rudewordsmith's Recent Comments
Sony Moving Forward With VENOM - Aug 01, 2008 - 12:20pm
This is a terrible idea, man... I'm not trying to offend any one here, but to call Venom a "character" is an insult to the fine art of story telling. He is less than one dimensional and carries no narrative weight at all. Sure, he hates Parker/Spidey but... how is that interesting? At least with Green Goblin and Doc Ock, we had enemies who hated Spider Man but cared for/ respected Peter Parker. That dynamic made for engrossing entertainment rife with moral questions, where a straight forward "BA! I hate that guy soooo much" villain is just... well, frankly it's extremely dull. Now, I'm not saying Venom's presence ruined "SM3". There are so many bits that can share that blame. Had they used J. J.'s son as a vessel for bringing the symbiote down to Earth (he worked IN SPACE, damn it!) instead of a one-note "love antagonist", that would have been better. Had they just set up Venom for the fourth film... Well, I still probably would not have liked that film -- but still! Give the fans of Venom a chance to enjoy him, but don't use his baffling popularity as an excuse to "add momentum" to the franchise in his own stand-alone movie. He can't carry one. Also, if they want it to come out before SM4 the flick would probably have to be rushed. A sloppy, potentially boring SP spin off can only do more damage to the property than a long wait for the next mundane installment. Lastly, use The Lizard as the next villain. Make this next installment the TDK of Spider Man. Fill it with moral uncertainty and blur that line between right and wrong, good and evil. Keep Carnage and the zillion other symbiotes out of it. Kraven, well, I'm warming up to that idea. Just get rid of that awful vest and call it a deal.
This is a terrible idea, man... I'm not trying to offend any one here, but to call Venom a "character" is an insult to the fine art of story telling. He is less than one dimensional and carries no narrative weight at all. Sure, he hates Parker/Spidey but... how is that interesting? At least with Green Goblin and Doc Ock, we had enemies who hated Spider Man but cared for/ respected Peter Parker. That dynamic made for engrossing entertainment rife with moral questions, where a straight forward "BA! I hate that guy soooo much" villain is just... well, frankly it's extremely dull. Now, I'm not saying Venom's presence ruined "SM3". There are so many bits that can share that blame. Had they used J. J.'s son as a vessel for bringing the symbiote down to Earth (he worked IN SPACE, damn it!) instead of a one-note "love antagonist", that would have been better. Had they just set up Venom for the fourth film... Well, I still probably would not have liked that film -- but still! Give the fans of Venom a chance to enjoy him, but don't use his baffling popularity as an excuse to "add momentum" to the franchise in his own stand-alone movie. He can't carry one. Also, if they want it to come out before SM4 the flick would probably have to be rushed. A sloppy, potentially boring SP spin off can only do more damage to the property than a long wait for the next mundane installment. Lastly, use The Lizard as the next villain. Make this next installment the TDK of Spider Man. Fill it with moral uncertainty and blur that line between right and wrong, good and evil. Keep Carnage and the zillion other symbiotes out of it. Kraven, well, I'm warming up to that idea. Just get rid of that awful vest and call it a deal.
SDCC: Full New RE: DEGENERATION Trailer - Jul 26, 2008 - 10:18pm
The monster at the end looks like a new form for William Birkin. I mean, I'm only saying this because of the signature arm-eye ball, and really any monster can have that I guess. But I've got a feeling it's Birkin. Nothing ever stays dead in the RE franchise, after all.
The monster at the end looks like a new form for William Birkin. I mean, I'm only saying this because of the signature arm-eye ball, and really any monster can have that I guess. But I've got a feeling it's Birkin. Nothing ever stays dead in the RE franchise, after all.
Batmania! Rise and Shine with The Dark Night - Jul 19, 2008 - 11:58pm
Arby: At first, I felt the same way. But I saw the flick a second time (so things could sink in after the initial high the first viewing gave me), and I really came to like the ending. Really, to end a Batman film on a high note would be contrary to the character and the lore. But I can still see how it might bother some people. Art is subjective, and perfection is debatable. Ha ha. As far as political commentary goes, I have to commend this flick for doing something most Hollywood films don't: It played for those of us in the middle. Like almostunbiased said, things can't be fixed when we continue to operate under the broken, two party system (broken houses make broken people, after all). This film captured that. POTENTIAL SPOILER: Batman essentially wire-taps every phone in Gotham (wire-tapping bad), but it ends up working (results good). But he has the foresight and discretion to stop once the job is done. And the bit Harvey talks about when asked about Batman? He talks about Rome suspending democracy in times of war so that one man can do what he feels is right in order to protect his people (Caesar=Batman), though Rachel is quick to point out how the last man to do that went too far with his power (Caesar now=President Bush). It was really about the thin line between right and wrong, and how some times it is necessary to cross it -- but it is never acceptable to completely obliterate the line and act like everything is peachy keen. And The Joker? Did any one else notice his child-like mannerisms (especially when he was leaving the hospital, that sort of aimless toddler walk)? To me, there was a theme running through the film about loss of innocence, which makes it brilliant that the antagonist is, in many ways, operating on an abused child-like thought frequency. He doesn't acknowledge right and wrong because he doesn't have the capacity of thought for determining right and wrong. He does what he does for fun. Maybe I'm reading too much into it?
Arby: At first, I felt the same way. But I saw the flick a second time (so things could sink in after the initial high the first viewing gave me), and I really came to like the ending. Really, to end a Batman film on a high note would be contrary to the character and the lore. But I can still see how it might bother some people. Art is subjective, and perfection is debatable. Ha ha. As far as political commentary goes, I have to commend this flick for doing something most Hollywood films don't: It played for those of us in the middle. Like almostunbiased said, things can't be fixed when we continue to operate under the broken, two party system (broken houses make broken people, after all). This film captured that. POTENTIAL SPOILER: Batman essentially wire-taps every phone in Gotham (wire-tapping bad), but it ends up working (results good). But he has the foresight and discretion to stop once the job is done. And the bit Harvey talks about when asked about Batman? He talks about Rome suspending democracy in times of war so that one man can do what he feels is right in order to protect his people (Caesar=Batman), though Rachel is quick to point out how the last man to do that went too far with his power (Caesar now=President Bush). It was really about the thin line between right and wrong, and how some times it is necessary to cross it -- but it is never acceptable to completely obliterate the line and act like everything is peachy keen. And The Joker? Did any one else notice his child-like mannerisms (especially when he was leaving the hospital, that sort of aimless toddler walk)? To me, there was a theme running through the film about loss of innocence, which makes it brilliant that the antagonist is, in many ways, operating on an abused child-like thought frequency. He doesn't acknowledge right and wrong because he doesn't have the capacity of thought for determining right and wrong. He does what he does for fun. Maybe I'm reading too much into it?
Batmania! Rise and Shine with The Dark Night - Jul 19, 2008 - 09:41pm
Saw it again tonight. I have to change my mind about something... ...Give Heath the frickin' Oscar. He earned that thing.
Saw it again tonight. I have to change my mind about something... ...Give Heath the frickin' Oscar. He earned that thing.
THE DARK KNIGHT: The Joker's Wild! - Jul 18, 2008 - 03:44pm
Momitchell: Just because some one is successful or famous, that doesn't mean something else in their life isn't going well. Success and fame are material; they can be gained as easily as they can be lost. The things that matter, intrinsic rewards, those matter most. Surely family problems made him sad. Insomnia (which he had) leads to depression as well.
Momitchell: Just because some one is successful or famous, that doesn't mean something else in their life isn't going well. Success and fame are material; they can be gained as easily as they can be lost. The things that matter, intrinsic rewards, those matter most. Surely family problems made him sad. Insomnia (which he had) leads to depression as well.
THE DARK KNIGHT: The Joker's Wild! - Jul 18, 2008 - 09:51am
Over all, I thought this was a very good movie. Certainly not the flawless masterpiece people have been claiming. Alas, such is the nature of hyperbole. Here's my breakdown: Batman: Good, except for the voice. It honestly got to the point where there were a few lines I couldn't understand. This should have been the first things fixed. I understand the need to disguise one's voice, but come on. Dent/Two-Face: I sincerely believe this is Dent's movie, accented by delightful scenes with The Joker and Batman. But when he turned... well, let's just say I can't get behind how his part concluded in this film. The Joker: Ledger made me eat my first words upon hearing he was cast in the role. Every facial tick, every odd bodily movement -- and the voice. Good God, this was the Joker. Still not sure I buy into the Oscar hype, but he did a great job.
Over all, I thought this was a very good movie. Certainly not the flawless masterpiece people have been claiming. Alas, such is the nature of hyperbole. Here's my breakdown: Batman: Good, except for the voice. It honestly got to the point where there were a few lines I couldn't understand. This should have been the first things fixed. I understand the need to disguise one's voice, but come on. Dent/Two-Face: I sincerely believe this is Dent's movie, accented by delightful scenes with The Joker and Batman. But when he turned... well, let's just say I can't get behind how his part concluded in this film. The Joker: Ledger made me eat my first words upon hearing he was cast in the role. Every facial tick, every odd bodily movement -- and the voice. Good God, this was the Joker. Still not sure I buy into the Oscar hype, but he did a great job.
THE DARK KNIGHT: The Joker's Wild! - Jul 17, 2008 - 08:56am
I think I dated a Marry Rottencrotch once. Thank God my sense of smell won against my hormones... But to the point... Hanso: On Rotten Tomatoes, the only bad reviews are coming from New York, and they seem to be from people who completely misunderstand the existential dilemma of Batman's existence, mistaking it for a sick propaganda for anarchy and mental instability. Clearly, they just like Spider Man better. :) 12:01, I'm there. And as much as it's gonna hurt, I think we should all try our hardest to avoid posting spoilers on here for our pals Ponyboy, and any one else, across the pond. The extra week's wait is cruel enough.
I think I dated a Marry Rottencrotch once. Thank God my sense of smell won against my hormones... But to the point... Hanso: On Rotten Tomatoes, the only bad reviews are coming from New York, and they seem to be from people who completely misunderstand the existential dilemma of Batman's existence, mistaking it for a sick propaganda for anarchy and mental instability. Clearly, they just like Spider Man better. :) 12:01, I'm there. And as much as it's gonna hurt, I think we should all try our hardest to avoid posting spoilers on here for our pals Ponyboy, and any one else, across the pond. The extra week's wait is cruel enough.
HBO's First Look at DARK KNIGHT - Jul 15, 2008 - 06:12am
Pony: I was thinking that, too. Surely he could have swung some sort of deal to release the flick in the UK the same time as in North America. Such is life, I guess. genretime- Man... I just don't know. My only problem with Batman's Rogues Gallery is that, at least for me, there are few villains of any real interest. I was never a Man-Bat guy, nor one for Killer Croc. Though, if they could come up with a "plausible" explanation for Clay Face, I'd love to see him in a movie. As it stands, I'm content to seeing a Nolanized Riddler. They could play the third film like a detective thriller, race against the clock kind of piece. Regardless, from what I've seen and read about the dark knight, no matter what act follows this flick it's going to be hard to top.
Pony: I was thinking that, too. Surely he could have swung some sort of deal to release the flick in the UK the same time as in North America. Such is life, I guess. genretime- Man... I just don't know. My only problem with Batman's Rogues Gallery is that, at least for me, there are few villains of any real interest. I was never a Man-Bat guy, nor one for Killer Croc. Though, if they could come up with a "plausible" explanation for Clay Face, I'd love to see him in a movie. As it stands, I'm content to seeing a Nolanized Riddler. They could play the third film like a detective thriller, race against the clock kind of piece. Regardless, from what I've seen and read about the dark knight, no matter what act follows this flick it's going to be hard to top.
HBO's First Look at DARK KNIGHT - Jul 14, 2008 - 10:29am
You have to wait an extra week, Pony? Damn, that sucks! I've got my ticket, so as long as I get out of class at a good hour I should be able to make the first showing. I'm amped!
You have to wait an extra week, Pony? Damn, that sucks! I've got my ticket, so as long as I get out of class at a good hour I should be able to make the first showing. I'm amped!
Joker Gets in A Parting Shot to DARK KNIGHT Sites - Jul 13, 2008 - 07:35am
THANK YOU wiseguy! There's no doubt that Ledger did a good/great job in the part, but every review I come across reads like this: "Heath Ledger, Heath Ledger, Tragic Death, Heath Ledger, Oscar, no one else mattered, Heath Ledger." Mean while, back when he was first announced for the part, these same people were lamenting on how he was a poor choice for the role. The whole thing reeks of posthumous hyperbole, which I feel will do more damage to the movie because it builds the audience up for a level of cinematic glory the film doesn't quite reach.
THANK YOU wiseguy! There's no doubt that Ledger did a good/great job in the part, but every review I come across reads like this: "Heath Ledger, Heath Ledger, Tragic Death, Heath Ledger, Oscar, no one else mattered, Heath Ledger." Mean while, back when he was first announced for the part, these same people were lamenting on how he was a poor choice for the role. The whole thing reeks of posthumous hyperbole, which I feel will do more damage to the movie because it builds the audience up for a level of cinematic glory the film doesn't quite reach.
BATMAN-GOTHAM KNIGHT (Two-Disc Collector's Edition) - Jul 12, 2008 - 07:24am
gauleyboy: I think we're disappointed because we did not get what we were told to expect: An action packed batman flick that bridged the gap between "Begins" and "Dark Knight". All the advertisements said it. What we got, though, was a limp, meandering mess that had nothing with which to bridge any sort of gap between the two movies. They didn't introduce Dent, they only focused on Sal Maroni and his silly Russian rival (I thought it was all out gang war?), and the longest segment was some boring one about Bruce Wayne training in order to rid himself of his baggage (wasn't that already the first act of Batman Begins?). I knew I'd wasted my money when I could barely get through the first story. "Sic, man..."
gauleyboy: I think we're disappointed because we did not get what we were told to expect: An action packed batman flick that bridged the gap between "Begins" and "Dark Knight". All the advertisements said it. What we got, though, was a limp, meandering mess that had nothing with which to bridge any sort of gap between the two movies. They didn't introduce Dent, they only focused on Sal Maroni and his silly Russian rival (I thought it was all out gang war?), and the longest segment was some boring one about Bruce Wayne training in order to rid himself of his baggage (wasn't that already the first act of Batman Begins?). I knew I'd wasted my money when I could barely get through the first story. "Sic, man..."
