A possible idea for a Doom Annihilation sequel

[Man of Doom]

So before I begin, I kind of need to put out a rant on how "Doom Annihilation bad" has essentially become "Fortnite bad"; I've spoilered it because it's kind of long:
 

Spoiler

TL;DR- People needlessly shitting on a B-movie are now just doing so just to gain upvotes, retweets, Reddit karma, etc.
It's just a B-movie, guys. The worst the movie deserves is maybe some degree of indifference, not seething contempt for everyone involved in its production.
Please stop making "gimme karma" posts that do nothing but shit on the movie in question, especially if there isn't any legitimate criticism involved. It's been turned into a "joke" that's been driven into the ground as a result.

 

 

 

The long version:
I know that discussion regarding "The B-Movie That Shall Not Be Named" has kind of died down lately, but I feel like there should be some kind of unofficial moratorium.

 

Doom Annihilation's reception has been... disastrous, to say the least. On Discord, on here, and on various other corners of the internet, everyone seems to have nothing but seething contempt for its existence (spare a few individuals who think it's kind of ok and whatnot). I still fail to understand how people keep saying that Annihilation is a worse movie than the 2005 film. But then the final straw was when I saw this:

 

https://twitter.com/JustySilverman/status/1186435769109381120/photo/1

 

And for the record, the official Cinemassacre account retweeted this, and the OP made sure to tag the official Doom account and Gmanlives.

 

"Sure, buy the movie so that you can selfie yourself dropping it in the trash, that'll show them! Tell all your friends to do the same, too. Make sure that as many people as possible are buying the physical version of the movie so that they make pictures of dropping it in the trash."

Yeah, that'll show those Hollywood suits! How dare those heretics who worked on a movie... try to make a movie with what they have.

 

In other words, saying that Doom Annihilation is THE WORST THING EVER is now just getting milked to death just to win Internet Points. In other words, it's turned into "Fortnite bad".
It's not even legitimate criticisms anymore. It's turned into relentless vitriol just for the sake of getting mad at a movie that somehow doesn't cater to oddly specific needs.

Just as an example, legitimate criticism would mean misspelling your lead actress's name in the opening credits or having "United Aerospace Corporation" instead of... you know, "Union Aerospace Corporation" (and yes, even I've made that mistake in the past as someone who's written fiction).

 

Legitimate criticism means pointing out that there are pacing issues or that the gore is surprisingly underwhelming.

 

Legitimate criticism does NOT mean Doom Annihilation sucks because it really takes a huge dump on the game, god for a start the stupid and pointless Doomguy who gets eaten by zombies, what a fucking travesty this is, everyone knows the Doomguy has god mode, and there's not a single Mancubus sex scene and they don't collect all the skull keys how dare they call it a doom movie they can't respect the entire point of the series it's obvious it's a lame cash grabs done by talentless hacks with not one ounce of respect for the franchise oh man I'm really angry and I hope all the people who "worked" on this piece of shit die in a car wreck

 

I mean, let's face it: Doom Annihilation is above-average for a B-movie, in that they actually tried to emulate the source material. That doesn't stop it from being a B-movie anyway.

 

To quote @GoatLord, someone who has had actual experience in filmmaking:

Quote

There's something almost tragic about the results of Doom: Annihilation because underneath its conservative budget is a better movie. Perhaps not Aliens or The Thing or Event Horizon; but at least a B-schlock facsimile, which is very nearly what we get. It's a strangely humble picture, as much of what happens is in-camera, with a smattering of squibs, muzzle shots, monster suits, props, costumes, and memorable sets. It's a very old school approach.

 

In the manual of the original game, you as the player is a space marine that, following a major screw-up, was transferred to the United Aerospace Corporation facilities on Mars. When the UAC's teleportation experiments on the Martian moon Phobos go awry, your team is called in to clean up the mess. Word for word, this is exactly the plot of the movie, with lieutenant Joan Dark (Amy Manson) serving the role as the player. She is at odds with Dr. Betruger (Dominic Mafham), the scientist responsible for the debacle.

 

Doom necessarily presents its own riff on familiar tropes. We get the scene whereupon waking up, the crew sits down to a meal, followed by a debriefing; we get glimpses into Joan's haunted past; we quickly learn that Winslow (Clayton Adams) is the Bill Hudson—the least-liked marine in Aliens—of the film. It all works, but it also has that SyFy Channel feel, and whether that's enjoyably quaint or disappointingly bland is a matter of taste.

