12 Angry Men is fantastic. There's something appealing to me about stripped down, stageplay-esque movies that mostly take place in one single location, like 12 Angry Men, and Dial M For Murder, Rope, Dogville, The Big Kahuna, My Dinner With Andre, etc.
Although, this is maybe a blasphemous opinion but I always felt like Henry Fonda was wrong for the part. I dunno, I think the character should have exuded thoughtfulness and goodness and instead Fonda just seemed kind of pissed off. Jimmy Stewart would've been better.
To be fair, anything is improved by the addition of Jimmy Stewart.
Mr Smith goes to the Pacific Rim
+1
Options
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
Midnight Heat
In the 80s a corrupt, cocaine addict cop tries to find a serial killer, while a pimp rethinks his career choice and tries to get out of the life. And a fantastic soundtrack.
Surprisingly, Kevin Smith’s Tusk dropped as hard as A Walk Among the Tombstones, going from $886K in its first weekend to $267K, just $617 per theater. Cumulatively, it has earned $1.4 million on an estimated $3 million budget.
So I caught The Boxtrolls over the weekend. It was... pretty good!
First, let's temper some expectations. This is not ParaNorman (which I thought was great), and it is not Coraline (which was goddamn fantastic), though the quality of the animation is top notch and the movie is just completely gorgeous to look at. I'm always happy to see new instances of actual stop-motion, and this was executed beautifully. The architecture of this bizarre, cone-shaped city is haunting, the boxtrolls themselves are delightfully modeled and animated, all the characters look great.
The story, meanwhile, starts off strong and has a great hook. This is a dark movie, by the way. Populated almost entirely by people who are various combinations of shallow, selfish, ignorant, and outright evil, the town comes off as almost a PG Sin City. Even the heroine of the story is initially driven by some pretty disturbing motivations. One could be forgiven for interpreting this movie's core message as "Human beings are generally awful and we should probably just wipe them out and let something else take over."
The story honestly stays strong until the final act. Unfortunately, that final act doesn't play out so well, which left me feeling... I dunno, confused? Unsatisfied?
The climax involving the deathbot and the Rise of the Boxtrolls was fun, but then it takes this meandering path to the antagonist having basically won, and he gets everything he wants, and kinda sits there casually and commits suicide by anaphylactic shock, while everybody sits around literally voicing the film's thesis. It was bizarrely heavy-handed and seemed completely unnecessary in light of the perfectly good climax we had ten minutes ago.
Spotty ending aside, I'd strongly recommend the movie. It's fun and different and definitely worth a look.
edit: The film also gets bonus points for having pretty much the best pun ever.
"Curds Way? How do I get there?" "Milk turns into it."
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Just saw The Rover. Absolutely loved it. Minimalist yet elemental and haunting, evoked the atmosphere of a post apocalyptic world even better than The Road did, though I love that movie dearly as well.
Oh god, been looking forward to this so much. Hype: increasing.
The Rover is frustrating because I want to talk about it so bad but nobody has seen it.
I have! Let's talk about it.
The entire journey being about his dead dog was brilliant. Explains in part why he murdered the dwarf and generally didn't care much for people. We spend the entire movie wondering why he's so hollowed out and angry, and that final scene makes us re-examine all of it. After he buries that dog he might even kill himself, it might have been the only thing getting him through the last 10 years after murdering his wife (which I think he regrets). I love how much it made the audience have to fill in the blanks, we learn more about Guy Pearce's character by just looking into his eyes than any one thing he says, and the brief amount of backstory he delivers to the PMC guy was amazing. "The feeling you get when you think about your feet touching the floor. What does that feel like to you?" was one of the most beautiful and haunting lines I can remember hearing in a long time. It makes you think. That's one of the main things I was left with, how thought provoking on a purely raw level it was, stripped down and the most hauntingly realized wasteland I've ever seen. Every character had this look of complete devastation about them, even the PMC's pretending to hold onto some old world values were incredibly creepy in the short screen time they got.
Also, Pattinson blew me away. Had no idea he had that in him. His characters story was pretty much a Greek tragedy.
Basically, David Michod needs to direct The Last of Us film.
