*Runs off to spend the rest of his workday Googling The Mandarin* This movie looks great. Adam Carolla talked about what makes a good action sequel in his podcast: Delayed satisfaction. Iron Man 1 good because we had to wait for him to build the full suit and get to kicking ass. Iron Man 2 not so good because he jumped right in and just got to shooting. The big thing is knocking the guy back down so he has to start over again, which this movie looks like it is going to do, so it'll probably be better than the 2nd, maybe even the first.
Not to mention, Shane Black is at the helm, the guy who for some reason goes uncredited as bringing Robert Downey Jr back. After Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang, this will be his chance to prove his directorial chops, after having his high priced scripts re-written in the 90's.
So, you're saying you want Arnie to direct Iron Man 3? That being said, despite writing Lethal Weapon, he was also responsible for the laughably bad pussy jokes in Predator. So there's that.
Star Wars: Episode 7 coming in 2015... <a class="postlink" href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2012/10/30/disney_acquires_lucasfilm_plans_star_wars_episode_vii_what_should_we_expect.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/201 ... xpect.html</a> Wow.
That's a pretty decent-looking remake truthfully, but it pisses me off too because that means no Bruce Campbell playing Ash once more. Seriously, was that so much to ask? At least it looks as hardcore as the first, which is a VERY tall fucking order.
I don't really care that much whether more Star Wars movies are made or not, but if there are, I think there's potential for them to be decent. The original movies weren't really a part of my childhood, it wasn't until later I appreciated the movies for the achievements they were; so while I think it's sad the prequels turned out the way they did, I never had the intense reaction most people seemed to. Especially after reading JW Rinzler's book, I don't even blame Lucas for the death grip he kept on the movies, but now that he's handing them off, Kathleen Kennedy can hire competent people to write and helm them. I never cared about Star Trek neither, but JJ Abrams et al made a great film that got me invested in that world, so if they can get someone with both the competency and love, they can make something worthwhile.
Lucas does not have a golden touch. Not at all. He has cash to hire the right people. Sometimes. The new Star Wars movies do not hold a candle to the old ones. We're talking about the guy who also created Howard The Duck, 1941 and Radioland Murders. His other film THX 11Whateverthefuck was droning, colourless nonsense. He caught a cosmic break in the field of film: riding Spielberg's coattails while he was grinding out magic in his prime. Empire Strikes Back was not directed by him. Is there a human being on the planet that doesn't think that's the best film of the whole lot? It is a breath of fresh air this series gets new blood. I look forward to it.
Those reviews are long, but extremely entertaining, but if I had to pick just one part of it that illustrates why the prequels didn't work and the originals did, it would be this one: I'm actually kind of excited by this news, giving other writers/directors a shot at Star Wars could be really good for it. But I kind of hope they stay away from the old characters and the Expanded Universe stuff. We've seen that already. There's an entire galaxy and thousands of years worth of characters and stories to create in that universe. And if Disney treats Lucasfilm the way they have treated Marvel Studios, then I think it's in good hands (especially considering Kathleen Kennedy's pretty outstanding production record).
I agree that Lucas has produced a lot of dreck since the 70's, but I don't think it's all that fair to completely discredit his accomplishments. He has, from the beginning and repeatedly since, openly admitted that he isn't a very good writer or director, stating that editing is his strength. In my estimation, he's had some of the most successful ideas in Hollywood, it's just that the execution of them generally needs to be aided by external forces. [Spoilered for the history lesson] Spoiler For one, American Graffiti was at the time and a long time after, the biggest cost-profit success, and while it wasn't simply "highest grossing," I don't think that is anything to sneeze at, it hit a nerve when it was released. Where was the execution aided? For one, Coppola challenged him to make something more warm and fuzzy after the "droning, colourless" THX1138 (which was kind of a proto-Star Wars, pessimistically dystopian, that was traded up for old fashioned optimism), and also his wife helped figure out the editing. Also, he sought help for the writing of the film, and yet it is extremely personal to him, considering all the autobiographical details to it. Then with Star Wars itself, benefitted from an extremely long and difficult birth. Virtually no-one understood what he was trying to accomplish (not cast, crew, his wife, the studio, etc), and despite having just made one of the most successful films ever, he had to fight an uphill battle all the way with it. Having to fight and justify everything to everyone streamlined the whole story and production. Several editors, including his then wife all worked on the film, but it was certainly him that specific ideas in mind to utilise editing techniques that hadn't been seen much outside the art-house world (esp. Russian and Japanese flicks). The documentary The Cutting