Tarantino's War BASTARDS Preps for October Start - Jul 10, 2008 - 08:12pm
Hebrew Hammer, heard! That's one of those that seemed to have won me over the more I watched it.
Hebrew Hammer, heard! That's one of those that seemed to have won me over the more I watched it.
Tarantino's War BASTARDS Preps for October Start - Jul 10, 2008 - 10:14am
I read on CHUD that this is about a band of Jewish soldiers who go into Nazi territory to deliver the spank on those rat bastards. Sort of a Jewsploitation flick. Glad to know I'm not the only one who wants some Jewsploitation. I've been working on this script about Hacidic Jews in the Diamond District of NY, who have to rid the berg of a greedy German mercenary. I want to make a spaghetti western out of it. Only, I guess, it would be a sort of "Speghetti Eastern", given the location. Long live the notion of Ass Kicking Heebs. They make the rest of us proud!
I read on CHUD that this is about a band of Jewish soldiers who go into Nazi territory to deliver the spank on those rat bastards. Sort of a Jewsploitation flick. Glad to know I'm not the only one who wants some Jewsploitation. I've been working on this script about Hacidic Jews in the Diamond District of NY, who have to rid the berg of a greedy German mercenary. I want to make a spaghetti western out of it. Only, I guess, it would be a sort of "Speghetti Eastern", given the location. Long live the notion of Ass Kicking Heebs. They make the rest of us proud!
Top Maniacal Rumors: Riddler's Clues, Super Millar and Abe Frankenstein - Jul 05, 2008 - 10:38am
Rodriguez already did three Westerns (his Mariachi Trilogy), and they did kick ass. I'd like to see him become the next Sergio Leone or John Ford, but I fear he has too much of a thing for "balls-to-the-wall action" to make a serious, restrained Western like Eastwood or those other two. But he does have so much more of a gift than his awful prospects seem to hint. I wish he'd get his head out of his ass. As for Superman, well, I couldn't care less. If ever there were a boring super hero, it'd be him.
Rodriguez already did three Westerns (his Mariachi Trilogy), and they did kick ass. I'd like to see him become the next Sergio Leone or John Ford, but I fear he has too much of a thing for "balls-to-the-wall action" to make a serious, restrained Western like Eastwood or those other two. But he does have so much more of a gift than his awful prospects seem to hint. I wish he'd get his head out of his ass. As for Superman, well, I couldn't care less. If ever there were a boring super hero, it'd be him.
Toy Maniac: Open the Exclusive Figure? - Jul 04, 2008 - 10:52pm
I won't lie; I dig action figures. Typically just movie related ones. My favorite pieces are my Bubba Ho-Tep figures (c'mon; Elvis in a stand off with a mummy in cowboy duds? What's not to love?). But no matter an exclusive or otherwise, toys are just that: toys. They're playthings and are produced for the sole purpose of being opened and played with. Opening them or just leaving them on the card to hoard because they are "exclusive" -- either way, regardless -- buying them makes ya a geek. Nothing wrong with that, though.
I won't lie; I dig action figures. Typically just movie related ones. My favorite pieces are my Bubba Ho-Tep figures (c'mon; Elvis in a stand off with a mummy in cowboy duds? What's not to love?). But no matter an exclusive or otherwise, toys are just that: toys. They're playthings and are produced for the sole purpose of being opened and played with. Opening them or just leaving them on the card to hoard because they are "exclusive" -- either way, regardless -- buying them makes ya a geek. Nothing wrong with that, though.
Bale Will Bail if Robin Shows in KNIGHT Sequel - Jul 04, 2008 - 08:08pm
As has been said, Robin could work in Nolan's version of Batman "If done correctly". The idea of Robin isn't out of fit with Nolan's vision (like how some people say "Robin wouldn't work in this 'realistic' approach to Batman. How? Are sidekicks not "realistic"?), but it would have to be handled in a much less campy way than in the other flicks. As it stands, though, I am quite content to see Batman carry on without Robin. But that doesn't mean the character wouldn't work. To me, adding a sidekick naturally forces Batman into having to save him/her at some point, in lieu of a love interest. If they could make the Robin angle work without that kind of forced plot development it wouldn't be so bad.
As has been said, Robin could work in Nolan's version of Batman "If done correctly". The idea of Robin isn't out of fit with Nolan's vision (like how some people say "Robin wouldn't work in this 'realistic' approach to Batman. How? Are sidekicks not "realistic"?), but it would have to be handled in a much less campy way than in the other flicks. As it stands, though, I am quite content to see Batman carry on without Robin. But that doesn't mean the character wouldn't work. To me, adding a sidekick naturally forces Batman into having to save him/her at some point, in lieu of a love interest. If they could make the Robin angle work without that kind of forced plot development it wouldn't be so bad.
HANCOCK: Superman III 1/2? - Jul 03, 2008 - 01:15pm
Also, in regards to The Dark Knight: I am so hyped to see that flick, but I think things are getting out of control. Oscars? Really? I know every one seems to be championing Heath for a posthumous oscar, but come on... I'm sure he did a great job, but I have a feeling that if he hadn't died, people wouldn't be pushing for it. Fanboys, sure. We do that. But John Q Public? Am I the only one who remembers when people were upset that Heath got the role in the fist place? Admittedly, I was in that camp -- but so were most of the critics/"norms" who are praising his work now. Have I changed my mind? Yes, I have. But every one else seems to be taking this waaaaay too far. And this isn't an attack on any one, not me trying to flame or something; I'm just getting it off my chest.
Also, in regards to The Dark Knight: I am so hyped to see that flick, but I think things are getting out of control. Oscars? Really? I know every one seems to be championing Heath for a posthumous oscar, but come on... I'm sure he did a great job, but I have a feeling that if he hadn't died, people wouldn't be pushing for it. Fanboys, sure. We do that. But John Q Public? Am I the only one who remembers when people were upset that Heath got the role in the fist place? Admittedly, I was in that camp -- but so were most of the critics/"norms" who are praising his work now. Have I changed my mind? Yes, I have. But every one else seems to be taking this waaaaay too far. And this isn't an attack on any one, not me trying to flame or something; I'm just getting it off my chest.
HANCOCK: Superman III 1/2? - Jul 03, 2008 - 01:06pm
ffft5305: Surely Costner got crap over Water World because he is so damned awesome that the critics felt the need to pull the strings of the public (lemmings that we are, after all) -- not because the movie was awful and his performance even worse. If I seem bitter, I'm sorry; I used to work with a guy who tried to convince me every day that "Water World" deserved to win an oscar. I don't miss that job. at all. As for Will Smith: I like the guy, but I want him to take more demanding, challenging roles. I know he's got the stuff to pull it off.
ffft5305: Surely Costner got crap over Water World because he is so damned awesome that the critics felt the need to pull the strings of the public (lemmings that we are, after all) -- not because the movie was awful and his performance even worse. If I seem bitter, I'm sorry; I used to work with a guy who tried to convince me every day that "Water World" deserved to win an oscar. I don't miss that job. at all. As for Will Smith: I like the guy, but I want him to take more demanding, challenging roles. I know he's got the stuff to pull it off.
RESIDENT EVIL 4 Is "Possible" for Sony - Jul 01, 2008 - 07:25pm
Anderson says he's waiting for the script to be "right" and "good", but... since when has the director of AVP, the Resident Evil franchise or Deathrace 3000 given a damn about quality scripts? I hope this license just dies, so some one can make a good version in a decade or so.
Anderson says he's waiting for the script to be "right" and "good", but... since when has the director of AVP, the Resident Evil franchise or Deathrace 3000 given a damn about quality scripts? I hope this license just dies, so some one can make a good version in a decade or so.
New DARK KNIGHT Trailer, New Villain for Third Film? - Jun 30, 2008 - 08:22pm
galaga51: Yeah, I can see your point. Though, and this kills me to even predict it, but I have a feeling Dent won't make it to film three. ****POTENTIAL SPOILER WARNING BASED ON CONJECTURE****They seem pretty content to start, work through and finish his story line at the end of the film. If Nolan is trying to keep things "realistic" (within reason, of course; it is Batman, after all) Dent can't last long with the scarring his face gets in this. What the reviews have said so far is that the "concept art" that surfaced a while back is essentially the way he turns out on screen. I can see Nolan using that scarring to establish a sort of "ticking clock" for Two-Face's motivation, along with his grief and anger. But I'm probably, and hopefully, wrong.****END POTENTIAL SPOILER WARNING BASED ON CONJECTURE**** My big thing is, I'd love to see Riddler done well, as opposed to the Jim Carrey Riddler we got in film three. And with his style of crime, matched with Nolan's proven ability to master the Thriller genre, I think it'd be grand. That is, assuming Nolan even comes back for part three. I'm sure he will, though that probably means no part three until three years down the line. Haha.
galaga51: Yeah, I can see your point. Though, and this kills me to even predict it, but I have a feeling Dent won't make it to film three. ****POTENTIAL SPOILER WARNING BASED ON CONJECTURE****They seem pretty content to start, work through and finish his story line at the end of the film. If Nolan is trying to keep things "realistic" (within reason, of course; it is Batman, after all) Dent can't last long with the scarring his face gets in this. What the reviews have said so far is that the "concept art" that surfaced a while back is essentially the way he turns out on screen. I can see Nolan using that scarring to establish a sort of "ticking clock" for Two-Face's motivation, along with his grief and anger. But I'm probably, and hopefully, wrong.****END POTENTIAL SPOILER WARNING BASED ON CONJECTURE**** My big thing is, I'd love to see Riddler done well, as opposed to the Jim Carrey Riddler we got in film three. And with his style of crime, matched with Nolan's proven ability to master the Thriller genre, I think it'd be grand. That is, assuming Nolan even comes back for part three. I'm sure he will, though that probably means no part three until three years down the line. Haha.
New DARK KNIGHT Trailer, New Villain for Third Film? - Jun 30, 2008 - 06:50pm
I'd love to see Nolan try The Riddler. After proving himself with Memento and The Prestige, I know that he could make a swell story with him as the bad guy. If Nolan even tried to make the third one feel like a Thriller and not a "typical" super hero flick (as I've heard this one is more of a crime drama), then he could knock it out of the f**kin' park.
I'd love to see Nolan try The Riddler. After proving himself with Memento and The Prestige, I know that he could make a swell story with him as the bad guy. If Nolan even tried to make the third one feel like a Thriller and not a "typical" super hero flick (as I've heard this one is more of a crime drama), then he could knock it out of the f**kin' park.
First SOLACE Trailer Online Now - Jun 30, 2008 - 08:55am
Looks like another quality Bond flick. I can't remember the last time two good Bond films came out one after the other. Normally, we had to put up with some silly jaunt through camp-town every other film. At least after Golden Eye. My only complaint is, if Bond is so damned heart broken and hurt over Vesper's death (enough so to make him defy his orders and government), then what's he doing shacking up with this new chick? If I'm supposed to buy his motivation in the film, it has to stay consistent. Only a minor complaint, though. The trailer still has me wanting more.
Looks like another quality Bond flick. I can't remember the last time two good Bond films came out one after the other. Normally, we had to put up with some silly jaunt through camp-town every other film. At least after Golden Eye. My only complaint is, if Bond is so damned heart broken and hurt over Vesper's death (enough so to make him defy his orders and government), then what's he doing shacking up with this new chick? If I'm supposed to buy his motivation in the film, it has to stay consistent. Only a minor complaint, though. The trailer still has me wanting more.
First Teaser Poster for SAW V - Jun 28, 2008 - 03:09pm
I hate to be the guy that has to be dickish, but this series went downhill with the second film. The first one was cool, and gave us something a little different with (surprisingly) little gore. But here comes the second flick, and everything is some crazy Rube Goldberg Device of Doom. The one from the first flick, the face device -- that was neat. But they took one neat idea and made it the focus, forsaking any smarts the franchise could have had for the "Wow! That crazy contraption just mutilated that guy/girl! Look at the blood!" If this one brings back what worked with the first flick (which in turn warranted the sequels, not the buckets of fake blood) then sign me up. But with the track record they have, I have little faith. It's just become a generic, boring franchise when it started out (and could have remained as) something so much more.
I hate to be the guy that has to be dickish, but this series went downhill with the second film. The first one was cool, and gave us something a little different with (surprisingly) little gore. But here comes the second flick, and everything is some crazy Rube Goldberg Device of Doom. The one from the first flick, the face device -- that was neat. But they took one neat idea and made it the focus, forsaking any smarts the franchise could have had for the "Wow! That crazy contraption just mutilated that guy/girl! Look at the blood!" If this one brings back what worked with the first flick (which in turn warranted the sequels, not the buckets of fake blood) then sign me up. But with the track record they have, I have little faith. It's just become a generic, boring franchise when it started out (and could have remained as) something so much more.
Sony Targetting May 2011 for SPIDER-MAN 4 - Jun 21, 2008 - 08:40pm
Sadly, since Spider Man 3 made money it stands to reason that Spidey Four will follow suit. The studios know this, and could not care less about what every one had against the garbage that has been, by and large, the whole Spidey film legacy. They'll screw the pooch as much as they want, or at least until they see a serious dip in profits. I would love to see Spidey done correctly -- by Marvel Studios -- and with a better cast. Willam Dafoe, Thomas Hayden Church and Alfred Molina were cast well. The rest? All of them were so wrong for their parts.
