![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There seems to be a lot of comments which have been left unsigned by the authors in this page. It's considered polite to sign your comments. Just a reminder. Crimson Shadow 23:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes guys, start signing your comments.
Listen to the guy above this comment people, start signing already, thats the right thing to do! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.48.123.76 (talk) 06:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
The trailer hasn't been released yet. DrJones 30 June 2005 17:45 (UTC)
>>Website should be http://www.crapmovie.com. "But" I said facetiously when leaving the theater, "at least they got the science right!"
I remember reading a long long time ago (between DOOM II and Final DOOM times) in a magazine that id Software wanted to make the film, but finally producers declined to make a such so gore film.
I think they were the same producers (UP), but I currently I don't remember where I put that magazine.
Can anyone please check and improve the article with that information, thanks.
—Claunia 05:05, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
For people's info: http://classicdoom.com/doominfo.htm About a third of the way down the page is the official list of Doom enemies straight from the game's original readme file.
Awww you had to kill teh fun xD Oh well... I actually knew it, but since i had no proof...
I just removed a line from the Trivia section about an interview with one of the movie's producers, John Wells. I also commented out the prose beneath the bullet points as lacking in both substance and source information. If someone can find a link or a reference to this supposed interview, I'll gladly reinstate the material. This kind of stuff shouldn't be in an encyclopedia article without a valid source. — EagleOne\Talk 20:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Towards the end when Sarge bursts though some glasswork, there are a bunch of names on that glass (Ying Lee, John Coates, Alan Crow, Alfredo Alvarez and more). Does anyone know who these people are? I'm assuming probably part of the fx team.
>x<ino 09:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Are all these images necessary? The BFG image I can understand -- however, we have an entire article for the BFG9000 in which the BFGv3.14 is noted, as well as an entire article for the BFG10k of the Quake series; both of which should be merged -- but all of the images for the Doom (film) article looks more like clutter than anything else.
Question: Is the Doom 2 movie actually confirmed to be greenlighted? I haven't seen any information on a sequel being greenlighted yet for the Doom movie. KSweeley 05:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
--Ronnie42 (talk) 11:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)Actually the sequel has been greenlighted. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-10-doom-film-reboot-green-lit-report
This movie does have NO detail from the games and fans of the game would have hated the movie. The only people who liked it did not play the games at all. The director should have played the games so he could know.
and a lesser important different: the technology that transport/create the enemies is a teleport device in the videogame and a genetical improvement discovered and copied by a now-estingued alien race in the film
Riiiiight, so you CANT make a movie that has nothing to do with the videogame at all? Okay then, now if you excuse me i am gonna go watch SF2 the american movie, because THAT ONE SUUURE has lots to do with the game =P
Comment not signed by _your face_ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.48.123.76 (talk) 06:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Character descriptions for Portman and Destroyer have been swapped. Vandalizm?
I believe that the sequel should be a try-again of the original movie rather than a by-product based on the success of DVD-sales. --Nintendude 18:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't think that they are going to risk the production costs on a Doom-related movie. User:Lord Hawk 04:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Hopefully some day, some one will make another try, but right now, Doom as a movie... is dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.97.38 (talk) 01:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I know this movie did not make histroy by showing the first person view of one of the characters in the movie. The first person view mode was seen by my brother and I in the movie "Belly" starring DMX and Nas.
Cleaned up the plot overview a bit, it was marked as needing it. But I think the Karl Urban quote needs to go in a different section. --GeneralDuke 22:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
I cleaned up a few things about the plots and weapons, and removed the tag. Hope that's ok? ----Gov 23:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
It appears the Discussion pages for any article relating to either Paul W. S. Anderson, his movies, Uwe Boll, his "movies" and other video game to movie adaptions have become places where people just fume out their anger with nothing but bitter comments and complaints. Well, here's my little thought, I think Doom was a fair effort. True, its not the best video game movie but far more entertaining than either the original game or the Tomb Raider film. Also removed section of criticism that complained about the FPS section being only 5 minutes when 75% of the film was expected to be in First Person. There's no source because it was obviously dreamed up by some idiot. That's another problem, people keep vandalizing and adding theire hateful bias to VG-film articles. Look, they are movies, just like any other films, I've seen many films that were worse than Doom and even worse than House of the Dead. (user:HannuMakinen)
Where the heck did this info come from?
