I was mocking you for thinking that either the guy's dancing or "singing" are remotely good...unless you're gay or female, in which case, my bad. You're probably right about how the studios view it. And honestly, the series has never been that heartfelt or serious anyway, so a death would only work if it wasn't surrounded by melodrama, which seems impossible for a number of reasons. And you're right; they can probably take the James Bond route, but personally, I would rather they just leave it alone. Four movies is enough.
That's not senility talking, it's the voice of reason. After that last abomination of a movie, Indy should be captured in some third-world country and put to death by their most archaic method of execution. Off camera, of course.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.slashfilm.com/tommy-wiseau-the-room-3d-theatrical-rerelease/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.slashfilm.com/tommy-wiseau-t ... rerelease/</a> You know I have no idea if this is true, but when I read it all I could do was laugh. Just thinking about The Room in 3D ... just ... wow. There are no words.
Battleship The Movie <a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship_(film" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship_(film</a>) Let's not be naive and think movie studios want to make art when they're producing movies, they're not. First and foremost, they're a business, and they're looking for ROI with as little risk as possible. Buying movie rights is a quick buck. It's very similar to an acquisition, buying an established clientele. However, I find it hard to believe anyone who actually enjoys the game will go see this movie based on it's premise alone. What tie-ins could they possibly make? We all know "You sunk my battleship!" will be the tagline. It'll be painfully stupid, so horrible in fact I can't believe they didn't cast Nicolas Cage to scream it while straddling the top of a submarine. Rihanna will be starring in it. I predict she'll be the fucktoy of some captain. This movie will be so bad it might be good, the Con Air effect. Then again, maybe it'll be clever and hold it's own like the movie "Clue". But that's a big maybe.
I'm morbidly curious about what the scenario is going to be, especially for a $200 million production budget. (That's more than the recent Tron film) I was pleased to read this, though; Good man! He probably had to take a significant paycut, but that shows integrity. That's never going to happen. Nowadays, mainstream Hollywood films aren't made with the sense of humor that made "Clue" so good, let alone CGI blockbusters.
The movies to see for 2011: Abrams and Spielberg team up for Abrams' first film that isn't a sequel or prequel. This looks too awesome for words. James Bond, Indiana Jones, Sam Rockwell, Adam Beach and Olivia Wilde. And Aliens! In the Old West! Are you moist yet? The last one sucked BALLS so let's hope this one is better. Ian McShane as Blackbeard is a real plus:
Thanks for that rundown, dude. JJ Abrams is a freaking hack. After being duped into seeing the most recent Star Trek, I'm going to avoid this guy's films like the plague. Oh, and the CGI in the trailer looks like shit. The whole thing looks worse than "Stealth". Intriguing premise and very impressive cast list, but it's directed by Jon Favreau and the trailer made the film seem uber-serious. You can't make a serious, good film called fucking "Cowboys and Aliens". Impossible to tell anything from that trailer. (It was awful, but so was the first film's trailer, like all standard blockbuster trailers these days) Guess I will wait to read peoples' reviews.
Yeah, I get it. Everyone but Kurosawa, Lang and Bergman suck ass at directing and everyone else to step behind the lens should just put a bullet in their own heads for even daring to even exist in the film industry. HOW. DARE. THEY. However, Bergman didn't hit it big until The Seventh Seal, and he had made more than a dozen lacklustre films before that. Cowboys & Aliens is based on a graphic novel (so it CAN'T be too serious), hence "entertainment". Super 8 is designed to look like it was shot with a grainy "Super 8" camera (not too unlike Cloverfield & Blair Witch). So angry! Be like me and become a chronic. You'll enjoy more films that way. And don't insult every other film that ever existed by comparing it to "Stealth". Too soon. HORROR REMAKES SOON TO DISGRACE THE SCREEN: August: Fright Night. One of my favourite 80's horror films, with Colin Farrel (!?!?!?) taking over the role over the most suave vampire of all time Jerry Dandridge, and Anton Yelchin as Charlie Brewster. This will probably suck. October: The Thing. I have heard rumours this may actually be more of a prequel than a remake, but either way FUCK YOU. You will never, EVER find CGI that can compare to Rob Bottin's unreal visceral make-up effects. Ever.
okay, I looked into it and they could not have made it worse: ...a bad lead actress, shitty script writers and a first time director?!?!? Can you say "Marcus Nipsel" anybody? Now I KNOW FOR SURE IT'S GOING TO SUCK.