Edge has a really good example of just how awful the rough cut is. By following the action, rather than the acting (which was the style at the time), Lucas changed the game of mainstream cinema. I think this is possibly his most significant legacy, greater than popularising visual effects in A movies, or solidifying the concept of the summer blockbuster. Even compare the editing of Spielberg's Jaws, vs Raiders of the Lost Ark. Speaking of Spielberg: 1941 was his deal, Lucas had nothing to do with it. In fact, after that debacle, he was the only one who'd hire Spielberg, to do Raiders, so I think it's not so clear who was riding whose coattails. And yes, The Empire Strikes Back is the best of the films, and old Georgie isn't credited as director, but I guarantee he had more to do with it than Howard the Duck. The way I see it is that it worked synergistically. First off, you couldn't have Empire without the first film. And then, while Irvin Kershner's contribution was essential to how good it was, his participation was mainly limited to production, utilising his skills in extracting performances from the actors, and making scenes work. Lucas didn't write the script either, but certainly he guided it's writing, and if you're thinking that he took too much credit, you may want to consider that he posthumously gave Leigh Brackett a writing credit, despite the fact that they used none of her script. In addition to heading up the pre-production, he was the strongest presence in post-production; In addition to overseeing the special effects photography, he really came to shine in the editing of the piece. Consider that Clash of the Titans was released around the same time, and how, despite Ray Harryhausen, how crappy it is by comparison. Return of the Jedi would have been the winding down of the bolt of lightning he was. I think overall it was an entertaining movie, despite it being a bit wearker and more saccharine; which was probably a decent payoff for the overall audience after the darkness of Empire. Since then, I sitll think Lucas has had some good ideas, although they've generally been buried under a heap of bad ones. It's easy to blame him surrounding himself with 'yes men' but I think the problem is almost the opposite; it's telling that he advised Simon Pegg not to "make the same movie [he made] thirty years ago," I think he isolated himself from any outside influence and made films he didn't really want to make. A couple years back when he first announced he was retiring from the business at large and wanted to make experimental low budget projects, that got me more excited than anything I've anticipated from Lucasfilm. As I said before, while Disney isn't perfect, there's every chance that if they hire people with both competence and love for the series, the new blood will create some good films. I even like the idea that Lucas will consult (and not much more), to me that adds a touch more legitimacy (I know that sounds ludicrous, but still...). Like I said, I don't have a childhood investment in the series (my fascination came later, from cinematic interest), so if nothing good comes of it I won't be too upset, but I do hope for a Star Trek type situation, that hooks me in by just being good.
I've enjoyed the books by David Wong so I'll definitely give this a look see. Sounds like it hits theaters in January (no idea on distribution scale) but they are also releasing it for streaming late December I think.
I couldn't think of a witty way to introduce it, but it doesn't need it: This is Manborg. The spirit of the 80's seems alive and well in this $1000 cheapie, and what the fuck, it looks head and shoulders more awesome than so many movies coming out these days that are supposedly for at my demographic. NB we are missing out on a swathe of really neat special effects because digital compisition aces optical composition (for degradation of image and positioning, anyway).
I have a huge boner right now. If this is half as good as the book I can die a happy man. Though I never got the impression from the book that these were fast moving zombies. Meh.
World War Z: Edit: Guy before me beat me to the trailer. Unfortunately, this looks absolutely NOTHING like the novel. They forgo the book's slow zombies for fast running Zombies (they were NEVER fast moving zombies in the book, that was one of the advantages humans eventually adapted to and learned to fight back), and the book's general format, which is likely impossible to make into a movie, anyway. I was really looking forward to this movie until I saw the trailer, and my immediate thought was "Dawn of the Dead on a bigger scale." I know his book as it is was basically unfilmable in a movie format (Personally, I think it would've made a good miniseries for a network like HBO or Showtime), but it looks like the only way this thing resembles the book is the title. I am actually pretty disappointed.
Agreed. This is one of my favorite books, and I've been wary of the movie since the first rumor I heard. I was hoping for a District 9-ish semi-documentary that could've captured the style of the book. Seeing the Battle of Yonkers and the Redeker plan fleshed out on screen would have been great cinema, but of course Hollywood goes for the over-done 'focus on one man's survival' over the books broad outlook at humanity during a global war scenario.
I was actually thinking a mini-series done in the same style of the Ken Burns documentaries would be an idea fit for this book. Interviews with people inter cut with "footage" from the war would make it an awesome faux-documentary.