You didn't know that??? That's why he went after him 'cause he was 'hitting it'
'Psychopathic, disgusting, sexually deviant member of the team.'..? Tad on the judgemental side don't you think? As far as I can remember he mentions liking ladyboys, which hardly makes him a devient in today's world, and certainly not in the future when presumably people will have come up with wierd and wonderful 'perversions' that we mere 21st century citizens can't even imagine. If this behavior is supposed to be some kind of indication of a psychotic character, it reflects very badly on the filmakers, who presumably believe that many of the thousands of male tourists that visit Bangcock each year are 'psychopaths' too. The word devient in this context is completly subjective anyway, since it presumes, that like the writer of the profile, everyone regards non-heterosexuals as devients. Needless to say it dosn't take a sociologist to tell you that's a highly innacurate presumption, so I think this needs a little editing... Lauriet 01:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Lol disgusting... very neutral opinion huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.97.38 (talk) 01:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I have a question, can section 2 of the article be verified through any reliable source? I've never heard of id Software even being involved with Columbine. KSweeley 06:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
This assumption is similar to the position taken by id Software lawyers on the famous Columbine High School massacre case.
...representatives of id Software claimed that it was only a “last drop” that triggered the events, but violence was initially in both kids' psyches because they were predisposed to it.
KSweeley 08:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
The article lists Reaper as a former scientist, I don't think that's correct. His sister says something to the effect that he could have been one. His parents died when he was very young and I think he went straight into the Marines when he became eligible. Mcr29 18:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that the following portion of the section entitled "Violence Predisposition Controversy" be removed:
"Even in the movie, this point is actually contradicted. Reaper says that he has had a very violent life, but the fact that C-24 doesn't turn him into a demon shows that he does not possess the genes which predispose violent behavior. Further, several characters who are seemingly benigh as normal people (e.g. Pinky) but are turned into demons and thus possess the genes for violent behavior but they don't determine how they actually act."
I don't see how this is a contradiction. Regarding Pinky, the person who wrote this seems to have forgotten the fact that as Portman was being killed, Pinky sat and watched with a smile on his face, and as he was being questioned (I believe by Sarge) if he had a visual on Portman, he replied that he did not. I believe that this was the film's clue to Pinky's predisposition to violence, despite his outward behavior to the contrary. Regarding Reaper, leading a violent life does not make a person instinctively violent. Note Reaper's concern towards the people Sarge was going to kill and his concern for his sister. All he said as he was "dying" was "I've done some bad things," not "I'm a violent person by nature." Almost everybody has done "bad things," which does not inherently make them bad people. Conversely, as with Pinky, not everybody who does good things is a good person. If that was too poorly explained, forgive me - I can give it another shot if need be. I won't remove the section just yet, as my analysis may not be universally agreed on. If I haven't received any compelling arguments to the contrary in a couple days I'm going to go ahead and remove it. Intooblv 00:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Pinky also damned Mac when he left him. He acted unwillingly from the beginning to the end. But if he is good or evil that does not really matter to me. IMO, he is just simply an indication to the appearance of a wheelchair demon.--165.228.131.12 06:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
When Sarge and Reaper found the dead bodies of Dr. Clay and Dr. Thurman, the place is the entrance to the archeological dig where is outside of Carmack's lab. And here they encountered the Hell Knight of Curtis Stahl, (the others showed before are proved to be the scientists) which means this one was not sealed inside Carmack's lab at the first place. It could start killing the civilians already but not. How unlikely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.228.131.12 (talk) 12:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
By any chance, did Curtis skip the Imp stage? If not, then can we assume (not saying put this in the article) that all the other Imps, given time, would have become Hell Knights? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ggctuk (talk • contribs) 10:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC).
Many feel the similarity between this movie and Alien movies because of the similar environment. But I aslo found it and the first Predator movie have something in common.
--Mato Rei 07:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
So, the criticism section is eaten up with weasel words and is seemingly biased. What if we changed that section to a "difference between the game and film" section instead, as to better showcase the differences, which is basically what that section is already about. Thoughts? Levid37 16:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
That sounds like it could work. I noticed that the Doom 3 article has a "rebuttals" section. The Doom movie article might also benefit from this, but I don't know if there are any widespread rebuttals to the common critcisms of the film. 24.255.168.225 20:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Okay I've changed the criticism section to a difference from the games section, but I'm still not sure that it works out all that well. Maybe if a little more work was put on it. It's still better, to me, than a section full of weasel words and little to no sources. If you feel it just doesn't work then feel free to revert, but at least give it a chance. Levid37 13:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I removed about half of the article, because most of it didn't really fit the definition of differences between the film and game. I removed references to things used sparsely, because they're going to be sparse by default because the games are naturally much longer than the film. I removed the reference to no homage to Romero, because that was in film, not a difference between the film and game. And finally, I took out the note about it being based on Doom 3, because Doom 3 is still a Doom game.
