Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10
2017 In Film / Re: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
« Last post by Alexandro on February 12, 2018, 11:26:06 PM »

I appreciated the fact that the film kept me second guessing it's intentions. A lot of what the more heroic characters were doing didn't sit right with me, and that prevented me from taking any sides. The ending was what shook me, because I realized what we were seeing was not a redemption story, but simply a descent into despair. Liked the humor, the performances, the dialogue... I was a little stunned when it ended and some dumbass chick who never stopped talking during the whole thing turned to her boyfriend and said: "so who was the killer? I didn't understand it... I don't want to understand it." Made the whole film a bit more poignant.
2017 In Film / Re: The Shape of Water
« Last post by Alexandro on February 12, 2018, 11:18:48 PM »
I could see the problems but in the end I didn't care. The ending was moving enough for me to be won over. When I saw Pan's Labyrinth the first time I had the same reservations about the villain, but on subsequent viewings I warmed up to the treatment and found the scheme effective. I don't think that will happen with this film, but I like that it's true to it's B Movie origins in the simplicity of it's archetypes.
2017 In Film / Re: The Post
« Last post by Alexandro on February 12, 2018, 11:16:06 PM »
I enjoyed it a lot excepting the dumb Vietnam beginning and the preachy ending. It's very frustrating when a film manages to work, create tension, suspense, humor and drama by being just people talking, just to almost ruin it with pontifications... and that feminist thing everyone is mentioning... wow... that was lame.

Also the George Steinbrenner-esque Nixon shots were a bit strange.

oh yes... would have been way better if it were just shots of the white house instead... really odd choice...
So basically, take Polanski out of the movie...and he should be able to get it financed.

What? Why? Because now Roman Polanski can't even be a character in a film because his mere existence on a piece of fiction somehow enforces sexual misconduct or perpertrates bla bla bla? You see how dumb this whole thing is? And what kind of precedent is setting? How is the presence of a historical figure on a film a "problem"? And how is this helping the cause of gender equality, exactly?

This Year In Film / Re: Black Panther
« Last post by jenkins on February 12, 2018, 09:52:58 PM »
there's this earliesh scene with Creed at like a table and Michael B. Jordan crushes it in this vital human way that's every bit as essential to the Rocky franchise as boxing, so i can't imagine a better contemporary entry into the Rocky franchise and i think it exceeds despite the possible limitations of the type of movie it is, and i'm therefore going to apply this perspective toward seeing Black Panther, hopefully, i'm actually in this "serious" phase and i have to cut loose, like i did last year for Skull Island, and Skull Island paid off for me, so in short the easy sounds complex but it'll sort itself out like how all narratives do.

Into the Spider-Verse i'll have to see since animation can embody imaginative faculties to a high degree. animation begins and ends from a perspective of infinite possibility. the creative forces are charged. and it's not until December anyway.
This Year In Film / Re: Black Panther
« Last post by Drenk on February 12, 2018, 05:01:10 PM »
I didn't like Creed. And Marvel movies are Marvel movies.

So my comic book movie of the year is this one.

This Year In Film / Re: Black Panther
« Last post by ©brad on February 12, 2018, 04:56:15 PM »
this is the comic book movie to see this year isn't it, isn't this it?

Yup. I stopped watching comic book movies years ago but I'm so pumped for this one.
Quentin Tarantino / Re: This Is Why Uma Thurman Is Angry (About Tarantino & Weinstein)
« Last post by Drenk on February 12, 2018, 04:27:37 PM »
Yeah, and what if Tom Cruise rapes a goat before 2019? Sony is taking risks!

The movie will be fine.
So basically, take Polanski out of the movie, decrease the budget, and he should be able to get it financed.
Rumor: Sony Having Second Thoughts About Producing Quentin Tarantino’s Manson Movie

Last week, Quentin Tarantino found himself trending for all the wrong reasons. The filmmaker hit the press to share his side of the story about the “Kill Bill” car accident involving Uma Thurman, which nearly left the actress severely injured. Tarantino called what went down “one of the biggest regrets of my career, it is one of the biggest regrets of my life.” The director again had to go on the defensive after an interview in 2003 on “The Howard Stern Show” resurfaced, and saw Tarantino asserting that Samantha Geimer, who was raped by Roman Polanski when she was 13 years-old, “wanted to have it….she was down with this.” The director issued an apology, but it seems there could be major fallout to come.

Showbiz 411 is reporting is now having “second thoughts” about producing Tarantino’s brewing not-actually-a-Charles-Manson-movie project. The studio is apparently concerned about the press that swirled around the director last week, and there’s probably a couple of good reasons they might be reconsidering the high profile project.

Firstly, it’s going to be very expensive. The budget is said to be in the neighborhood of $100 million, and after marketing, it will need to earn $375 million worldwide to break even. For context, the director has only crossed that number once — with 2012’s “Django Unchained,” which earned $425 million worldwide. The next closest is “Inglourious Basterds,” which tallied $321 million worldwide. Tarantino’s last movie, “The Hateful Eight,” was considered a disappointment financially, earning $155 million globally, on a budget of $44 million (not including marketing).

Secondly, the movie is already generating controversy thanks to the recent news that Polanski will appear as a character in the 1969 set movie.

Leonardo DiCaprio is attached to star in the movie which is set in Los Angeles, and centers on a washed up TV actor who’s had one hit series and is looking for a way to get into the film business through the burgeoning spaghetti western industry in Italy. His sidekick — who’s also his stunt double (which Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise are apparently in contention for) — is looking for the same thing. Meanwhile, the horrific murder of Sharon Tate and four of her friends by Charles Manson’s cult of followers shadows the main narrative. DiCaprio is playing that washed up actor, with Margot Robbie expected to sign up as Sharon Tate, with Al Pacino also eyed for role. (Showbiz 411 speculates that Cruise is up for the Polanski role, which makes little sense considering the director was 36 at the time of Tate’s death — Cruise is 55 — and goes against previous reports that Tarantino is looking for a Polish actor for the part).

It’s a big, expensive auteur project but if anything else surfaces between now and  August 9, 2019 — when the film is slated to be released — that generates further negative chatter around Tarantino, I’m sure Sony doesn’t want to have a big, unreleasable movie on their hands.

Of course, none of this is official, and I’d imagine that Sony is simply watching at the moment to see how things will shake out. There’s also been no word from Paramount, who are in the midst of developing an R-rated “Star Trek” movie based off a concept by Tarantino, who may also sign up to direct.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10
DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy