one thing....Money. If you really think that Disney has lost any money on its movie releases then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

 

[FusionAddict]

Really...

I really didn't read all the details of the posts.

That much is obvious.

However, Disney has NEVER lost money on any of its movies!

Look up "Bubble Boy" on boxofficemojo.com.

Sure they use "Hollywood Accounting" to make the actors, writers and others think they lost a bundle.

Really? That's funny, 'cause it seems to work pretty well with the shareholders as well...

Even if they have a box office bomb, they make up the money in the video and DVD releases. In the "old days" they made their money from repeated re-releases of their "timeless" movies.

A) This isn't the "old days", and B) Note that FLIGHT OF THE NAVIGATOR is long out of print, and may never be released on DVD. And then, there's SONG OF THE SOUTH.

Heck, they're still making money from Snow White!

Hmmm...I wonder what the adjusted grosses for Snow White and Tron would be. Hint: One's a family classic, one's a cult classic.

As for Tron II, you can bet it will happen because of one thing....Money.

Actually, if you'd read my posts, you'd see that money is precisely the reason why it probably WON'T happen any time soon. Not to say it never will, just not very soon.

If you really think that Disney has lost any money on its movie releases then I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

But if I purchase it, then you and the other trolls will be homeless, and that would make me sad.

 

[FusionAddict]

Re: Really...

Sorry, double post

 

[FusionAddict]

Originally posted by MrPromey
I guess what I’m trying to say is that with the original release, Tron was a risky movie to make. The subject had limited appeal and was terribly expensive to make due ironically enough, to all the traditional work that went into making the whole thing look digital.

Agreed...however, the studio heads at the time (meaning NOT EISNER) were willing to take a financial risk on the picture, for the sake of making something cool that might gain interest over time (WWWD?). Eisner is a different animal. His entire focus, from the day he came into the company, was making money...hence the creation of the Touchstone and Hollywood Pictures subsidiaries, to make less family-friendly fair, and the acquisition of Miramax, who make quite a few films that can be considered even family-HOSTILE.

I think a good story could be made into a good movie with a modest budget for this film and with so many movies that have been made over the years that garnished ideas from the original Tron I think if anything, 2.0 would run the risk of seeming standard and unoriginal (which seems a sure thing in Hollywood these days) rather than risky…

Again, point conceded, but that budget is going to be key. If the studio doesn't think the movie has the legs to make back what was spent on it, it won't happen. Unless, that is, Disney gets its act together and decides to throw caution to the wind like in the old days and make something just COOL. The theme park tie-in possibilities alone boggle the mind (imagine, if you will...Jeff Bridges, Bruce Boxleitner, and Steven Lisberger landing in Future World via ENCOM chopper...).

I mean, there are no shortage of dogs that have been released by all of the studios in recent years and this is one that comes with at least a small built in cult audience already established. If the game is successful that audience will obviously grow but if given the old summer block buster treatment, it is hard for me to fathom how they could $crew it up badly enough not to make a good chunk of change even if they do go more the Triple X than Lord of the Rings route if you know what I mean.

Well said...but careful...that cult audience are going to be the ones who scrutinize the film the closest, and they can make or break the film. And as for how they could screw it up, well, that's easy...release it at the same time as another expected summer blockbuster. Lisberger and John Carpenter both learned that lesson back in 82.