Sadly, since Spider Man 3 made money it stands to reason that Spidey Four will follow suit. The studios know this, and could not care less about what every one had against the garbage that has been, by and large, the whole Spidey film legacy. They'll screw the pooch as much as they want, or at least until they see a serious dip in profits. I would love to see Spidey done correctly -- by Marvel Studios -- and with a better cast. Willam Dafoe, Thomas Hayden Church and Alfred Molina were cast well. The rest? All of them were so wrong for their parts.
Possible SAG Strike Fall Out Details - Jun 13, 2008 - 11:32am
I dunno... I tend to do my best to get behind those who strike, because typically there is a good reason. But I can't do that with the SAG. When you strike, or threaten to strike, every year because you could always stand to make more money (no matter how much more you make than other folks in the business) that's just greed. Not only that, but it's a desperate cry for attention. And God knows actors don't get enough of that any way.
I dunno... I tend to do my best to get behind those who strike, because typically there is a good reason. But I can't do that with the SAG. When you strike, or threaten to strike, every year because you could always stand to make more money (no matter how much more you make than other folks in the business) that's just greed. Not only that, but it's a desperate cry for attention. And God knows actors don't get enough of that any way.
Raimi Wants to Direct SPIDER-MAN 4? - Jun 07, 2008 - 09:20pm
Wolfman, Ponyboy: I agree. Dunst simply must go, and with her that ego she seems to be lugging around by her crooked teeth. As for Venom... with all due respect... No. Just no. "That story" did end. He got blown the F**k up. Please don't let venom back into the movie.
Wolfman, Ponyboy: I agree. Dunst simply must go, and with her that ego she seems to be lugging around by her crooked teeth. As for Venom... with all due respect... No. Just no. "That story" did end. He got blown the F**k up. Please don't let venom back into the movie.
New Redband trailer for Coens' BURN - May 30, 2008 - 10:03am
I dunno... The Coen Bros make such unique films, I'd be hesitant to not consider their work its own genre. The Coen genre, perhaps? Haha. I'm glad they're following up "No Country" with an original project, and that it's a dark comedy no less. I loved "No Country", but there isn't anything better than a story that starts, polishes and finishes in the joint-brain of the bros. September can't come soon enough.
I dunno... The Coen Bros make such unique films, I'd be hesitant to not consider their work its own genre. The Coen genre, perhaps? Haha. I'm glad they're following up "No Country" with an original project, and that it's a dark comedy no less. I loved "No Country", but there isn't anything better than a story that starts, polishes and finishes in the joint-brain of the bros. September can't come soon enough.
DIARY OF THE DEAD - May 26, 2008 - 09:23am
I am still hurting over the disappointment of this film. It was acted, written and directed more like a crummy Sci-Fi Original Movie rather than a true George A. Romero film. It felt like someone impersonating Romero. Since it wasn't, that just makes the whole ordeal that much more sad and pathetic. Plus, the whole "mocumentary" schtick only works if the characters feel real. They didn't. They still spoke like teens in a horror film. And the Professor? Always with the solemn, slurred philosophic quotations and traditional "thriller" tough guy dialogue. "It's time we leave this place." Who actually says that? "Let's go", "Let's get the Hell out of here". When you're panicking, the last thing on your mind is "How do I say this in the most old fashioned way -- because, you know, I'm a professor?" And the action scenes fell so flat. There was not a scary scene in the whole mess of film. Not one scene. Romero is better than this. And please don't let him do the CGI gore effects any more. Squibs work just as well, and they're just as cheap. I never thought I'd live to see the day when Romero would hand in something so pedestrian and boring. F-.
I am still hurting over the disappointment of this film. It was acted, written and directed more like a crummy Sci-Fi Original Movie rather than a true George A. Romero film. It felt like someone impersonating Romero. Since it wasn't, that just makes the whole ordeal that much more sad and pathetic. Plus, the whole "mocumentary" schtick only works if the characters feel real. They didn't. They still spoke like teens in a horror film. And the Professor? Always with the solemn, slurred philosophic quotations and traditional "thriller" tough guy dialogue. "It's time we leave this place." Who actually says that? "Let's go", "Let's get the Hell out of here". When you're panicking, the last thing on your mind is "How do I say this in the most old fashioned way -- because, you know, I'm a professor?" And the action scenes fell so flat. There was not a scary scene in the whole mess of film. Not one scene. Romero is better than this. And please don't let him do the CGI gore effects any more. Squibs work just as well, and they're just as cheap. I never thought I'd live to see the day when Romero would hand in something so pedestrian and boring. F-.
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - May 22, 2008 - 09:37pm
Yes, Flickman37, this story was too far fetched. Unless you remember the stories from the first three films: A magic box that held evil lightening ghosts, three magic stones that contained magical, burning diamonds inside of them, and a magical cup that fights old age and gun shot wounds -- as long as it doesn't leave the temple in which it is held. But really, when compared to those feasible Macguffins, the Crystal Skull and psychic commies are just too outlandish to be taken seriously. If ya want feasible Indiana Jones, you don't want Indiana Jones.
Yes, Flickman37, this story was too far fetched. Unless you remember the stories from the first three films: A magic box that held evil lightening ghosts, three magic stones that contained magical, burning diamonds inside of them, and a magical cup that fights old age and gun shot wounds -- as long as it doesn't leave the temple in which it is held. But really, when compared to those feasible Macguffins, the Crystal Skull and psychic commies are just too outlandish to be taken seriously. If ya want feasible Indiana Jones, you don't want Indiana Jones.
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - May 22, 2008 - 12:49pm
Truer words were never spoken, Hanso.
Truer words were never spoken, Hanso.
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - May 22, 2008 - 11:56am
Just got back from seeing it. I really liked it. Personally, I think it was better than Temple of Doom, at any rate. There wasn't some obnoxious broad running around screaming at everything. The sidekick wasn't ass mouthy and annoying (no great disrespect to Short Round), and the action was pretty fun. It made me feel like a little kid again, and that's rare. Easily the third best Indy adventure, in my book. Though, I do have to make a quick gripe: The ending, or at least the climax, was pretty bland and anti-climactic. I agree about the CGI being kinda weak. I think they should have stayed with practical effects. They managed to create more entertaining set pieces that way.
Just got back from seeing it. I really liked it. Personally, I think it was better than Temple of Doom, at any rate. There wasn't some obnoxious broad running around screaming at everything. The sidekick wasn't ass mouthy and annoying (no great disrespect to Short Round), and the action was pretty fun. It made me feel like a little kid again, and that's rare. Easily the third best Indy adventure, in my book. Though, I do have to make a quick gripe: The ending, or at least the climax, was pretty bland and anti-climactic. I agree about the CGI being kinda weak. I think they should have stayed with practical effects. They managed to create more entertaining set pieces that way.
SPIDER-MAN 4 & 5 Filmed Together? - May 17, 2008 - 01:31pm
I would love a re-cast of the major players. The only thing Spider Man 3 did for me was show how much better Topher grace would have played Parker (his Eddie Brock was really more like the comic Parker than the movies ever allowed), as well as proving that any one -- but especially Bryce Dallas Howard -- would have made a better MJ. I love the first two flicks, but there is no denying how wrong they got Parker and MJ. Parker was barely anything but sad all the time, like some wounded little brat. He lacked the panache Stan "The Man" Lee gave him in the comics. And MJ? She was supposed to be feisty and spunky, really hot and what not. But in the flicks, she was just boring, listless and, frankly, fugly.
I would love a re-cast of the major players. The only thing Spider Man 3 did for me was show how much better Topher grace would have played Parker (his Eddie Brock was really more like the comic Parker than the movies ever allowed), as well as proving that any one -- but especially Bryce Dallas Howard -- would have made a better MJ. I love the first two flicks, but there is no denying how wrong they got Parker and MJ. Parker was barely anything but sad all the time, like some wounded little brat. He lacked the panache Stan "The Man" Lee gave him in the comics. And MJ? She was supposed to be feisty and spunky, really hot and what not. But in the flicks, she was just boring, listless and, frankly, fugly.
JOKER Has the Last Smirk on New Banner - May 17, 2008 - 01:22pm
It's all good Wiseguy. I noticed the other day that the clip was pulled from Youtube, and I was beginning to get a little pissed as well. I only got to see it once, and was jonsing to see it again.
It's all good Wiseguy. I noticed the other day that the clip was pulled from Youtube, and I was beginning to get a little pissed as well. I only got to see it once, and was jonsing to see it again.
JOKER Has the Last Smirk on New Banner - May 17, 2008 - 09:28am
Wiseguy: I think that whole bit is in the movie. In the trailer, it shows a bunch of clips from the snippit (the goons rapelling from the rooftop into the bank, the two goons and a masked joker barging into the bank's front door). I don't think it's any sort of special feature hat will be saved for the DVD.
Wiseguy: I think that whole bit is in the movie. In the trailer, it shows a bunch of clips from the snippit (the goons rapelling from the rooftop into the bank, the two goons and a masked joker barging into the bank's front door). I don't think it's any sort of special feature hat will be saved for the DVD.
New Facts On RE5 Come Out - May 16, 2008 - 07:23am
Sweet! I have been waiting for Chris to come back, man. With the awesome gameplay of RE4 being incorporated, this should be another terrifying, amazingly fun romp through the RE universe. Though, on the topic of the game's "controversy" in regards to him killing Africans: People need to find something more important to throw a fit over. I didn't hear any one complain when Leon Kennedy went around killing nothing but South American's for two-thirds of RE4. It just makes sense; If Chris is in a small African town, he's going to encounter Africans. If they're the ones infected, well, they're gettin' shot/stabbed/punched. This society is too damned sensitive.
Sweet! I have been waiting for Chris to come back, man. With the awesome gameplay of RE4 being incorporated, this should be another terrifying, amazingly fun romp through the RE universe. Though, on the topic of the game's "controversy" in regards to him killing Africans: People need to find something more important to throw a fit over. I didn't hear any one complain when Leon Kennedy went around killing nothing but South American's for two-thirds of RE4. It just makes sense; If Chris is in a small African town, he's going to encounter Africans. If they're the ones infected, well, they're gettin' shot/stabbed/punched. This society is too damned sensitive.
Mumbling Kitsune: Go Speed Racer - May 12, 2008 - 08:06am
I lost a great deal of respect for Anime via association with its fans, having worked in a book/dvd store. I'm not sure if the parents of Animaniacs never got around to teaching them how to clean up after themselves, use indoor voices, or respect people's personal space or what have you, but as such I can only see this fascination with Anime as partly responsible for our children growing up slovenly, lazy and stupid. Please don't feel the need to make more into live action films that will draw respectable kids into this fad. Please... Oh, and I'm sure the movie did what it needed to do: get kids' asses into the seats.
I lost a great deal of respect for Anime via association with its fans, having worked in a book/dvd store. I'm not sure if the parents of Animaniacs never got around to teaching them how to clean up after themselves, use indoor voices, or respect people's personal space or what have you, but as such I can only see this fascination with Anime as partly responsible for our children growing up slovenly, lazy and stupid. Please don't feel the need to make more into live action films that will draw respectable kids into this fad. Please... Oh, and I'm sure the movie did what it needed to do: get kids' asses into the seats.
DRAGONBALL - Chatwin as Goku - May 12, 2008 - 07:35am
godsonfilm: As I am some what in the middle of this (I don't particularly care about this adaptation one way or another) let me offer a non-jaded opinion: This film is going to be awful. Marsters as Piccolo, James Wong directing, and no Vegeta. Three strikes, my friend. Three strikes.
godsonfilm: As I am some what in the middle of this (I don't particularly care about this adaptation one way or another) let me offer a non-jaded opinion: This film is going to be awful. Marsters as Piccolo, James Wong directing, and no Vegeta. Three strikes, my friend. Three strikes.
DONNIE DARKO Sequel - May 10, 2008 - 09:18am
I sorta-kinda like the first one. I dunno; after I saw the Director's Cut, the whole experience was ruined for me. And after seeing Southland Tales, I'm starting to think Kelly got lucky with the theatrical version of Darko. So I am in the camp that thinks this movie would be crappy, even with his involvement.
I sorta-kinda like the first one. I dunno; after I saw the Director's Cut, the whole experience was ruined for me. And after seeing Southland Tales, I'm starting to think Kelly got lucky with the theatrical version of Darko. So I am in the camp that thinks this movie would be crappy, even with his involvement.
New DARK KNIGHT Trailer Online - May 06, 2008 - 03:30pm
Hold on a moment: Come on, guys... Let's put this petty squabbling in the trash where it belongs. Regardless of some one's opinion about who nailed which part, or which director made the most "accurate" batman film (let's remember that it is all fictional, and has been rewritten and re-envisioned on numerous occasions -- thus making the arguments on "accuracy" a farce), let us just take solace in the fact that there is a gorgeously filmed, splendidly dark film in the works here. And for only eight or ten bucks, plus a few months wait, we'll get to sit back and watch one hell of a movie. Now, I personally don't like what Nicholson did with The Joker. To me, he wasn't threatening or unsettling. But that's just one man's opinion. Do I know if Ledger's Joker will be a geekgasm waiting to happen? Nah, I can't say that without seeing it in the context of the actual film. But I do know that every time I watch that trailer, I get chills. The first time I saw the portrait shot of Mr. J, I nearly shat myself in fear/disgust. To me, that's an awesome achievement. Any number of films can entertain me, but I think it's time for a villain to make me uneasy.