Bubby on
+1
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Surprisingly, Kevin Smith’s Tusk dropped as hard as A Walk Among the Tombstones, going from $886K in its first weekend to $267K, just $617 per theater. Cumulatively, it has earned $1.4 million on an estimated $3 million budget.
Ouch so it won't even make back its meager budget.
Honestly I think they fucked up by opening it in 600 theaters. It's the definition of a word-of-mouth movie, where you give it a very limited release to start with so that people go, "You won't believe what I saw!" and then drag their friends back to the theater when it opens slightly wider.
There are very few cases where you should be opening any movie in 100-1500 screens. Either you go below that and hope to build, or you go above that so that hopefully get the "I dunno what's playing but we should see a movie tonight" crowd based on availability.
+1
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
edited September 2014
The Rover on a scale of Mad Max to The Road, where it be, boos?
Pattinson being in the movie is the main reason I've avoided it.
Surprisingly, Kevin Smith’s Tusk dropped as hard as A Walk Among the Tombstones, going from $886K in its first weekend to $267K, just $617 per theater. Cumulatively, it has earned $1.4 million on an estimated $3 million budget.
Ouch so it won't even make back its meager budget.
Honestly I think they fucked up by opening it in 600 theaters. It's the definition of a word-of-mouth movie, where you give it a very limited release to start with so that people go, "You won't believe what I saw!" and then drag their friends back to the theater when it opens slightly wider.
There are very few cases where you should be opening any movie in 100-1500 screens. Either you go below that and hope to build, or you go above that so that hopefully get the "I dunno what's playing but we should see a movie tonight" crowd based on availability.
It hasn't open in Canada and some foreign markets. Between that and VOD sales/rentals I'm sure it'll make it's money back at least.
It apparently got Smith funding for Clerks III, so I guess there's that. Though I dunno who actually wants that movie.
Tusk looks like trash I'm not surprised it's doing poorly
if your movie marketing has to be "well there was this joke in a podcast months ago.." you might want to reassess if that's a movie you should actually make
When Henry Fonda moved to Hollywood in 1934, he was again a roommate with Stewart in an apartment in Brentwood, and the two gained reputations as playboys. Both men's children later noted that their favorite activity when not working seemed to be quietly sharing time together while building and painting model airplanes, a hobby they had taken up in New York, years earlier.
The mental image pleases me no end. Just two old time movie stars, painting model airplanes in amiable silence.
When Henry Fonda moved to Hollywood in 1934, he was again a roommate with Stewart in an apartment in Brentwood, and the two gained reputations as playboys. Both men's children later noted that their favorite activity when not working seemed to be quietly sharing time together while building and painting model airplanes, a hobby they had taken up in New York, years earlier.
The mental image pleases me no end. Just two old time movie stars, painting model airplanes in amiable silence.
I think Peter Cushing may have been the nicest man in showbusiness. No one has ever said a bad word about him, and most stories are of his patience and kindness and old-worldly manners.
I like Christopher Lee's story of how, upon complaining vociferously in their dressing room about some film they were in or other, Cushing stops him dead with a mildly critical "Well, we must make the best of it, my dear boy". Lee says it struck him like a bullet, so astonishing was it to hear a reproof from Cushing.
I like old timey movie star biographies. Far better to have a section in the book where the subject goes off and fights in WWII or rides trains like a hobo in the Great Depression or recruits Winston Churchill's double for diversionary operations or murders her gangster boyfriend and gets her daughter to take the rap than, say, a bit about rehab.
Mitchum's biography is fantastic for this kind of thing.
Surprisingly, Kevin Smith’s Tusk dropped as hard as A Walk Among the Tombstones, going from $886K in its first weekend to $267K, just $617 per theater. Cumulatively, it has earned $1.4 million on an estimated $3 million budget.
Ouch so it won't even make back its meager budget.
Honestly I think they fucked up by opening it in 600 theaters. It's the definition of a word-of-mouth movie, where you give it a very limited release to start with so that people go, "You won't believe what I saw!" and then drag their friends back to the theater when it opens slightly wider.
There are very few cases where you should be opening any movie in 100-1500 screens. Either you go below that and hope to build, or you go above that so that hopefully get the "I dunno what's playing but we should see a movie tonight" crowd based on availability.