 

Once the action ramps up, things get a bit messy. The budget really shows here, with much of the gunplay revolving around possessed humans, and not so much as a single demon until the third act. It's almost frustrating to think of what could have been, as well as knowing there was nothing director Tony Giglio could have done about it. The results are simultaneously repetitive and brief, designed to provide the illusion of more than meets the eye. Does it work? Mostly. The middle sags and the teleportation sequences were undercooked, but the finale provides more eye-candy than you'd expect.

 

Universal first gave Doom a go in 2005, and the results were disastrous⁠—it failed to recoup its $60 million budget, and was a far cry from the source material. Here, we have a smaller, scaled-back, more legitimate attempt. Its sincerity is what carries it more than anything else, and for all its flaws, it treats its subject with praise. Non-fans might toss it aside, but any true Doomer ought to appreciate the work involved.

 

But then again, quite possibly the greatest B-movie ever made was 1984's The Terminator. (Seriously, that was made on a shoestring budget to the point where the climax was done only because James Cameron told the police that he was helping his son finish a project because they didn't have permits to shoot in that particular location.)

That doesn't mean that Doom Annihilation doesn't have its merits. It really is a fairly humble movie that does what it can to create more than what meets the eye, just like The Terminator.

 

Quote

I find it incredibly frustrating thinking about how much this film would have been elevated by a bigger budget. Hammy acting and predictable plot aside, nearly everything would have been solved, sadly, by throwing more money at it. Giglio did his best, but an action sci-fi horror dealing with otherworldly imagery is nearly impossible to effectively pull off with a small budget.

 

Doom [as a cinematic concept] is an underdog, even now. No studio gives enough of a shit about the franchise to get it right. So far it's been:

1. A director with lots of money who doesn't understand the source material producing mildly enjoyable trash.
2. A director with very little money who understands the source material producing overly repetitive but enjoyable trash.

In both cases, poor studio decisions (hiring the wrong people or insisting on a pathetically small budget) keep Doom as a cinematic concept from reaching its potential. It could easily reach the heights of Aliens, Hellraiser, Total Recall, or Event Horizon if the right people work on it. It's a matter of people with money understanding who to give the money to.

 

 

In other words, it's actually kind of astounding they were able to pull off the entire Hell sequence in the first place.
Case in point: Tony Giglio actually wanted to include the Bruiser Brothers from Episode 1 for this movie, but couldn't because... well, budget.

 

And yeah, he hit the nail on the head with why Doom has not been doing well in making the transition to film.

It pretty much boils down to studio cynicism and corporate mandate, either in the case of giving a project to people who may have the budget to pull it off but have no desire to understand the source material or just ordering an ashcan copy to get made just to keep the rights to the franchise... even if the people involved in the production of said "ashcan copy" clearly give a shit about the source material.

 

Either way, this is a movie that was clearly written before the existence of Doom 2016, and it shows.
This is NOT a movie about a roided-up supersoldier/demigod who punches a bajllion demons left and right.
This is a movie that is more about the horror and suspense you felt when you saw the flashing lights at the start of Deimos Lab or the dark parts of Doom 3. The movie was clearly meant to evoke the feeling that the enemy is a real threat and by being the best soldier you can be, you might make it out alive like Joan does at the end.

 

In my personal opinion: This actually isn't half-bad for a Doom movie.

 

In fact, I kind of feel like this is the movie we should have gotten back in 2005 (same script but bigger budget). I think if we had those things, we definitely could have had people talking about this potential Doom movie as "one of the better video game movies".

 

That said, this movie was kind of released during a very unfortunate time. Yes, I know we're essentially in a Doom renaissance and everything, but just hear me out. With that new Doom renaissance came certain... expectations as of late.

It's a goddamn shame because this movie is actually pretty decent overall, and much more of a Doom movie than the one from 2005.

 

Or you know, maybe I could be wrong because Doom Annihilation is a movie about space marines fighting against demons, but it's not a 3-hour section of 🤘𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔇𝔬𝔬𝔪 𝔖𝔩𝔞𝔶𝔢𝔯🤘 slaughtering hapless demons in a first-person perspective while spouting memes from the Doom comic and flexing every 0.595 femtoseconds, which is the only thing that The Internet^TM would have accepted as a good Doom movie.

 

I've decided to include said rant because I know I'm probably going to receive replies that consist of "lol imagine making a sequel to a shit-ass movie that caters to those esjaydubbaewes" or "fight like hell commercial except its two hours long pls".

So there are actually two big reasons as to why I've even started this thread in the first place.