Hold on a moment: Come on, guys... Let's put this petty squabbling in the trash where it belongs. Regardless of some one's opinion about who nailed which part, or which director made the most "accurate" batman film (let's remember that it is all fictional, and has been rewritten and re-envisioned on numerous occasions -- thus making the arguments on "accuracy" a farce), let us just take solace in the fact that there is a gorgeously filmed, splendidly dark film in the works here. And for only eight or ten bucks, plus a few months wait, we'll get to sit back and watch one hell of a movie. Now, I personally don't like what Nicholson did with The Joker. To me, he wasn't threatening or unsettling. But that's just one man's opinion. Do I know if Ledger's Joker will be a geekgasm waiting to happen? Nah, I can't say that without seeing it in the context of the actual film. But I do know that every time I watch that trailer, I get chills. The first time I saw the portrait shot of Mr. J, I nearly shat myself in fear/disgust. To me, that's an awesome achievement. Any number of films can entertain me, but I think it's time for a villain to make me uneasy.
New DARK KNIGHT Trailer Online - May 05, 2008 - 06:37am
Well, I mean; it is a competition to the studios -- but to Hell with that noise. I'm just glad that we already have one seriously entertaining super hero flick this year, and that The Dark Knight (haters be damned) is shaping up to look even better. Well, maybe not better, but I will put money on the table that says it'll give me more chills than Iron Man did. Also, you can kind of see the burn creeping over to Dent's face in the clip of him riding in the car with a revolver in hand. So it looks like he'll be more active as Two-Face in the flick than most of us thought?
Well, I mean; it is a competition to the studios -- but to Hell with that noise. I'm just glad that we already have one seriously entertaining super hero flick this year, and that The Dark Knight (haters be damned) is shaping up to look even better. Well, maybe not better, but I will put money on the table that says it'll give me more chills than Iron Man did. Also, you can kind of see the burn creeping over to Dent's face in the clip of him riding in the car with a revolver in hand. So it looks like he'll be more active as Two-Face in the flick than most of us thought?
IRON MAN - May 03, 2008 - 07:27pm
I loved, loved, LOVED this one. I think it's safe to say that Marvel doing the work on all of their properties from now on is a good call. After all, they love their characters and know what is right for them. In lesser hands, this one really could have turned into some sort of preachy, dull commentary on the current political climate. And I have to agree with the poster above me. The tension and plot work for Obidiah was evident from the get go. I have been hearing a lot of people complain that he "just shifts to evil in no time". But if you pay attention to his dialogue and his body language, it's obvious he has always been evil and crazy -- or that he had suspicious dealings/plans from the get-go, at the very least. He wants the war to keep going, he wants to profit off of death, and he's so greedy for money and fame (which comes easily for Stark) that he'd step over his own mother if the chance presented itself. Look at that cover picture of one of the magazines at the awards ceremony. Where he's standing behind Stark. He's obviously scorned, thwarted, and his body posture just SCREAMS Machiavelli.
I loved, loved, LOVED this one. I think it's safe to say that Marvel doing the work on all of their properties from now on is a good call. After all, they love their characters and know what is right for them. In lesser hands, this one really could have turned into some sort of preachy, dull commentary on the current political climate. And I have to agree with the poster above me. The tension and plot work for Obidiah was evident from the get go. I have been hearing a lot of people complain that he "just shifts to evil in no time". But if you pay attention to his dialogue and his body language, it's obvious he has always been evil and crazy -- or that he had suspicious dealings/plans from the get-go, at the very least. He wants the war to keep going, he wants to profit off of death, and he's so greedy for money and fame (which comes easily for Stark) that he'd step over his own mother if the chance presented itself. Look at that cover picture of one of the magazines at the awards ceremony. Where he's standing behind Stark. He's obviously scorned, thwarted, and his body posture just SCREAMS Machiavelli.
New Trailer for Shyamalan's HAPPENING Online - May 03, 2008 - 09:28am
I dunno... I like the cast, but I'm always cautious when it comes to M. Night. The first two acts of his movies are always pretty stellar. But he tries too hard to make things mind-boggling or clever, and when that happens he ends up making a train wreck of the third act. Just once, I want this guy to make a movie I can enjoy all the way through. Hopefully his troubles early on in getting the script sold took a bite out of his hubris?
I dunno... I like the cast, but I'm always cautious when it comes to M. Night. The first two acts of his movies are always pretty stellar. But he tries too hard to make things mind-boggling or clever, and when that happens he ends up making a train wreck of the third act. Just once, I want this guy to make a movie I can enjoy all the way through. Hopefully his troubles early on in getting the script sold took a bite out of his hubris?
Final Poster & Trailer for Uwe Boll's POSTAL - Apr 26, 2008 - 06:46am
The best Osama impersonator they could find is John Goodman fat? What is this world coming to? I remember the glory days, like Hot Shots. That Sadam looked like the real deal. Tis a shame...
The best Osama impersonator they could find is John Goodman fat? What is this world coming to? I remember the glory days, like Hot Shots. That Sadam looked like the real deal. Tis a shame...
Del Toro Confirmed for HOBBIT Films - Apr 25, 2008 - 11:10am
I guess I'm the only who thinks the second "bridge-the-gap" film is unnecessary. Really and truly, what super important or enthralling events occurred in between the Hobbit and LOTR that warrants a film? To me, it just stinks of profit-hounding.
I guess I'm the only who thinks the second "bridge-the-gap" film is unnecessary. Really and truly, what super important or enthralling events occurred in between the Hobbit and LOTR that warrants a film? To me, it just stinks of profit-hounding.
First Victors for Mania Monster Madness - Apr 25, 2008 - 09:42am
Is it a "which villain is cooler" type competition? Not a "if these two slugged it out, who would win" type deal? If not, well, I don't know how to explain things. But, if we're just doing a bracketed competition to see who is cooler, then I can totally see Joker and Vader winning their "fights".
Is it a "which villain is cooler" type competition? Not a "if these two slugged it out, who would win" type deal? If not, well, I don't know how to explain things. But, if we're just doing a bracketed competition to see who is cooler, then I can totally see Joker and Vader winning their "fights".
Update: New KNIGHT Poster, Trailer Online Monday - Apr 25, 2008 - 09:38am
Gargoyle: Maybe The Joker did the deed and rigged the explosion in order to a) frame or b) mock Batman? Or, more over, perhaps its a poster meant to capture attention in order to help fill seats, not to be dissected and analyzed for "incorrectness"?
Gargoyle: Maybe The Joker did the deed and rigged the explosion in order to a) frame or b) mock Batman? Or, more over, perhaps its a poster meant to capture attention in order to help fill seats, not to be dissected and analyzed for "incorrectness"?
First Look Featurette for HANCOCK - Apr 24, 2008 - 11:47am
I'm always on the fence with Will Smith. I know he has what it takes to be a great actor (I loved him in "Ali"), and when he's just being entertaining he can some times border on annoying. But there is no denying that he has a gift. I am really looking forward to this flick, because it looks like he'll get to do more than be a witty Chris Tucker (not knocking Smith, just the parts he tends to get offered), to tread that line between being loud and funny as well seriously acting. Plus, like Ponyboy said, his work is always of a good quality. Even cinema snobs like most of us can agree with that.
I'm always on the fence with Will Smith. I know he has what it takes to be a great actor (I loved him in "Ali"), and when he's just being entertaining he can some times border on annoying. But there is no denying that he has a gift. I am really looking forward to this flick, because it looks like he'll get to do more than be a witty Chris Tucker (not knocking Smith, just the parts he tends to get offered), to tread that line between being loud and funny as well seriously acting. Plus, like Ponyboy said, his work is always of a good quality. Even cinema snobs like most of us can agree with that.
New SOLACE Pics Online From Chilean Set - Apr 04, 2008 - 06:50am
Aw Christ. Paul Haggis has made Bond a little boy. That was the only thing I couldn't deal with in Royal, was that he knew Vesper for a few hours and, all of a sudden, she's the "love of his life". And why does that have to be the catalyst for the whole damned remaining storyline about taking down Spectre? Shouldn't the motivation be, oh I dunno, that they're essentially the massive organization who has its hand in everything and is attempting to commit atrocities that range from genocide to robberies that start in the billions? But no, you're right; Bond should only be taking them down because they are responsible for killing some broad he knew for forty-eight hours and fell in love with. There's making characters human, and then there's making them melodramatic foibles. Haggis has the latter down in spades.
Aw Christ. Paul Haggis has made Bond a little boy. That was the only thing I couldn't deal with in Royal, was that he knew Vesper for a few hours and, all of a sudden, she's the "love of his life". And why does that have to be the catalyst for the whole damned remaining storyline about taking down Spectre? Shouldn't the motivation be, oh I dunno, that they're essentially the massive organization who has its hand in everything and is attempting to commit atrocities that range from genocide to robberies that start in the billions? But no, you're right; Bond should only be taking them down because they are responsible for killing some broad he knew for forty-eight hours and fell in love with. There's making characters human, and then there's making them melodramatic foibles. Haggis has the latter down in spades.
Raimi Leading New JACK RYAN Trilogy - Mar 19, 2008 - 08:37am
I hate seeing increasingly boring directors attach themselves to worn out, uninteresting properties. I think Raimi should get back to doing more intimate, low-budget work before going back to a franchise situation. Doesn't even have to be anything like "Drag Me To Hell". Let him find something more on the dramatic side, but don't let it be something with a mammoth budget and contractually derived sequels. He needs to find the artist in himself once more. Because, I hate to say it, since he did Spider-Man I've been getting the impression he's slipping into Hackdom without a care in the world.
I hate seeing increasingly boring directors attach themselves to worn out, uninteresting properties. I think Raimi should get back to doing more intimate, low-budget work before going back to a franchise situation. Doesn't even have to be anything like "Drag Me To Hell". Let him find something more on the dramatic side, but don't let it be something with a mammoth budget and contractually derived sequels. He needs to find the artist in himself once more. Because, I hate to say it, since he did Spider-Man I've been getting the impression he's slipping into Hackdom without a care in the world.
FUNNY GAMES - Mar 14, 2008 - 07:40pm
I love the orginal flick, which I bought not too long ago at a Virgin Megastore for what would have been too much money for most other flicks. At any rate... I dig how the movie is a commentary on how kids (even if they're rich, polite and "well bred") will sometimes turn to horrible acts of violence on account of being bored. "What do you want to do?" "Wanna go around hurting people?" "Sounds good!" This happens all too often. Hell, read a paper and chances are you'll find a story about some kid killing some one and his answer will be "I dunno why I did it". Yet, at the same time, it points out that we as an audience might not be much better. "You bored?" "Yeah..." "Wanna watch a movie where people get tortured and killed?!" "HELL YEAH!" Any way, I've rambled much too long. But I'm bored. Beats killin' families I guess.
I love the orginal flick, which I bought not too long ago at a Virgin Megastore for what would have been too much money for most other flicks. At any rate... I dig how the movie is a commentary on how kids (even if they're rich, polite and "well bred") will sometimes turn to horrible acts of violence on account of being bored. "What do you want to do?" "Wanna go around hurting people?" "Sounds good!" This happens all too often. Hell, read a paper and chances are you'll find a story about some kid killing some one and his answer will be "I dunno why I did it". Yet, at the same time, it points out that we as an audience might not be much better. "You bored?" "Yeah..." "Wanna watch a movie where people get tortured and killed?!" "HELL YEAH!" Any way, I've rambled much too long. But I'm bored. Beats killin' families I guess.
Watching the Watchmen - Mar 12, 2008 - 08:34am
I agree that B&R was a near death sentence for Batman films, but not superhero films in general. Honestly, during those days it was one of the only comic films being done. We didn't have Spider-Man yet, or X-Men. And Superman had been done with for a while before hand. If you ask me, the flick that was more likely to do damage to comic films as a whole, not as a select few "likely to succeed" properties, was The Phantom. You know, Billy Zane in the silly purple tights. Treat Williams trying to act like a bad ass. That film didn't put much faith into the public that Superheroes could be worth watching if they weren't Batman or Superman. At any rate, I'm not sure that Watchman could spell the end for Superhero films. If it's anything like the comic, it will be quite heavy and, for a superhero story, pretentious. But that won't tell Hollywood that Superhero films can't be profitable. We'll just continue to get drivle like Spider Man 3 and Fantastic Four, Namor, Venom, Wolverine... any of the garbage that can sustain any number of Superhero films for a long, long time. Let's say that Watchmen does fail. Will the following product be more style, less substance? Probably. But they'll probably make money and thrill people looking for FX pieces. It won't be the end of Superhero films. Not by a long shot.
I agree that B&R was a near death sentence for Batman films, but not superhero films in general. Honestly, during those days it was one of the only comic films being done. We didn't have Spider-Man yet, or X-Men. And Superman had been done with for a while before hand. If you ask me, the flick that was more likely to do damage to comic films as a whole, not as a select few "likely to succeed" properties, was The Phantom. You know, Billy Zane in the silly purple tights. Treat Williams trying to act like a bad ass. That film didn't put much faith into the public that Superheroes could be worth watching if they weren't Batman or Superman. At any rate, I'm not sure that Watchman could spell the end for Superhero films. If it's anything like the comic, it will be quite heavy and, for a superhero story, pretentious. But that won't tell Hollywood that Superhero films can't be profitable. We'll just continue to get drivle like Spider Man 3 and Fantastic Four, Namor, Venom, Wolverine... any of the garbage that can sustain any number of Superhero films for a long, long time. Let's say that Watchmen does fail. Will the following product be more style, less substance? Probably. But they'll probably make money and thrill people looking for FX pieces. It won't be the end of Superhero films. Not by a long shot.
Michelle Rodriquez Back in FURIOUS 4 - Mar 06, 2008 - 10:05am
I'm sorry, but I'm not a fan of Michelle. I wouldn't even go so far as saying that she is reasonably easy on the eyes, let alone "hot". She has a stroke face, like Katie Holmes. Just sayin.