He wrote a pretty great response, which seems way less cynical than he's been in a while.
Hi! It's TUSK-maker Kevin Smith!
For anyone interested in my take on the box office of TUSK, here are 2 links to podcasts where I discuss the subject at length...
But if you're not a podcast fan, here's some text...
TUSK cost under $3 million to make. Yes - I'm stupid enough to make a movie that weird but I'm not stupid enough to break the bank doing so. Demarest, the company that funded the film, made their loot back on foreign sales at the last Berlin market: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/berlin-sony-snaps-up-kevin-678200
The marketing budget of our theatrical release was a low spend, as our plan was to use the Toronto buzz to launch our national release. A24 ran a beautiful campaign. I have zero complaints. I'm happy anyone showed up to see the flick at all. Seriously: it's a movie about a guy who turns another guy into a walrus. Thanks to ANYBODY who ever said #WalrusYes.
Monday morning quarterbacking the situation? The 600 screen release was way too ambitious. If you're going to open on that many screens, you have to spend far more than we did to let people know there's a movie in theaters at all. We could have likely done close to the same opening number on half the amount of screens. In retrospect, a more traditional platform release might've worked better. TUSK is opening that way this Friday in Canada, debuting on 4 screens across the entire country in Toronto, Winnipeg, Montreal and Vancouver. If there's interest, it will expand accordingly.
As for why TUSK didn't do better: it's a weeeeeird movie, man. It was always a midnight movie, not a mainstream movie. When A24 said they wanted to go out on 600 screens (and at one point, there was even talk of 1000 screens, if you can believe that), it was a wonderful vote of confidence. Now we know that wide release vote of confidence was misplaced on me and my walrus movie in this instance.
But TUSK is by no means a disaster. It's a three million dollar movie, kids: everyone's financially okay. And while I can't predict the future (obviously), I think the flick will do quite nicely on VOD.
Naturally, I wish more folks had come to see it in theaters, but I've been here before and I know how it all works out - because the TUSK release is akin to the MALLRATS theatrical release. That flick cost $5 million in 1995 and was release on 700 screens. It did only slightly better than TUSK, earning $400k on the opening Friday. But while I lost the box office derby on that 1995 opening weekend, I won the marathon with MALLRATS - as it's the movie people talk to me about the most and the biggest gateway/intro to the rest of the films and all the podcasts. TUSK will have people talking for the rest of my life. Some people will love, some will hate. But it'll make you feel something. And that, they tell me, is art.
I honestly don't mind all the roasting of my flesh online or being the whipping boy of the moment because even if I "failed", I did so doing trying something different. But on the purely financial side - the biz of the showbiz equation? Because of TUSK, I got to make YOGA HOSERS (which is turning out nicely). And also because of TUSK, we just secured financing for CLERKS III. And right after that, we wrap the third part of the True North Trilogy that began with TUSK, continues in YOGA HOSERS, and ends with MOOSE JAWS (which is my JAWS with a moose movie). TUSK was the bridge to all that. If that's failing, yes: I'm a big, fat failure. And I hope to fail lots more just like it in the near future.
Don't be afraid to do weird stuff, so long as you do it cheaply and cover everyone's bets. Be bold. Be stupid, if you have to: so long as you don't hurt anybody, what's it matter how dopey your dream is? If I hadn't made TUSK? If I'd let it die as a podcast? I wouldn't have three other movies I'm now making within the span of a year. Some folks will try to shame you for trying something outside the norm; the only shame is in not trying to accomplish your dreams.
People have been telling me I'm a failure and that I'm doing it all wrong for 20 years now. Never trust anybody when they tell you how your story goes. You know your story. You write your own story.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
So I caught The Boxtrolls over the weekend. It was... pretty good!
First, let's temper some expectations. This is not ParaNorman (which I thought was great), and it is not Coraline (which was goddamn fantastic), though the quality of the animation is top notch and the movie is just completely gorgeous to look at. I'm always happy to see new instances of actual stop-motion, and this was executed beautifully. The architecture of this bizarre, cone-shaped city is haunting, the boxtrolls themselves are delightfully modeled and animated, all the characters look great.