Except I have ranted and raved about how "Crank 2" is a modern masterpiece, not to mention my undying love for 70's blaxploitation as well as cheesy American action films from the 80s and 90s. (featuring master thespians like Van Damme, Steven Seagal, Dolph Lundgren, etc.) The vast majority of what I have seen is "silly schlock", and I've enjoyed most of it. So I don't know where you get the idea I only like serious films, as I have stated many times that's not the case. And sadly, I haven't seen "The Seventh Seal" yet! Except that's not the way the trailer depicted it. It presented a film called Cowboys and Fucking Aliens as seriously as a goddamn Tarkovsky film. It was another one of those "dark, gritty, ugly CGI blockbusters with a ridiculous premise". Why does a stupid comic book film need to be "dark and gritty", anyways? I would rather it be "humorous, absurd, and entertaining". It sure seemed to work out swell for the Tim Burton Batman films, or for the recent "Red". I guess it's just too logical. You're the one ranting against Hollywood here, not me, but I agree about those two specific films. "Fright Night" was just so freaking 80s, not to mention a blend of comedy and horror that few directors get a chance to do nowadays. The premise itself was completely unoriginal, too, so I don't see the point except slightly capitalizing on the built-in fanbase. While Carpenter's "The Thing" was a re-make itself, I'm not sure what they are going to improve upon there.
Speaking of which, after seeing this ,is it safe to call it the most uber-pretentious trailer ever made? I mean, wow. Tone it down a little.
Look. Enough of the bullshit, from everyone. Consider this a pre-emptive strike. Or warning. Whatever. I'm feeling happy, someone posted an awesome rack in the boobie thread, I've had a few drinks while watching the Bears and Hawks, so all and all I'm in a good place. I don't want anyone to fuck with my serenity, ok? EVERYONE be nice to each other. If you're going to argue, or "discuss" shit, do it nicely. Don't be passive aggressive dicks about it, either. If you're just going to post bullshit vitriol about how the other guy's taste sucks cock, then don't post. Agree to disagree, and don't rehash the same shit over and over and over again. The vast majority of us who lurk in these particular forums (and don't add to these discussions) don't appreciate it, and it makes us not want to come back. If you really feel the need to do it, take it to PM. Most of you have genuinely interesting things in your posts, and I find them, for the most part, quite engaging. I'm sure others do as well. Let's please keep it that way, ok?
A friend sent me this. Don't know how it will play out, but we haven't had a good gangster yarn in a while.
It couldn't possibly be worse than Skyline. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdOGJi5Sne4 Although both films look kind of similar.
Actually, there's lots of movies worse than Skyline. Here's the thing about Skyline that I will give a huge amount of credit to the Strauss Brothers for: in an age where shitty movies like Robin Hood (the 2010 "Prince of Z's" version as I call it) cost $200 million to make and are probably somewhat to blame for the economy collapsing, because they are F/X specialists the Strauss Brothers made a film that could pass for a $150 million budget with its look. How much did Skyline cost to make? Less than ELEVEN MILLION DOLLARS. Despite a not-so-good turnout, they made the money back in less than one weekend and are now (for some reason) making a sequel. So again: Skyline is NOT a good film, but the way The Brothers Strauss stretched its budget it is in some ways a movie miracle in the same vein of El Mariachi. If they ever learn how to actually direct a film properly, think of what they could do.
A minor detail. However, making an alien invasion for $11 million isn't quite as difficult as you claim, especially when one skimps on the visual effects. Moreover, it doesn't scale up; Rodriguez making "El Mariachi" for so little was genuinely amazing, but nowadays, his features are right around the average budget for their genre. (Sin City, Machete) And I meant to write "Skyline" in place of "Stealth" above when writing about "Super 8". What's with the sudden rash of alien films, by the way?
Just saw this preview: It's also directed by Zack Snyder, so I have high hopes for this movie. Yes, I realize Watchmen wasn't everyone's favorite, but I loved 300 and Dawn of the Dead.