I'm sorry, but I'm not a fan of Michelle. I wouldn't even go so far as saying that she is reasonably easy on the eyes, let alone "hot". She has a stroke face, like Katie Holmes. Just sayin.
First Pics from Smith's PORNO and THUNDER - Mar 05, 2008 - 04:00pm
Robert Downey is always good in whatever film he's in. Jack Black and Ben Stiller, though... I dunno. They wear out their schtick a little too easily. But I agree, this seems like a potentially hilarious flick. As for Kevin Smith's flick, well, what can be said? Hopefully Seth Rogan can teach him how to make things funny.
Robert Downey is always good in whatever film he's in. Jack Black and Ben Stiller, though... I dunno. They wear out their schtick a little too easily. But I agree, this seems like a potentially hilarious flick. As for Kevin Smith's flick, well, what can be said? Hopefully Seth Rogan can teach him how to make things funny.
First look of Liev Schreiber As CREED - Mar 05, 2008 - 09:55am
Also: What's the point in a stand-alone Wolverine Movie? The whole X-Men Trilogy was about him any way. Cyclops should have been the one to confront and finish off Jean in X-3 as, you know, the two were friggin' Husband and Wife. They need to take whatever money this movie is likely to make, and put it to good use. They should re-invent the X-Men franchise with a director who gives a shit about The X-MEN, and not just the most popular character.
Also: What's the point in a stand-alone Wolverine Movie? The whole X-Men Trilogy was about him any way. Cyclops should have been the one to confront and finish off Jean in X-3 as, you know, the two were friggin' Husband and Wife. They need to take whatever money this movie is likely to make, and put it to good use. They should re-invent the X-Men franchise with a director who gives a shit about The X-MEN, and not just the most popular character.
First look of Liev Schreiber As CREED - Mar 05, 2008 - 09:50am
I once said I couldn't see Liev as Creed. I now think he can pull it off. But, really, it doesn't matter; this movie is going to be utter crap. There isn't any way it could be anything else.
I once said I couldn't see Liev as Creed. I now think he can pull it off. But, really, it doesn't matter; this movie is going to be utter crap. There isn't any way it could be anything else.
SAG Causing High Profile Film Delays? - Feb 28, 2008 - 09:12am
I could get behind the writers' strike, but I can never get behind a strike for the SAG. I mean, really, if any one is getting walked over in Hollywood, it sure as shit isn't the actors. Really, the SAG threatens to strike all the time. If they were more low-key about it, I'd be more willing to sympathize. But they threaten it every other year and, in the end, it's just because forty million dollar paychecks don't cut it any more. But most actors tend to be a very spoiled, demanding lot. They'll get what they want.
I could get behind the writers' strike, but I can never get behind a strike for the SAG. I mean, really, if any one is getting walked over in Hollywood, it sure as shit isn't the actors. Really, the SAG threatens to strike all the time. If they were more low-key about it, I'd be more willing to sympathize. But they threaten it every other year and, in the end, it's just because forty million dollar paychecks don't cut it any more. But most actors tend to be a very spoiled, demanding lot. They'll get what they want.
Anime and the Holocaust - Feb 28, 2008 - 08:58am
As a Jew myself, I can say I don't find the story all that offensive. Now, had the kirin been in the story to save the Nazi's and re-write history... yeah, that would have been in poor taste. I like to think that most of the people who read this stuff (not my cup of tea, but hey; different strokes for different folks) understand that it's just some artistic license being had. Then again, I do see an awful lot of men and women come into the bookstore I work at with those little cat ears on their heads, honest-to-god believing they are some special, magical cat-human. So, really, I couldn't even begin to judge the merrit of a story like this on the dellusional crowd mentioned above. Hey; if it makes for good reading, it can't be too terrible.
As a Jew myself, I can say I don't find the story all that offensive. Now, had the kirin been in the story to save the Nazi's and re-write history... yeah, that would have been in poor taste. I like to think that most of the people who read this stuff (not my cup of tea, but hey; different strokes for different folks) understand that it's just some artistic license being had. Then again, I do see an awful lot of men and women come into the bookstore I work at with those little cat ears on their heads, honest-to-god believing they are some special, magical cat-human. So, really, I couldn't even begin to judge the merrit of a story like this on the dellusional crowd mentioned above. Hey; if it makes for good reading, it can't be too terrible.
The Oscars Are Happening: Do You Care? - Feb 25, 2008 - 10:04am
I tend to doubt that people "buy" their oscars. I think that's an easy excuse for people to make when their favorite film loses. I don't think that Crash had any right being best picture that particular year, but it won. Do I think Paul Hagas or his producers bribed the academy? No. Frankly, I feel that people are still so naive about race relations that they thought the film was powerful enough to be "Best Picture". Maybe Hollywood thought some melodramatic after school special could fix intolerance, even though decades of civil rights championing from intelligent men and women couldn't completely eradicate the problem. My point is this, though: There is no logic to how most people vote. Every one has different tastes, and in a year like 2007, when the films were very strong, it could have gone any-which-way. But the people that deserved to win, won... except for all the Bourne Ultimatim love. I don't understand that at all.
I tend to doubt that people "buy" their oscars. I think that's an easy excuse for people to make when their favorite film loses. I don't think that Crash had any right being best picture that particular year, but it won. Do I think Paul Hagas or his producers bribed the academy? No. Frankly, I feel that people are still so naive about race relations that they thought the film was powerful enough to be "Best Picture". Maybe Hollywood thought some melodramatic after school special could fix intolerance, even though decades of civil rights championing from intelligent men and women couldn't completely eradicate the problem. My point is this, though: There is no logic to how most people vote. Every one has different tastes, and in a year like 2007, when the films were very strong, it could have gone any-which-way. But the people that deserved to win, won... except for all the Bourne Ultimatim love. I don't understand that at all.
And The Oscar Goes To... - Feb 25, 2008 - 08:50am
Hey! The best picture actually won Best Picture this year. That hasn't happened in a long time. But to Freddyfred27: Simply put, everything about No Country was done right. No hate towards "There Will Be Blood", but in watching it I saw at least thirty minutes of story that could have been gotten rid of that would have made the film better and to help it move quicker. Atonement was a bloated, boring affair. There's a reason people keep referring to it as the "next" Titanic... only it didn't get lucky enough to win best picture. Michale Clayton was dull, and had one of the single most lazy endings I have ever experienced. The onyl way it could have been more cliched or tired was if it had all been a dream. And Juno was a fun, touching film, but it won the award it deserved earlier in the night. "No Country" had solid acting, a solid narrative, and solid execution. The Coen's wisely made Chigurh less of a character than McCarthy had written him in his book. Instead, they made him an honest-to-God force of Violence and Consequence. As for any one's complaint about the ending... How should it have ended? With Tommy Lee Jones catching Bardem and retiring a happy, content old man? That wouldn't match with the themes, the tone, or the plot. Plus, if it deserves the award for no other reason, it deserves it because it brought the Coen's back from the shitty place they were at when they made "Intolerable Cruelty" and "The Ladykillers" remake.
Hey! The best picture actually won Best Picture this year. That hasn't happened in a long time. But to Freddyfred27: Simply put, everything about No Country was done right. No hate towards "There Will Be Blood", but in watching it I saw at least thirty minutes of story that could have been gotten rid of that would have made the film better and to help it move quicker. Atonement was a bloated, boring affair. There's a reason people keep referring to it as the "next" Titanic... only it didn't get lucky enough to win best picture. Michale Clayton was dull, and had one of the single most lazy endings I have ever experienced. The onyl way it could have been more cliched or tired was if it had all been a dream. And Juno was a fun, touching film, but it won the award it deserved earlier in the night. "No Country" had solid acting, a solid narrative, and solid execution. The Coen's wisely made Chigurh less of a character than McCarthy had written him in his book. Instead, they made him an honest-to-God force of Violence and Consequence. As for any one's complaint about the ending... How should it have ended? With Tommy Lee Jones catching Bardem and retiring a happy, content old man? That wouldn't match with the themes, the tone, or the plot. Plus, if it deserves the award for no other reason, it deserves it because it brought the Coen's back from the shitty place they were at when they made "Intolerable Cruelty" and "The Ladykillers" remake.
Danny Huston Hunts After WOLVERINE - Feb 16, 2008 - 10:08am
Hmmm... The only problem with having Huston replace Ledger in this hypothetical situation is that he is visably older than Ledger, and also much lankier. But were he a younger man, I'd agree with you 100%. My only hope is that Joker does die in Dark Knight, thus removing any awkward re-casting situations. As for the actual news here, though, I can see him passing for a younger Stryker. He's no Brian Cox, but he should do well. I still don't know how I feel about Liev Schreiber playing Creed, though. He's got the acting chops, but he doesn't scream Sabertooth to me.
Hmmm... The only problem with having Huston replace Ledger in this hypothetical situation is that he is visably older than Ledger, and also much lankier. But were he a younger man, I'd agree with you 100%. My only hope is that Joker does die in Dark Knight, thus removing any awkward re-casting situations. As for the actual news here, though, I can see him passing for a younger Stryker. He's no Brian Cox, but he should do well. I still don't know how I feel about Liev Schreiber playing Creed, though. He's got the acting chops, but he doesn't scream Sabertooth to me.
JUMPER - Feb 14, 2008 - 12:06pm
I dig the premise, and the sfx seem pretty airtight. I just can't stand Hayden Christiansen. That guy can't deliver lines to save his soul. He always sounds so... vacant? Also, wasradone: If you're going to harp on things for a lack of originality, ya probably shouldn't use Heroes as the contradicting argument. There's nothing original about that show.
I dig the premise, and the sfx seem pretty airtight. I just can't stand Hayden Christiansen. That guy can't deliver lines to save his soul. He always sounds so... vacant? Also, wasradone: If you're going to harp on things for a lack of originality, ya probably shouldn't use Heroes as the contradicting argument. There's nothing original about that show.
Coen Bros. Adapting YIDDISH Police Tale - Feb 12, 2008 - 08:24pm
I love the Brothers Coen. Brilliant filmmakers, really. As for "There Will Be Blood"... I loved it. But I think it was thirty minutes too long, and could have been just as powerful and delivered the same sentiments without the sub-plot about his long-lost brother. Really, that whole sub-plot went nowhere. It didn't tell us anything about Daniel that hadn't already been made clear, and it certainly didn't add anything to the film -- except time. Apart from that, though, I loved every frame of that film. It wouldn't bum me out if it won over "No Country" at all, no matter how biased I am for the Coen Bros. I'm just glad it was such a good year for cinema, and not just for movies.
I love the Brothers Coen. Brilliant filmmakers, really. As for "There Will Be Blood"... I loved it. But I think it was thirty minutes too long, and could have been just as powerful and delivered the same sentiments without the sub-plot about his long-lost brother. Really, that whole sub-plot went nowhere. It didn't tell us anything about Daniel that hadn't already been made clear, and it certainly didn't add anything to the film -- except time. Apart from that, though, I loved every frame of that film. It wouldn't bum me out if it won over "No Country" at all, no matter how biased I am for the Coen Bros. I'm just glad it was such a good year for cinema, and not just for movies.
First Trailer for M.Night's HAPPENING - Feb 04, 2008 - 10:34pm
I might just see this as it marks the first time some one talked M. Night into, you know, go back to the drawing board to fix whatever glaring problem his script had the first time around. Maybe this will be his first film that is consistently good from beginning through to the end. And I'm not ragging on the guy, so much as I am commenting that his flicks are usually decent for the first two acts. But then he tries too hard to be clever, or just loses interest, and things fall apart from then on.
I might just see this as it marks the first time some one talked M. Night into, you know, go back to the drawing board to fix whatever glaring problem his script had the first time around. Maybe this will be his first film that is consistently good from beginning through to the end. And I'm not ragging on the guy, so much as I am commenting that his flicks are usually decent for the first two acts. But then he tries too hard to be clever, or just loses interest, and things fall apart from then on.
Vanderbilt Updates on Writing SPIDER-MAN 4 - Feb 03, 2008 - 06:10am
Personally, the only thing Spider Man did for me was prove how mis-cast the two lead characters were. Topher Grace would have been a better Peter Parker/Spider Man, especially when it comes down to Spidey's over all sarcastic/corny sense of humor (which Toby McGuire, in my opinion, just couldn't pull off), and Bryce Dallas Howard would have been a better Mary Jane. She's sexier looking for one, and her confidence and ability to play sexy trumps anything Dunst ever could have done. But really, I dig the other two films. My only gripe is that the two main roles are not written like they were in the comic books. Peter is too sad all the time, and M.J. isn't fiery at all. She's barely room temperature.
Personally, the only thing Spider Man did for me was prove how mis-cast the two lead characters were. Topher Grace would have been a better Peter Parker/Spider Man, especially when it comes down to Spidey's over all sarcastic/corny sense of humor (which Toby McGuire, in my opinion, just couldn't pull off), and Bryce Dallas Howard would have been a better Mary Jane. She's sexier looking for one, and her confidence and ability to play sexy trumps anything Dunst ever could have done. But really, I dig the other two films. My only gripe is that the two main roles are not written like they were in the comic books. Peter is too sad all the time, and M.J. isn't fiery at all. She's barely room temperature.
Dreamworks Acquires Ghostly ACTIVITY - Jan 31, 2008 - 02:23pm
I saw the trailer for this a while back. Maybe on Chud.com... At any rate, I think they go handheld with the camera as well, so... well, as Madmanic999 put it, any "b#$%#s that can't even ride a tilt-a-whirl..." need not apply.
I saw the trailer for this a while back. Maybe on Chud.com... At any rate, I think they go handheld with the camera as well, so... well, as Madmanic999 put it, any "b#$%#s that can't even ride a tilt-a-whirl..." need not apply.