It no longer illistrates very well why people didn't like it compared to the game, but it didn't fit the new heading.
Out of curiosity, why was the note about the possibility of Grimm's first name being a homage to Romero removed? I know it was speculation, but it doesn't seem right to state something like that factually when a distinct possibility like that is present. 24.255.168.225 00:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Image:1st Person.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 23:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Sarge VS. Reaper.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Image:Doom4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed the info about Pinky from the cast section, as it is redundant, it is covered elsehwere in the article. I also removed the Carmack information for safety; as I recall, the fictional Carmack was a very bad person; comparing this to a real person...well, Wikipedia prefers, in this type of situation to err very heavily on the side of caution. Lots42 (talk) 01:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Added information regarding id Software's CEO Todd Hollenshead's recent statements on a new Doom movie that he would like to do with Universal again, this time possibly based on the upcoming Doom 4 game found on Kotaku. KSweeley (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
there is obvious contradiction between revenue and budget size in the template and in the text —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.244.248 (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
The article ends by saying that the movie is "considered a huge flop", yet if you add up the revenue it generated it seems to have made a profit of more than 20 million dollars. As was mentioned above, the article is inconsistent in it's figure for the movie's budget, with it stating as being both $60 million and $70 million, but if you add up the gross revenues including US and Worldwide it comes to $84 million, that sounds like $24 to $14 million of profit, can that really be considered a flop? --Hibernian (talk) 14:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Above are links that can be used to improve the article. They were in the "External links" section, but I moved them here to avoid making that section into a link farm. —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me that half these sections violate the talk page guidelines.
"The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page." -[talk page guidelines]
I am not going to touch this, I've been cleaning up blatant vandalism, and took off what seemed to be obvious trolling, but if a senior editor would take it into consideration to clean up this page a little of posts that violate the guidelines, That would be great. B10Reaper (talk) 19:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm surprised this isn't mentioned in the article: the doctor's name, Carmack, is an obvious tribute to John Carmack, the lead programmer of Doom. --82.171.70.54 (talk) 11:48, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
2 of the Marine teams' last names are Fantom & Gannon. Oooh, Zelda: Ocarina of Time referance... /eyeroll
Now, I know its nothing absolutley HUGE, but the death f several characters are inaccurate. Mac, Destroyer, and Portman were not killed by Imps, but by the Hell Knight monster which apears throughout the movie. I also think it could be mentioned that Carmack, after being transformed, is killed by Sarge. I would edit this myself, but I suppose I would like others thoughts or ideas. --Clonehunter1 (talk) 03:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Doom (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore))
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot))
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Doom (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Below information was tagged for needing sources in 2010. Feel free to reinsert with appropriate references. DonIago (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Production |
---|
The film's producer, John Wells, admitted in an interview that "many" video game movie adaptations had "sucked". He revealed that the crew was able to get "a lot of financial support from Universal" and that it was not "done on the cheap." Wells also revealed that the Doom movie would have a sequence shot in a first-person perspective because "Doom without that would be a miscarriage of justice!"
Wells also revealed, "we were all very concerned that we make sure that it was exactly the kind of experience that we [the crew] remembered so fondly from the game: turning the lights off at midnight, cranking it up, and scaring the hell out of yourself!" Wells further stated that a balance exists between computer-generated imagery and prosthetics in the Doom movie, and he, for the first time as a producer, admitted, "we didn't wanna rely on the CGI. Those effects still haven't quite got[ten] to the level where you fully believe it — certainly not for long periods of time," and that the crew used Stan Winston's Creature Shop and that his work is only "enhanced with CGI." He also stated, "if you rely too much on CGI, it can look cheesy: it doesn't quite work. It'll get there, but it's not there yet." Wells has stated that the crew insisted that the Doom movie be made into an R-rated movie and that he did not "think it was possible to do a PG-13 version—and that's been the mistake made by a couple of other computer game movies," and that "a lot of studios didn't want to do it. But we made a conscious decision that we'd prefer not to make it any other way." Wells also revealed that if this first Doom film is successful, a second one could be made, and, "we certainly have some ideas for the next one, if there is gonna be one. We'll have to wait and see: the audience will have to tell us ..." |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Doom (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Doom (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Approximately 17 minutes into the movie, a map of the Olduvai facility is shown in which the circular room leading to the Atrium is labeled "Arc Chamber". Unless anyone has any information which contradicts this spelling, it's the one that the article should use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.70.13.107 (talk) 02:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
NVM. On-screen text displays "UAC Ark Facility" at 1 hour 18 minutes into the movie. 73.70.13.107 (talk) 03:13, 10 October 2020 (UTC)