Film Discussion > News and Theory

Theatrical Release Calendar and Projects In Development

(1/4) > >>

wilder:
PDF link below. This calendar is by no means all-inclusive - just the stuff I'm looking forward to. It includes forthcoming US theatrical release dates and a list of projects in development. The document is something I update for myself, but figured it could be useful to other people. I'm making no claims to its accuracy, these dates change all the time.

I'll try to update the link every so often, the file marked with the date the list was last modified.

Release Calendar - PDF (last updated February 1, 2019)

PDF is also attached to this topic if Sendspace link dies.

Edit - movies shot on film with release dates are now blue

jenkins:
looking forward to when the dates crack open for tbd. my anticipation, your dates must crack open!

palo alto is a fun list topper. fascinated by how franco exists within both high and low cultures, how high culture consistently thrashes him and how low culture is boggled and delighted. he is thrashable and boggleable. i appreciate that. like, i tried to watch as i lie dying. phewwww. the purpose of its existence is a realdeal fucking mystery. franco is now on the cover of faulkner's as i lay dying. lol. idk. the book is the same as it was, so no prob imo. nbd. palo alto overlaps through its creation by an unproven coppola. what's gonna happen??? mystery. i'm in

tangentially related: james ponsoldt's the end of the tour, which is based on an interpretation of dfw from an interview conducted on a road trip, and jason segal is playing dfw. what. the. fuck. again, dfw's books are the same as they were -- this is a wonky triple-layered imagining of him, so nbd despite its overall mysterious purpose. and, at least it's not an adaptation of a dfw book (cringe via brief interviews with hideous men)

most of the time the lit world hates adaptations anyways. i basically do. well, i like adaptations when they break creative barriers, because i don't think they can exist within the same ones. factually speaking, the mediums are different. obvious. so light cinema's flame when you can, please!

appropriately conversational, inherent vice in december. if you're wondering, yes, i have irl confirmation that certain disciples of literature aren't more tolerant of this because of pta's involvement. there's the view that pynchon belongs on the pages where he lives. butalso, there's more widespread interest and approval. fucking pynchon approved (which i've heard expressed as a sign that pynchon has lost his way. uhck, so rude). it's like, however you view the matter, if you're gonna trust a person to do this pta is the person to trust. i've said before that having read iv i'm not at all worried. nope. consider the selection pta's good choice. think he's perfectly suited for this book. and i think this group definitely trusts him, and he deserves trust, with the handling of properties of cinema. get him grrrrl

thanks for this topic btw. me, lottery, mel, and others can relate to sharing information that for one reason or another doesn't stir conversation. fuck it. believe in your interests even when no else does if you can. someone's gotta, you know. right? rightish. k

Axolotl:

--- Quote from: jenkins<3 on April 28, 2014, 04:04:31 PM ---most of the time the lit world hates adaptations anyways. i basically do.

--- End quote ---
I don't understand that position. Do you also hate translations? Isn't an adaptation a visual translation, or the search for an essential visual equivalent of the text? Just as the clunkiest translations are the ones that are slavish adherents to the original and look for a word-by-word equivalence(case in point: Lydia Davis' translation of Proust which is inferior to the old Moncrieff/Kilmartin one even though it's more faithful) so the worst adaptations are the ones that try to put the text directly on the screen instead of locating its essence. And that's not even a question when you're dealing with a great filmmaker in which case you can end up with a work of art superior and of greater depth than the original. I understand being wary of hollywood adaptations in general, but hating adaptations on principle is close minded especially given their historical importance to cinema.


--- Quote from: jenkins<3 on April 28, 2014, 04:04:31 PM ---if you're wondering, yes, i have irl confirmation that certain disciples of literature aren't more tolerant of this because of pta's involvement. there's the view that pynchon belongs on the pages where he lives

--- End quote ---
Those disciples haven't read Inherent Vice then. It's the least impressive thing he's written since Slow Learner and that was when he was <24 years old. IV was barely rescued for me by how beautiful the the last page or two were, and a later realization that he wrote this, and only this, to be adapted.


--- Quote from: jenkins<3 on April 28, 2014, 04:04:31 PM ---fucking pynchon approved (which i've heard expressed as a sign that pynchon has lost his way. uhck, so rude)

--- End quote ---
Nabokov must have been passed out in a ditch somewhere when he wrote the screenplay for Lolita, and Pale Fire and Ada or Ardor must not exist.


--- Quote from: jenkins<3 on April 28, 2014, 04:04:31 PM ---me, lottery, mel, and others can relate to sharing information that for one reason or another doesn't stir conversation

--- End quote ---
You guys are doing God's work. Please don't stop.

jenkins:
ax,
terrific conversational opportunity
i stand like:
my favorite jane austen adaptation is clueless
andrea arnold and fish tank = tops
^ and wuthering heights = not really but thanks
steve mcqueen and shame = tops
^ and 12 years = just not the same!
fearful of costumes
luhrmann and r&j -- yess
luhrmann and gg -- silly
favorite novelization of a movie -- lol. nope. 2001 in that it was a simultaneous creation

in general it's a fear of costumes, probably

[edited]below this post used to be a post where i asked about which polish movies i should see that were playing somewhere]

Mel:
I don't think I will be able to help you, since I'm somewhere between being very dismissive about some Polish directors (which is very Polish in itself) and ignorant about cinema in native language overall. Films are the cause and material I learned English from and there is a part about learning other cultures, even through narrow window as film often are. I would probably do more harm than good, since I'm in no way objective here and my judgment is very prodigious.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version