SUPERHERO Spoof Trailer Online - Jan 31, 2008 - 02:17pm
I'm not sure I'm ready to see this. The trailer alone has me giving up on Leslie Neilson's ability to be funny... something that started with Dracula: Dead and Loving It, then almost completely re-enforced by 2001: A Space Travesty.
I'm not sure I'm ready to see this. The trailer alone has me giving up on Leslie Neilson's ability to be funny... something that started with Dracula: Dead and Loving It, then almost completely re-enforced by 2001: A Space Travesty.
Paramount Confirms CLOVERFIELD 2 - Jan 31, 2008 - 12:19pm
I dug Cloverfield for what it was. Should it win any awards? Will it change any one's life? Nah, but come on; for a giant monster movie it turned out really well. Especially given how tired and boring those things have become lately. At any rate, I agree that no one should have been surprised by this. I smelled sequel the minute the teaser came to a close before Transformers, and every one turned to look at the person next to them and said "Huh?!". Also, Matt Reaves said in an interview that ****SPOILER**** The object falling into the ocean at the end was not the monster, and that it had lived underwater long before this film ever took place. ****END SPOILER**** I don't know, but that's what was said.
I dug Cloverfield for what it was. Should it win any awards? Will it change any one's life? Nah, but come on; for a giant monster movie it turned out really well. Especially given how tired and boring those things have become lately. At any rate, I agree that no one should have been surprised by this. I smelled sequel the minute the teaser came to a close before Transformers, and every one turned to look at the person next to them and said "Huh?!". Also, Matt Reaves said in an interview that ****SPOILER**** The object falling into the ocean at the end was not the monster, and that it had lived underwater long before this film ever took place. ****END SPOILER**** I don't know, but that's what was said.
Del Toro Directing Both HOBBIT Films - Jan 28, 2008 - 08:51pm
Oh, Sweet Mother of God... I am more excited about this than the Harry Potter possibility. Del Toror has a vision unlike any one else, and everything he does is just beautiful -- even when it's so horrible and disgusting. Sweet.
Oh, Sweet Mother of God... I am more excited about this than the Harry Potter possibility. Del Toror has a vision unlike any one else, and everything he does is just beautiful -- even when it's so horrible and disgusting. Sweet.
New TV Series Based on CRASH - Jan 28, 2008 - 08:46pm
I'll agree that the story is not convoluted or "stupid", but here's the thing about Crash, in one man's opinion: It wasn't the important, intillectual film it is boasted as. I've actually had a great time watching people defend this film. Every time, without fail, they seem to get a superiority complex. Essentially it boils down to them saying "If you don't like it, you OBVIOUSLY didn't get it and are an idiot". Can't follow a multi-story arc? All films are multi-story narratives, even if they don't jump out and smack you in the face until you acknowledge it. And when the multi-stories in this film all follow the same general formula, it becomes the easiest thing in the world to follow them. All you have to do is concede that none of them are going anywhere unique or interesting. If you, as a filmmaker, want people to care about your characters, then you need to give them unique motivations and flaws. As it stands, these characters were just cut-and-paste from one story to the next. It was a big-budgeted afterschool special. The "characters" had no real life behind them. And it pains me to say that about Terrence Howard and Matt Dillon. They were all poorly formed parodies of the prejudice and paranoia in man. The story arcs held no surprises, at least not in how they would come together in their respective ends. There was nothing close to a revelation in the script. The film, really, was alright. It was nothing special. Powerful? Not by a long shot. Only one scene made me feel anything, and that was when the old man tried to kill the Latino locksmith, and they led us to believe the little girl was shot instead. A three minute scene out of... what... ninety-something minutes all told? That part made me gasp and whimper out "Oh... F**k no..." Everything else? Unmoved. It just preached instead of entertained, and the only people who eat that up are people who want to be preached to. And don't get me wrong; some times preaching is a good thing, but not when the person preaching assumes his audience is full of uninformed dolts. The big thing that makes disdain grow against this flick? The supporters tend to think they're part of a small, priviledged club that understands the film. It's like those gifted kids in school; they aren't actually smarter than any one, but their egos lead them to join their little club. And then they start believing that any one outside of the club is undeserving of the opportunity to walk next to them. But really, all they demonstrate is that they are elitist braggarts with no more grey matter in their noggins than those whom they belittle. Is it absolutely without merrit? No, of course not. Was it worthy of best picture? Not in my opinion, but I'm just one man. If you view this film as the gift from God some treat it as, that's your right. But don't go marking those who disliked it as idiotic buffoons. Just a little respect, even if you have to hide your massive egos to pretend to offer even the slightest amount. And yes, I include myself in that category as I'm guilty of the same flaw from time to time.
I'll agree that the story is not convoluted or "stupid", but here's the thing about Crash, in one man's opinion: It wasn't the important, intillectual film it is boasted as. I've actually had a great time watching people defend this film. Every time, without fail, they seem to get a superiority complex. Essentially it boils down to them saying "If you don't like it, you OBVIOUSLY didn't get it and are an idiot". Can't follow a multi-story arc? All films are multi-story narratives, even if they don't jump out and smack you in the face until you acknowledge it. And when the multi-stories in this film all follow the same general formula, it becomes the easiest thing in the world to follow them. All you have to do is concede that none of them are going anywhere unique or interesting. If you, as a filmmaker, want people to care about your characters, then you need to give them unique motivations and flaws. As it stands, these characters were just cut-and-paste from one story to the next. It was a big-budgeted afterschool special. The "characters" had no real life behind them. And it pains me to say that about Terrence Howard and Matt Dillon. They were all poorly formed parodies of the prejudice and paranoia in man. The story arcs held no surprises, at least not in how they would come together in their respective ends. There was nothing close to a revelation in the script. The film, really, was alright. It was nothing special. Powerful? Not by a long shot. Only one scene made me feel anything, and that was when the old man tried to kill the Latino locksmith, and they led us to believe the little girl was shot instead. A three minute scene out of... what... ninety-something minutes all told? That part made me gasp and whimper out "Oh... F**k no..." Everything else? Unmoved. It just preached instead of entertained, and the only people who eat that up are people who want to be preached to. And don't get me wrong; some times preaching is a good thing, but not when the person preaching assumes his audience is full of uninformed dolts. The big thing that makes disdain grow against this flick? The supporters tend to think they're part of a small, priviledged club that understands the film. It's like those gifted kids in school; they aren't actually smarter than any one, but their egos lead them to join their little club. And then they start believing that any one outside of the club is undeserving of the opportunity to walk next to them. But really, all they demonstrate is that they are elitist braggarts with no more grey matter in their noggins than those whom they belittle. Is it absolutely without merrit? No, of course not. Was it worthy of best picture? Not in my opinion, but I'm just one man. If you view this film as the gift from God some treat it as, that's your right. But don't go marking those who disliked it as idiotic buffoons. Just a little respect, even if you have to hide your massive egos to pretend to offer even the slightest amount. And yes, I include myself in that category as I'm guilty of the same flaw from time to time.
Bond 22 Has a New 'Quantum' Title - Jan 24, 2008 - 04:17pm
So the follow up to Casino Royal deals more with Bond going after the guys that killed his girlfriend instead of some legitimate, top-secret and government issued mission? Curse you Haggis!!!!! But nah, since the guys are the same ones behind the big, bad syndicate of evil that he's supposed to be fighting any way, well... I guess it's no big deal. I just don't want to see Bond turned into some sapp.
So the follow up to Casino Royal deals more with Bond going after the guys that killed his girlfriend instead of some legitimate, top-secret and government issued mission? Curse you Haggis!!!!! But nah, since the guys are the same ones behind the big, bad syndicate of evil that he's supposed to be fighting any way, well... I guess it's no big deal. I just don't want to see Bond turned into some sapp.
CLOVERFIELD - Jan 19, 2008 - 02:17pm
Alright: I liked the movie. I went in with expectations ranging in the middle, and found them to be beneath what this film turned out to be. I was very pleasently surprised that it wasn't the let down I suspected it may have been. But here's my big gripe with people's gripes about the film: The ending. SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: When a movie starts out by telling you "hey, we found this video in central park -- a destroyed, ruined central park", you shouldn't expect to know anything more than the tape is going to contain. It would have ruined the film if they put us through this barrage of hand-held carnage only to spend the last fifteen minutes "solving the monster problem" in a typical formulaic way. Why are some people so enraged by seeing a movie that doesn't tell the audience every little detail? We were meant to see this incident how it happened on tape, as if we had secured a copy. We weren't meant to learn anything more than we did, and the marketing certainly didn't give any one the impression that we would. To me, that's like hating on a film for being in black and white. Also, yes; There Will be Blood was fucking brilliant! To me, between "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood", people can finally face facts and admit that Citizen Kane is not the best film of all time. ;)
Alright: I liked the movie. I went in with expectations ranging in the middle, and found them to be beneath what this film turned out to be. I was very pleasently surprised that it wasn't the let down I suspected it may have been. But here's my big gripe with people's gripes about the film: The ending. SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!: When a movie starts out by telling you "hey, we found this video in central park -- a destroyed, ruined central park", you shouldn't expect to know anything more than the tape is going to contain. It would have ruined the film if they put us through this barrage of hand-held carnage only to spend the last fifteen minutes "solving the monster problem" in a typical formulaic way. Why are some people so enraged by seeing a movie that doesn't tell the audience every little detail? We were meant to see this incident how it happened on tape, as if we had secured a copy. We weren't meant to learn anything more than we did, and the marketing certainly didn't give any one the impression that we would. To me, that's like hating on a film for being in black and white. Also, yes; There Will be Blood was fucking brilliant! To me, between "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood", people can finally face facts and admit that Citizen Kane is not the best film of all time. ;)
And the Golden Globe Winners Are... - Jan 14, 2008 - 07:17am
Brenden: Juno was pretty damn good. I was sure it was going to be funny, but I was worried it was going to just rely too much on "listen to how clever my dialogue is" -- a tactic that too many movies try to exploit waaaay too much. But no, it was actually subdued and pitch perfect. No Country's wit was much more subtle and, maybe the best way to put it, quiet. I absolutely agree that its visuals were very strong, and you're right that the audible power it possessed probably wouldn't pack the same punch on paper. Here's hoping Juno gets some love at the Oscars as well.
Brenden: Juno was pretty damn good. I was sure it was going to be funny, but I was worried it was going to just rely too much on "listen to how clever my dialogue is" -- a tactic that too many movies try to exploit waaaay too much. But no, it was actually subdued and pitch perfect. No Country's wit was much more subtle and, maybe the best way to put it, quiet. I absolutely agree that its visuals were very strong, and you're right that the audible power it possessed probably wouldn't pack the same punch on paper. Here's hoping Juno gets some love at the Oscars as well.
And the Golden Globe Winners Are... - Jan 14, 2008 - 06:14am
Oh bother... How, in these trying and uncertain times, can people not give the Coen Brothers all the love they deserve? Atonement may have been a good flick (I dunno. Didn't see it), but the fact that "No Country" is a good Coen Brothers film made within the last ten years makes it the cinematic Second Coming of Christ. I hope they get more love at the Oscars -- especially where a little "Best Picture" nomination is concerned.
Oh bother... How, in these trying and uncertain times, can people not give the Coen Brothers all the love they deserve? Atonement may have been a good flick (I dunno. Didn't see it), but the fact that "No Country" is a good Coen Brothers film made within the last ten years makes it the cinematic Second Coming of Christ. I hope they get more love at the Oscars -- especially where a little "Best Picture" nomination is concerned.
BOND 22 Begins Filming Thursday - Dec 31, 2007 - 11:25am
I couldn't stand Die Another Day -- or really any of the bond movies in the last three decades. I dug Golden Eye, but because it seemed to go back to Bond being, ya know, a spy. Not some superhero with the world's most idiotic gadgets. Though I'm no huge fan of Haggis, I dig what he was able to do with Bond in Casino Royal. He does well with adding a human element, so long as their is some one there to keep him restrained. I don't want him turning Bond into a total after school special like "Crash". Some of the traditional elements need to stay with the franchise, like island/country hopping. Now if you'll excuse me, I must be off. I have a very banal vacation lined up that takes me to Bucharist, Prague, Cuba, Hawaii and Iceland. Exotic locals are such a bore...
I couldn't stand Die Another Day -- or really any of the bond movies in the last three decades. I dug Golden Eye, but because it seemed to go back to Bond being, ya know, a spy. Not some superhero with the world's most idiotic gadgets. Though I'm no huge fan of Haggis, I dig what he was able to do with Bond in Casino Royal. He does well with adding a human element, so long as their is some one there to keep him restrained. I don't want him turning Bond into a total after school special like "Crash". Some of the traditional elements need to stay with the franchise, like island/country hopping. Now if you'll excuse me, I must be off. I have a very banal vacation lined up that takes me to Bucharist, Prague, Cuba, Hawaii and Iceland. Exotic locals are such a bore...
First Teaser Trailer for HELLBOY II - Dec 20, 2007 - 07:37pm
Yeah, John Myers isn't going to be in the flick. I forget why, but it's alright. It looks as though they've replaced him with an ass-ton of monsters! Oh, and Johann Kraus. I'm glad he made the cut and was put in the flick. I think he replaces Myers, or something.
Yeah, John Myers isn't going to be in the flick. I forget why, but it's alright. It looks as though they've replaced him with an ass-ton of monsters! Oh, and Johann Kraus. I'm glad he made the cut and was put in the flick. I think he replaces Myers, or something.