The first is that it turns out that actually Universal considers Doom Annihilation to be a considerable financial success, paving the way for a potential sequel and an actual chance for Tony Giglio to actually create a Doom movie that's far more in line with his vision due to a potentially increased budget.
The second is that it's been talked about in an actual capacity and not just "lmao Doom Annihilation sux lol"; case in point, David Szymanski (the main developer of Dusk) was talking about the state of the "video game movie curse" and why something like a two-hour rendition of the "Fight Like Hell" commercial is never going to happen. He also made it worth mentioning about this exact point:

 

An additional point I'd like to make regarding the "video game movie curse" is that with the likes of Detective Pikachu or Sonic the Hedgehog, it's more than possible to create a good movie that's based on a video game, and said solution is surprisingly simple: just create a rock-solid movie that happens to take place within the universe of a video game, and make sure to do as much research as possible (and by that, I mean get people involved who actually care about the source material).

So with all that being said, with the possibility of a Doom Annihilation sequel, what can be done there other than an interpretation of the last two Doom episodes or Hell on Earth? (In case you're wondering, Annihilation is essentially a take on Knee-Deep in the Dead.)

Well, why not do something unique with what we currently have?
Why not lean further into Lieutenant Dark being this timeline's version of the Doom Marine? (Besides, Joan was already written as a character heavily inspired by the likes of Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley so she already has that going for her.)
What if instead of taking inspiration from films like Aliens or Total Recall, why not instead take inspiration from Dredd or Mandy (AKA that one Nicolas Cage film), complete with more saturated visuals and more gore-soaked brutality? Why not push that R rating as far as possible and even make the sequel a full-on splatter movie?
Instead of just doing a generic sci-fi soundtrack, why not bring in someone like Perturbator or Carpenter Brut to infuse an already batshit insane presentation with a soundtrack that can be as sickeningly violent as the movie's action?
 

 

Unlike the Doomslayer's method of KAR EN TUK, Lieutenant Dark could instead take on a more survivalist approach to demon-killing (using the environment around her as well as using big guns, using arcane markings to ward off demonic possession, etc.). Instead of just taking place in some kind of UAC installation for the entire runtime, perhaps the movie could instead take place mostly in Hell or in some kind of place that's already been corrupted by Hell's influence to the point of reality being warped into some sinister facsimile of itself.

 

In terms of the story, there isn't anything solid that I could currently think of. Perhaps it could be built off of Joan having some kind of Hell-based PTSD, with the additional side effect of Dr. Betruger constantly mocking her inside her head? In spite of her condition, the UAC has essentially deployed her as she's the only one who has not only survived the events of the Phobos incident but also is pretty much the only one really suited for the job of clearing out... whatever location has been infested with demons. It's pretty much a complete toss-up from there.

All in all, this take on a Doom Annihilation sequel could potentially be "what if Doom 64 was injected with a combination of neon and PCP, only to be left in a septic tank for about a week?"

Anywho, this is pretty much my own take on how a Doom Annihilation sequel could be. And yes, I also have an additional idea for a "proper" Doom movie which essentially takes place in the Doom Eternal universe (namely a story that revolves around a group of Night Sentinels still loyal to the Slayer even after the fall of the Khan Maykr amidst a second civil war in Argenta), but that's honestly a whole different beast.

In all honesty, this is just nothing more than a thought exercise I figured would be fun.

[orangefire222]

I'd watch it.

 

I also watch the other 2 doom movies whenever I catch them. I know they're terrible but I got love for anything involving Doom.

[seed]

I would watch a sequel as a curiosity too, and no, it's not a good movie in itself, decent at most in my book.

 

But it is indeed the budget that really killed it - the environments are bland, we see just a few Imps for the longest period, lots of running around, and everything looks cheap like plastic. The reason why some think the 2005 movie was better is mainly because it did better with its budget, I'd say. The FPS scene, the music, and the quite evocative locations are just some of its highlights, despite being a far cry from the source material and its abysmal writing.

 

Both have their flaws and strong points, Annihilation's biggest problem being that it never really had a chance. With an almost nonexistent budget too many sacrifices had to be made.

[Gez]

9 hours ago, Man of Doom said:

And yes, I also have an additional idea for a "proper" Doom movie which essentially takes place in the Doom Eternal universe (namely a story that revolves around a group of Night Sentinels still loyal to the Slayer even after the fall of the Khan Maykr amidst a second civil war in Argenta), but that's honestly a whole different beast.

Given that the movie rights only concern the pre-ZeniMax titles (Doom, Doom II, Doom 3, and perhaps also Final Doom, Doom RPG, Doom II RPG, and Doom 64), using the 2016/Eternal plot elements in a movie would require negotiating the movie rights for them.

