Re: Big Boy #4018

>>>>I do believe that a script was written, or at least an outline. On the former website were some storyboards made from the script.<<<<<<
As far as anyone has been able to determine, the only "script" that existed was the storyboard,
and it changed as he tried to make it more and more politicly correct. And more outlandish.
They refused to answer any questions about the script because, they said, if they "gave away" any information, someone could "steal" their idea and make the movie.
>>>>I talked with Danny Bishop once, he mentioned that he had contracted Frank Darabont (Shawshank Redemption) to write it. <<<<<<
At various times, the web site and public pronouncements claimed that various and sundry "Hollywood people" were working on this thing. Problem is, apparently none were. Nearly everyone involved with a large-scale movie project is a freelancer, or independent contractor. If they don't get paid, they hit the road in a hurry.
>>>>>On paper, this was a really good idea. The movie, if it had gone forward, could have landed a 20 to 30 million dollar budget without much fuss.<<<<<<
Aye, there's the rub. Bishop would have us believe that he was going to raise that money by selling T-shirts and videos. That raised all sorts of red flags because:
1. Movies are NOT financed by donations and/or trinket sales.
2. With all the investment capital floating around Hollywood over the last 3 years, if this was such a wonderful project, why could he not get some of that funding? God knows a lot of real stinkbombs got financing easily enough and were made. It's very difficult not to conclude that it was either phoney from the get-go (e.g. he never made any effort to get real financing) or he actually did try to get financing and when the money and movie people examined his concept, they said "no."
>>>It really should have been a cakewalk for Bishop.<<<<
Maybe, assuming he was who he claimed to be. There is a substantial body of evidence that he was a phoney himself. Many of his claims didn't check out, such as his claim that he was an instructor in film sciences at a university. It turned out the university in question had never heard of him.
>>>>The profits of the movie could have been funnled back to complete the restoration.<<<
Assuming there were any profits. And anyway, once the movie has been made, you no longer need a locomotive, do you? So what's the point?
>>>This was a huge blow to both the railway preservation world and to Hollywood.<<<<
I fully agree with the first part of this statement. There have been plenty of phoney preservation/restoration schemes in the past, all of which leave a stain on the credibility of the overall rail preservation movement. In this case, I dropped my donations to AOS (along with the matching donations from my employer) because, IMO, they have let this thing go on too long. They claim to be silent partners or innocent bystanders, but their locomotive was and still is being used to make money for someone else.
I disagree with the second part. Hollywood, to the extent it was even aware of the plan (if it was aware of it at all, which is also doubtful), could care less. That industry is loaded with schemes and scams like this and is the home of tawdry deals. One more would hardly be noticed.
Now, shouldn't we return to the world of narrow gauge before the board monitors lose patience with all of us?