First Teaser Trailer for HELLBOY II - Dec 20, 2007 - 06:35pm
I like Guillermo Del Toro for this reason: He can go from making truly remarkable films that should give him such a genius-complex, then he takes the time to do fun movie like Hellboy and still loves what he's doing. He never really slows down as far as his enthusiasm is concerned, and that's why I thik his films (even his lesser films, like Mimic) are leaps and bounds better than most other directors' "masterpieces". Lead the way, Del Toro. This film buff will follow you any where you plan on taking us (especially if you plan on having a go with "At The Mountains of Madness")
I like Guillermo Del Toro for this reason: He can go from making truly remarkable films that should give him such a genius-complex, then he takes the time to do fun movie like Hellboy and still loves what he's doing. He never really slows down as far as his enthusiasm is concerned, and that's why I thik his films (even his lesser films, like Mimic) are leaps and bounds better than most other directors' "masterpieces". Lead the way, Del Toro. This film buff will follow you any where you plan on taking us (especially if you plan on having a go with "At The Mountains of Madness")
DARK KNIGHT Trailer Officially Hits the Web - Dec 17, 2007 - 09:25pm
Metalwater: Sorry for misreading your post about Dead End. I guess I was just on a tear. But really, my main gripe is that even since Batman Begins started production, every one and their mother seemed to say "No. Make it like Batman: Dead End", as if it was the beat-all-end-all Batman for film. Don't get me wrong, I like it for what it is. But I certainly don't think anything set it apart from any other fan movie. I do hear ya on wanting the Joker to be more of a controlled maniac. Granted, I will geek the Hell out when I see him do crazy, flamboyant shit (like play chicken against the Bat Pod with naught but a Tommy Gun). But I totally see eye-to-eye with you on him needing to be a little less "Hey! Look at me!" But then, I dunno, I guess that's part of the Joker's persona. Just so long as I don't get tired of watching his antics before the third act, I'll be pleased.
Metalwater: Sorry for misreading your post about Dead End. I guess I was just on a tear. But really, my main gripe is that even since Batman Begins started production, every one and their mother seemed to say "No. Make it like Batman: Dead End", as if it was the beat-all-end-all Batman for film. Don't get me wrong, I like it for what it is. But I certainly don't think anything set it apart from any other fan movie. I do hear ya on wanting the Joker to be more of a controlled maniac. Granted, I will geek the Hell out when I see him do crazy, flamboyant shit (like play chicken against the Bat Pod with naught but a Tommy Gun). But I totally see eye-to-eye with you on him needing to be a little less "Hey! Look at me!" But then, I dunno, I guess that's part of the Joker's persona. Just so long as I don't get tired of watching his antics before the third act, I'll be pleased.
DARK KNIGHT Trailer Officially Hits the Web - Dec 17, 2007 - 03:54pm
Not every one is going to like this version of The Joker, or Batman for that matter. I can't blame them for not digging it, and to piss all over them for not liking it is ridiculous. Let the haters hate, and let the lovers love. I know I'm going to look forward to this, so I won't let detractors like Metalwater tell me how awful it will be. And maybe it will be. I don't see any signs of this being possible, but ya never know. I've been fooled by films before. Also, I'm not a big fan of Batman: Dead End. I'll never understand how that can be seen as more than schilling to fanboys who love crossovers. I just found it boring, and the Joker depicted in it (for what, two minutes?) was not what I would classify as "THE" incarnation of the character from the comics. He wasn't funny in that either.
Not every one is going to like this version of The Joker, or Batman for that matter. I can't blame them for not digging it, and to piss all over them for not liking it is ridiculous. Let the haters hate, and let the lovers love. I know I'm going to look forward to this, so I won't let detractors like Metalwater tell me how awful it will be. And maybe it will be. I don't see any signs of this being possible, but ya never know. I've been fooled by films before. Also, I'm not a big fan of Batman: Dead End. I'll never understand how that can be seen as more than schilling to fanboys who love crossovers. I just found it boring, and the Joker depicted in it (for what, two minutes?) was not what I would classify as "THE" incarnation of the character from the comics. He wasn't funny in that either.
Horror Writers Get Creative for WGA STRIKE - Nov 28, 2007 - 09:17am
Wow... Stuart Gordon and David Hayter are the only ones in that group worth a damn. I say cut the rest of these twits loose and let some new talent into the mix.
Wow... Stuart Gordon and David Hayter are the only ones in that group worth a damn. I say cut the rest of these twits loose and let some new talent into the mix.
Rogue Reveals CASTLEVANIA Plot Details - Nov 26, 2007 - 10:17pm
I dig Castlevania like the rest of you guys. I would like nothing more than to see this work out. But I'm kinda on the same page with Hanso and a few others; I'm staying guardedly optimistic. Odds are, this will suck (given the creative team behind it), but I keep thinking "really, what is there to screw up?" I reckon I'll find out.
I dig Castlevania like the rest of you guys. I would like nothing more than to see this work out. But I'm kinda on the same page with Hanso and a few others; I'm staying guardedly optimistic. Odds are, this will suck (given the creative team behind it), but I keep thinking "really, what is there to screw up?" I reckon I'll find out.
HEROES & CLOVERFIELD Cross Over - Nov 21, 2007 - 09:46am
This is just heroes taking ideas from yet another property on account of it has some of the least imaginitive writers in the business.
This is just heroes taking ideas from yet another property on account of it has some of the least imaginitive writers in the business.
Sienna Miller Fights Against G.I JOE - Nov 20, 2007 - 09:25pm
Hanso: Of course Racism exists in this country. It exists every where. What got to me was that you had to go and say what you did in the context that only Americans are biggots. What was it you said?... something about how we only think "white boys" are American? Look, I'm a jew so I've had plenty of shit tossed at me. But ya know what, a lot of the shit tossing has come from people who are either A) old and bitter, or B) from another country. Maybe it's just where I've had the fortune of living, but I rarely find people who still bitch and moan about minorities trying to get their share of this country. I'm sorry if the same thing cannot be said for where you reside. My advice would be to move. But you can't make assumptions about a whole populace based upon the fraction of it you have witnessed. I've been fortunate enough to live all over this country, and for the most part I have found tolerance to be a virtue many Americans have been practicing for a good, long while. Shit, I used to have to talk to old people at my medical office in VA. We're talking people who were young ten years before the civil rights movement. There were a few bastards in there who hated minorities, but most others had come to appreciate them. But my original point, made in my original post, was that every one wants Americans to feel like the worst creatures alive. I think that is sad. They want us all to plead guilty to actions committed by some one who the majority of Americans do not agree with. I can't, and I won't. I'm not a conservative, nor am I a liberal. I hate partisan politics. Do I like Bush? Fuck nah. Do I agree with ANY fundementalist? No. And that includes the fundamentalists over seas who want us dead. The downside? we wasted time and soldiers going to Iraq -- for oil! Do I like that? Of course not. But I love this country, and much to most people's chagrin it is one of the best places to live. So my second point: Why should the premise of GI JOE be changed just to make people outside of America like it? It seems to have a bunch of international fans as is, so what's the problem? And if there is one; screw the detractors. If they are so angry at the thought of a pro-America action film, then the film isn't for them.
Hanso: Of course Racism exists in this country. It exists every where. What got to me was that you had to go and say what you did in the context that only Americans are biggots. What was it you said?... something about how we only think "white boys" are American? Look, I'm a jew so I've had plenty of shit tossed at me. But ya know what, a lot of the shit tossing has come from people who are either A) old and bitter, or B) from another country. Maybe it's just where I've had the fortune of living, but I rarely find people who still bitch and moan about minorities trying to get their share of this country. I'm sorry if the same thing cannot be said for where you reside. My advice would be to move. But you can't make assumptions about a whole populace based upon the fraction of it you have witnessed. I've been fortunate enough to live all over this country, and for the most part I have found tolerance to be a virtue many Americans have been practicing for a good, long while. Shit, I used to have to talk to old people at my medical office in VA. We're talking people who were young ten years before the civil rights movement. There were a few bastards in there who hated minorities, but most others had come to appreciate them. But my original point, made in my original post, was that every one wants Americans to feel like the worst creatures alive. I think that is sad. They want us all to plead guilty to actions committed by some one who the majority of Americans do not agree with. I can't, and I won't. I'm not a conservative, nor am I a liberal. I hate partisan politics. Do I like Bush? Fuck nah. Do I agree with ANY fundementalist? No. And that includes the fundamentalists over seas who want us dead. The downside? we wasted time and soldiers going to Iraq -- for oil! Do I like that? Of course not. But I love this country, and much to most people's chagrin it is one of the best places to live. So my second point: Why should the premise of GI JOE be changed just to make people outside of America like it? It seems to have a bunch of international fans as is, so what's the problem? And if there is one; screw the detractors. If they are so angry at the thought of a pro-America action film, then the film isn't for them.
Sienna Miller Fights Against G.I JOE - Nov 20, 2007 - 10:15am
Also, Hanso, what's with the "America is soooo racist" bull shit? Our country has embraced diversity for some time now. What if they decided James Bond should be played by, say, a asian actor? We saw the fuss that was made over a blonde guy playing the character, so I can only imagine how that would go over amongst the Europeans who grew up with the character.
Also, Hanso, what's with the "America is soooo racist" bull shit? Our country has embraced diversity for some time now. What if they decided James Bond should be played by, say, a asian actor? We saw the fuss that was made over a blonde guy playing the character, so I can only imagine how that would go over amongst the Europeans who grew up with the character.
Sienna Miller Fights Against G.I JOE - Nov 20, 2007 - 10:08am
Christ... you utter the words "more American" and some one is going to give you a hard time. God forbid America not always be made to look like the biggest collection of pricks on Earth. Does any one overseas even pay attention to the news, when it reports on how heavily the majority of the country disagrees with our current leader's every decision? I know every one and their mother hates America for some reason or another (some reasons make sense, but most are wildly unfounded), but GI JOE is an American product. It was about American soldiers who lived with a sense of honor and virtue, and they wouldn't quit until the job was done. It was a good way to boost moral amongst American citizens. I mean... Look, I am as far from patriotic as ya can get. I don't like what America is being forced to turn into because of some money hungry corporations or power hungry stooges... but I love GI JOE for the same reason I love Captain America. They uphold the principles upon which the country was originally founded, and even when people like Bush make a mess of things and demonize the American image, GI JOE will still be there to re-enforce the ideals of this country. Maybe, to the rest of the world, it was nothing more than kick ass soldiers fighting the bad guys... but it was good moral for the American children. You wouldn't undertand it because of your narrowminded ignorance, but when kids like me watched GI JOE, it made us feel good about being American. And when you remove the patriotic nature of the license to make it more marketable, you are removing the heart. Any one can lambast us as much as they please, but they are only showing their ignorance by hating an entire group over the decisions made by a very small portion of the population.
Christ... you utter the words "more American" and some one is going to give you a hard time. God forbid America not always be made to look like the biggest collection of pricks on Earth. Does any one overseas even pay attention to the news, when it reports on how heavily the majority of the country disagrees with our current leader's every decision? I know every one and their mother hates America for some reason or another (some reasons make sense, but most are wildly unfounded), but GI JOE is an American product. It was about American soldiers who lived with a sense of honor and virtue, and they wouldn't quit until the job was done. It was a good way to boost moral amongst American citizens. I mean... Look, I am as far from patriotic as ya can get. I don't like what America is being forced to turn into because of some money hungry corporations or power hungry stooges... but I love GI JOE for the same reason I love Captain America. They uphold the principles upon which the country was originally founded, and even when people like Bush make a mess of things and demonize the American image, GI JOE will still be there to re-enforce the ideals of this country. Maybe, to the rest of the world, it was nothing more than kick ass soldiers fighting the bad guys... but it was good moral for the American children. You wouldn't undertand it because of your narrowminded ignorance, but when kids like me watched GI JOE, it made us feel good about being American. And when you remove the patriotic nature of the license to make it more marketable, you are removing the heart. Any one can lambast us as much as they please, but they are only showing their ignorance by hating an entire group over the decisions made by a very small portion of the population.
WGA Update: Talks Resume on Nov 26 - Nov 18, 2007 - 03:07pm
Maybe I'm a little biased towards the writers, on account of I want to be in that profession some day -- and I'm certain hundred if not thousands of you are in the same spot. Are strikes "bad"? When you're making millions of dollars more than most people and demand to be paid more, sure. Like the actors on "Friends" and "Everybody Loves Raymond". In that situation, the threat of walking out in order to get more money than any human could ever reasonably deserve was a shitty, ruthless tactic. But think about it, the writers really do get screwed on a regular basis. Are their some writers who make enough from their work to allow them to get by without the pay increases? Sure! Of course there are. But the majority of the writers in the guild are not that well off. Writing is one of the most physically and mentally demanding parts of filmmaking (well, when it comes to good scripts, any way. Any one can shit out "Epic Movie" after all). Is that to say it is the only difficult, stressful part of mkaing a film? No, no, no! We all know that isn't the case. But it is hard work, as hard -- if not harder -- than most of the other jobs that generate much more profit. The writers deserve to reap as much of the profits as actors or producers. Because, really, without the writers actors have nothing to dig their teeth into. I can promise you most actors wouldn't get an academy award fro just standing around trying to ad-lib their lines, imagine the story or fulfill their own character arcs. The script, as we all know, is the blue-print. Think about it: would buildings ever get built if they had no floor plans? Would chefs be able to prepare such awesome dishes without a solid recipe? Would I ever be able to buy groceries if my girlfriend didn't give me a well thought out shopping list? Sure I could -- but I'd get bitched at for not getting the right things! These guys and dames deserve their share. And I think they've shown more willingness to negotiate than the studios have. Dropping cuts from DVD sales could have helped pad their wallets in no time.