[Man of Doom]

On 10/13/2020 at 2:50 AM, seed said:

 

But it is indeed the budget that really killed it - the environments are bland, we see just a few Imps for the longest period, lots of running around, and everything looks cheap like plastic. The reason why some think the 2005 movie was better is mainly because it did better with its budget, I'd say. The FPS scene, the music, and the quite evocative locations are just some of its highlights, despite being a far cry from the source material and its abysmal writing.

 

Both have their flaws and strong points, Annihilation's biggest problem being that it never really had a chance. With an almost nonexistent budget too many sacrifices had to be made.

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

It’s actually part of the reason why so many people nowadays have been saying the 2005 movie is better explicitly because of things like the FPS scene (which could’ve honestly gone in any FPS-based movie) as well as the caliber of the actors  (who really did give it their all) and the considerable budget. I mean, what other video game franchise could say that they were represented by Luke Hobbs, Judge Dredd (or Billy Butcher depending on your mileage), and the Night King from GoT?
Otherwise, those are the only real things going for the 2005 movie with everything else falling flat on its face.

 

 

Another thing to note is that while I did say that the greatest B-movie ever made is The Terminator, I should also mention that part of the reason why that movie works is because of the base premise, that being a killer robot sent back in time to kill the mother of a resistance leader who rallies an uprising against a sentient AI in the near-future hell-bent on exterminating humanity.

 

Doom, on the other hand, is basically about military-based experiments in the far future where teleportation ends up opening a literal gateway to Hell; for Annihilation to even have had a chance, it needed a much bigger budget than what it ultimately got.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t have instantly been written off as DOA by a considerable amount of the Doom community (not to mention the whole “hate this thing because reactionary weirdos told you to” phenomenon that also happened with the more recent Wolfenstein titles, which in itself is a whole another can of worms).

 

I suppose the only real silver linings in all of this is that the cast and crew had the time of their lives working on the movie, and that Universal considers this movie to be a commercial success which does pave the way for a potential sequel.

 

On 10/13/2020 at 6:36 AM, Gez said:

Given that the movie rights only concern the pre-ZeniMax titles (Doom, Doom II, Doom 3, and perhaps also Final Doom, Doom RPG, Doom II RPG, and Doom 64), using the 2016/Eternal plot elements in a movie would require negotiating the movie rights for them.

It’s definitely worth mentioning that Tony Giglio could only take story beats from the pre-ZeniMax Doom titles back when he was officially working on the story due to legal reasons.

 

Honestly, I imagine that a Doom movie taking story beats from 2016/Eternal would require the approval of at least id Software and definitely ZeniMax.

[seed]

3 minutes ago, Man of Doom said:

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

It’s actually part of the reason why so many people nowadays have been saying the 2005 movie is better explicitly because of things like the FPS scene (which could’ve honestly gone in any FPS-based movie) as well as the caliber of the actors  (who really did give it their all) and the considerable budget. I mean, what other video game franchise could say that they were represented by Luke Hobbs, Judge Dredd (or Billy Butcher depending on your mileage), and the Night King from GoT?
Otherwise, those are the only real things going for the 2005 movie with everything else falling flat on its face.

 

 

Another thing to note is that while I did say that the greatest B-movie ever made is The Terminator, I should also mention that part of the reason why that movie works is because of the base premise, that being a killer robot sent back in time to kill the mother of a resistance leader who rallies an uprising against a sentient AI in the near-future hell-bent on exterminating humanity.

 

Doom, on the other hand, is basically about military-based experiments in the far future where teleportation ends up opening a literal gateway to Hell; for Annihilation to even have had a chance, it needed a much bigger budget than what it ultimately got.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t have instantly been written off as DOA by a considerable amount of the Doom community (not to mention the whole “hate this thing because reactionary weirdos told you to” phenomenon that also happened with the more recent Wolfenstein titles, which in itself is a whole another can of worms).

 

I suppose the only real silver linings in all of this is that the cast and crew had the time of their lives working on the movie, and that Universal considers this movie to be a commercial success which does pave the way for a potential sequel.

 

Indeed.

 

I think the issue just boils down to the budget ultimately. Without money you can't afford good or believable CGI, making the locations look half-decent, nice effects, and of course, better actors. So all things considered, if Annihilation had a budget similar to the 2005 movie, it could have potentially been comparable to the few game-to-movie adaptions that actually worked. But you can't make a good Doom movie when you can't afford... anything.

 

If it does get a sequel, I certainly hope they'll reconsider the budget, otherwise it will end up DOA for a second time - and for good this time.