Maybe I'm a little biased towards the writers, on account of I want to be in that profession some day -- and I'm certain hundred if not thousands of you are in the same spot. Are strikes "bad"? When you're making millions of dollars more than most people and demand to be paid more, sure. Like the actors on "Friends" and "Everybody Loves Raymond". In that situation, the threat of walking out in order to get more money than any human could ever reasonably deserve was a shitty, ruthless tactic. But think about it, the writers really do get screwed on a regular basis. Are their some writers who make enough from their work to allow them to get by without the pay increases? Sure! Of course there are. But the majority of the writers in the guild are not that well off. Writing is one of the most physically and mentally demanding parts of filmmaking (well, when it comes to good scripts, any way. Any one can shit out "Epic Movie" after all). Is that to say it is the only difficult, stressful part of mkaing a film? No, no, no! We all know that isn't the case. But it is hard work, as hard -- if not harder -- than most of the other jobs that generate much more profit. The writers deserve to reap as much of the profits as actors or producers. Because, really, without the writers actors have nothing to dig their teeth into. I can promise you most actors wouldn't get an academy award fro just standing around trying to ad-lib their lines, imagine the story or fulfill their own character arcs. The script, as we all know, is the blue-print. Think about it: would buildings ever get built if they had no floor plans? Would chefs be able to prepare such awesome dishes without a solid recipe? Would I ever be able to buy groceries if my girlfriend didn't give me a well thought out shopping list? Sure I could -- but I'd get bitched at for not getting the right things! These guys and dames deserve their share. And I think they've shown more willingness to negotiate than the studios have. Dropping cuts from DVD sales could have helped pad their wallets in no time.
WGA Update: Talks Resume on Nov 26 - Nov 17, 2007 - 02:55pm
Gauleyboy, I just have to ask: Where were these so-called "best actors" in X-3? I just saw a bunch of hacks who kept going for more money. But you make good points, other wise. Both great writers and great actors (along with great directors and producers, crew etc) make great viewing. Film is the proverbial "Stew" art form, and if only a few of the ingrediants are fresh, there will be a lingering taste of ass in that meal from the ingrediants that have gone to rott.
Gauleyboy, I just have to ask: Where were these so-called "best actors" in X-3? I just saw a bunch of hacks who kept going for more money. But you make good points, other wise. Both great writers and great actors (along with great directors and producers, crew etc) make great viewing. Film is the proverbial "Stew" art form, and if only a few of the ingrediants are fresh, there will be a lingering taste of ass in that meal from the ingrediants that have gone to rott.
Burton Confirmed For ALICE & FRANKENWEENIE - Nov 16, 2007 - 08:39am
Expect, in the near future, the attachment of Helena Bonham Carter and Jonny Depp in both films. This will, of course, be followed up with a press release by Tim Burton caliming "Really, I don't just hire them for every role. Just the ones I can see them in... which is every role." All snark aside, I really do think Old School Tim Burton would have made a great Alice in Wonderland. But the Tim Burton of Now has just been losing his edge with everything he's done after Big Fish. Maybe I'm finally getting tired of his insistance to never push his artistic eye, instead falling back on the same tired game over and over.
Expect, in the near future, the attachment of Helena Bonham Carter and Jonny Depp in both films. This will, of course, be followed up with a press release by Tim Burton caliming "Really, I don't just hire them for every role. Just the ones I can see them in... which is every role." All snark aside, I really do think Old School Tim Burton would have made a great Alice in Wonderland. But the Tim Burton of Now has just been losing his edge with everything he's done after Big Fish. Maybe I'm finally getting tired of his insistance to never push his artistic eye, instead falling back on the same tired game over and over.
Lizzy Caplan Talks CLOVERFIELD - Nov 16, 2007 - 08:33am
I saw the one on youtube, and really the quality isn't so bad that you can't make out what's going on or being said. That said, I agree with Whiskeymovie about the initial reaction to the trailer. But I am starting to lose interest in the flick, especially after that second trailer. The shaky camera thing just doesn't work for me in such large doses, and I really do find it more distracting in films than helpful in creating an illusion.
I saw the one on youtube, and really the quality isn't so bad that you can't make out what's going on or being said. That said, I agree with Whiskeymovie about the initial reaction to the trailer. But I am starting to lose interest in the flick, especially after that second trailer. The shaky camera thing just doesn't work for me in such large doses, and I really do find it more distracting in films than helpful in creating an illusion.
Raimi Too Exhausted for SPIDER-MAN 4 - Nov 14, 2007 - 01:02am
How in the world would Eli Roth make a good (spider man) movie? I can see some of the other choices, but that one (and Michale Bay) just leaves me puzzled. I could dig a Spidey directed by Fincher or Proyas, though. I like Cameron, but he seems more interested in making grandious set-piece films as of late (or underwater documentaries). Jackson could handle both the spectacle and character elements very well, as he's proven quite well in recent years.
How in the world would Eli Roth make a good (spider man) movie? I can see some of the other choices, but that one (and Michale Bay) just leaves me puzzled. I could dig a Spidey directed by Fincher or Proyas, though. I like Cameron, but he seems more interested in making grandious set-piece films as of late (or underwater documentaries). Jackson could handle both the spectacle and character elements very well, as he's proven quite well in recent years.
Raimi Too Exhausted for SPIDER-MAN 4 - Nov 13, 2007 - 06:19pm
I must have missed some world-wide geek conference where every one decided that Kraven was any thing more than a ridiculous joke of a character. I'm not being a dick when I ask this -- I actually want to know: What makes Kraven so interesting? But if they're gonna do this flick, they need to do it right. They've set up Dr. Connors (well, kind of... I never really felt that closeness between he and Peter that was supposed to be there), so they need to tackle the Lizard. Truthfully, after the Lizard, they should stop. The other characters that work well in comics won't quite work so well on film. Hell, I love The Rhino... but I can't see any way of making him work that wouldn't be as sloppy as how they pulled off The Sandman.
I must have missed some world-wide geek conference where every one decided that Kraven was any thing more than a ridiculous joke of a character. I'm not being a dick when I ask this -- I actually want to know: What makes Kraven so interesting? But if they're gonna do this flick, they need to do it right. They've set up Dr. Connors (well, kind of... I never really felt that closeness between he and Peter that was supposed to be there), so they need to tackle the Lizard. Truthfully, after the Lizard, they should stop. The other characters that work well in comics won't quite work so well on film. Hell, I love The Rhino... but I can't see any way of making him work that wouldn't be as sloppy as how they pulled off The Sandman.
Four Cast in STEPFATHER Thriller - Nov 12, 2007 - 10:22am
Whiskeymovie, I honestly thought you were going to end that story with "She ended up killing my neighbor" or something like that. I thouht we actually found some one who's lived through the Murderous Step Parent Syndrome.
Whiskeymovie, I honestly thought you were going to end that story with "She ended up killing my neighbor" or something like that. I thouht we actually found some one who's lived through the Murderous Step Parent Syndrome.
Tommy Lee Jones Talks New TWO FACE - Nov 09, 2007 - 10:10pm
Ya know, Ponyboy; I've never thought of Billy D's casting in such a way, but now I kind of have to. It was a little random. Perhaps Burton hired him because instead of a paycheck, Billy D offered to do the role for a few bottles of Colt 45. I'm just throwin' out ideas. Though I really like Tommy Lee Jones, I have to concur that his Two-Face was more reminiscant of Ceasar Romero's Joker. Pretty awful, campy stuff. Though that face used to give me nightmares as a child. The made-up half was pretty creepy back then, too.
Ya know, Ponyboy; I've never thought of Billy D's casting in such a way, but now I kind of have to. It was a little random. Perhaps Burton hired him because instead of a paycheck, Billy D offered to do the role for a few bottles of Colt 45. I'm just throwin' out ideas. Though I really like Tommy Lee Jones, I have to concur that his Two-Face was more reminiscant of Ceasar Romero's Joker. Pretty awful, campy stuff. Though that face used to give me nightmares as a child. The made-up half was pretty creepy back then, too.
Jack Nicholson Talks About Nolan's JOKER - Nov 08, 2007 - 06:23pm
Well, I happen to have t least 2/3rds of a brain, and I still find Jack's Joker too over-the-top. And sure, Citizen Kane is influential, but it's far from a great film. That said, The Original Batman had some great moments. But Jack always plays...well, Jack. He just does over-the-top -- China Town excluded.
Well, I happen to have t least 2/3rds of a brain, and I still find Jack's Joker too over-the-top. And sure, Citizen Kane is influential, but it's far from a great film. That said, The Original Batman had some great moments. But Jack always plays...well, Jack. He just does over-the-top -- China Town excluded.
Rob Zombie Remaking C.H.U.D? - Nov 08, 2007 - 05:51pm
Didn't he say he was not doing any more remakes? Or was it just no more Halloween movies. I don't remember. Probably the latter. Zombie... well, what can be said tht hasn't been said already. He's got fans some how, so more power to him. I just don't like any filmmaker who feels the need to use shaky cam during dialogue scenes that really have no tension to begin with. And yeah, Sherri Moon Zombie will be in it, and she will again make Paris Hilton's turn in House of Wax seem like gold.
Didn't he say he was not doing any more remakes? Or was it just no more Halloween movies. I don't remember. Probably the latter. Zombie... well, what can be said tht hasn't been said already. He's got fans some how, so more power to him. I just don't like any filmmaker who feels the need to use shaky cam during dialogue scenes that really have no tension to begin with. And yeah, Sherri Moon Zombie will be in it, and she will again make Paris Hilton's turn in House of Wax seem like gold.
Zack Snyder Blogs the WATCHMEN - Nov 04, 2007 - 01:04am
SinCity -- don't be silly. We don't have ANY problems in regards to Corporations running rampant. By the way, this bit of sarcasm was brought to you by McDonalds.
SinCity -- don't be silly. We don't have ANY problems in regards to Corporations running rampant. By the way, this bit of sarcasm was brought to you by McDonalds.
JOKER Site Updated for Halloween - Nov 01, 2007 - 10:28am
"I've got better things to do with my time rather than dressing up in makeup and taking a picture for a website." Like what, Daforce; sit on your ass and complain about viral marketing. Haha. I'm just taking the piss out of ya, Chief. (And no, I don't have to explain what I'm going to do with said extracted piss. Certainly not make some radical new fuel that gets three states every gallon...) I'll agree with most of ya when ya say "hey, enough dickin' around. Just show us the goods already". But I have to admit, I like seeing creative ways of selling product. Plus, I always read about these hijynx before I go to work, then forget about them through the course of the day. Then when I come home, I'm greeted with a new trailer or a few new pics, and it's like Hannukah came early (and didn't bring me socks).
"I've got better things to do with my time rather than dressing up in makeup and taking a picture for a website." Like what, Daforce; sit on your ass and complain about viral marketing. Haha. I'm just taking the piss out of ya, Chief. (And no, I don't have to explain what I'm going to do with said extracted piss. Certainly not make some radical new fuel that gets three states every gallon...) I'll agree with most of ya when ya say "hey, enough dickin' around. Just show us the goods already". But I have to admit, I like seeing creative ways of selling product. Plus, I always read about these hijynx before I go to work, then forget about them through the course of the day. Then when I come home, I'm greeted with a new trailer or a few new pics, and it's like Hannukah came early (and didn't bring me socks).
Ratner Out of ESCAPE Remake - Oct 29, 2007 - 10:52am
I'm no Ratner apologist, but I will say that he makes better films than Wiseman. Well, better is too strong a word. They're a lot easier to watch, any way. He's not as impatient or spastic with the camera as Wiseman tends to be. I guess it's just a matter of time before some other Top Notch Hack gets his mitts on this film-that-should-not-be.
I'm no Ratner apologist, but I will say that he makes better films than Wiseman. Well, better is too strong a word. They're a lot easier to watch, any way. He's not as impatient or spastic with the camera as Wiseman tends to be. I guess it's just a matter of time before some other Top Notch Hack gets his mitts on this film-that-should-not-be.
SAW IV Cuts Out the Competition - Oct 28, 2007 - 06:44pm
And Metalwater is right. There are much better examples of films or other media that make you think that don't have to decorate their messages in sloppily wrapped packages.
And Metalwater is right. There are much better examples of films or other media that make you think that don't have to decorate their messages in sloppily wrapped packages.
SAW IV Cuts Out the Competition - Oct 28, 2007 - 06:44pm
If Saw flicks are the sort that "make you think", then you don't do a lot of thinking all that often. There isn't any clever subtext in these films. Sure, it made a decent observation about society in the first film -- though just barely. The fact that has been four films with nothing new to say (or even a new way of saying the old thing), they prove themselves pointlessly bloody and poorly directed shit fests.
If Saw flicks are the sort that "make you think", then you don't do a lot of thinking all that often. There isn't any clever subtext in these films. Sure, it made a decent observation about society in the first film -- though just barely. The fact that has been four films with nothing new to say (or even a new way of saying the old thing), they prove themselves pointlessly bloody and poorly directed shit fests.
Mania is the premiere online destination for fans of science fiction, fantasy, horror, and anime entertainment. It is the largest community offering profiles, video, science fiction movies, sci fi TV, art, sci fi comics, photos, cheats, blogs, science fiction books, forums and feedback. Mania offers insider entertainment industry info and original content for science fiction, fantasy, and horror entertainment genres including: video games, comics, gadgets, movies, television, toys, music, books, DVDs and more. © Mania Entertainment, LLC. 2001 - 2008
You know, I really enjoyed the flick. No, it wasn't the second coming of Scary Christ or anything like that, but it was refreshing to see a horror flick try to be scary and tense instead of ultra violent and gross. That's probably most people's problem with it: the common "wisdom" is that blood=scary. But as Hitchcock's flicks still manage to prove, that just isn't the case. That said, I don't want a sequel to this. Not every film needs a sequel. Things don't have to keep perpetuating. And was it just me, or was that last bit with (SPOILER) Live Tyler jumping back to life kind of forced? (END SPOILER) It just felt tacked on to me, as if the studios thought, "well, ya can't end the film that way. Blah, blah, blah."