The story, meanwhile, starts off strong and has a great hook. This is a dark movie, by the way. Populated almost entirely by people who are various combinations of shallow, selfish, ignorant, and outright evil, the town comes off as almost a PG Sin City. Even the heroine of the story is initially driven by some pretty disturbing motivations. One could be forgiven for interpreting this movie's core message as "Human beings are generally awful and we should probably just wipe them out and let something else take over."
The story honestly stays strong until the final act. Unfortunately, that final act doesn't play out so well, which left me feeling... I dunno, confused? Unsatisfied?
The climax involving the deathbot and the Rise of the Boxtrolls was fun, but then it takes this meandering path to the antagonist having basically won, and he gets everything he wants, and kinda sits there casually and commits suicide by anaphylactic shock, while everybody sits around literally voicing the film's thesis. It was bizarrely heavy-handed and seemed completely unnecessary in light of the perfectly good climax we had ten minutes ago.
Spotty ending aside, I'd strongly recommend the movie. It's fun and different and definitely worth a look.
edit: The film also gets bonus points for having pretty much the best pun ever.
"Curds Way? How do I get there?" "Milk turns into it."
This is a pretty spot on review of the film, especially the climax having one peak too many.
I guess it makes thematic sense that the guy obsessed with the trappings of status is quite literally destroyed by said trappings, but I figured a way to do that and keep up the momentum of the climax would be having him leap over a cliff after the white hat and go out Disney style. You could keep him being all one winged angel with the cheese allergy for the grossout factor.
God I wanted to punch Winnie's Dad in the face. There's not paying attention to your kid and there's outright neglect. Not to mention corruption with the Children's Hospital-cum-Brie wheel. I know that was the movie's point that the adults are awful, but it stretched believability just a little bit.
And before scapegoating the Box Trolls, what was Snatcher's plan with the giant robot? Just seize the hat outright?
Nitpicks aside, it was still pretty great. And yes, that pun was great. I also loved:
"The unspeakable has happened! We must speak about it!"
I think Peter Cushing may have been the nicest man in showbusiness. No one has ever said a bad word about him, and most stories are of his patience and kindness and old-worldly manners.
I like Christopher Lee's story of how, upon complaining vociferously in their dressing room about some film they were in or other, Cushing stops him dead with a mildly critical "Well, we must make the best of it, my dear boy". Lee says it struck him like a bullet, so astonishing was it to hear a reproof from Cushing.
I just assume the sheer Britishness of that statement snapped Lee's stiff-upper-lip into place so hard he couldn't complain anymore.
Laika are all about subtle transgressions of the norm, aren't they? We've gone from a gay teenager to Winnie being a gore (and possibly vore) fetishist?
Fetishist may be a bit strong, but she was definitely into it.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Surprisingly, Kevin Smith’s Tusk dropped as hard as A Walk Among the Tombstones, going from $886K in its first weekend to $267K, just $617 per theater. Cumulatively, it has earned $1.4 million on an estimated $3 million budget.
Ouch so it won't even make back its meager budget.
Honestly I think they fucked up by opening it in 600 theaters. It's the definition of a word-of-mouth movie, where you give it a very limited release to start with so that people go, "You won't believe what I saw!" and then drag their friends back to the theater when it opens slightly wider.
There are very few cases where you should be opening any movie in 100-1500 screens. Either you go below that and hope to build, or you go above that so that hopefully get the "I dunno what's playing but we should see a movie tonight" crowd based on availability.
He wrote a pretty great response, which seems way less cynical than he's been in a while.
Hi! It's TUSK-maker Kevin Smith!
For anyone interested in my take on the box office of TUSK, here are 2 links to podcasts where I discuss the subject at length...
But if you're not a podcast fan, here's some text...
TUSK cost under $3 million to make. Yes - I'm stupid enough to make a movie that weird but I'm not stupid enough to break the bank doing so. Demarest, the company that funded the film, made their loot back on foreign sales at the last Berlin market: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/berlin-sony-snaps-up-kevin-678200
The marketing budget of our theatrical release was a low spend, as our plan was to use the Toronto buzz to launch our national release. A24 ran a beautiful campaign. I have zero complaints. I'm happy anyone showed up to see the flick at all. Seriously: it's a movie about a guy who turns another guy into a walrus. Thanks to ANYBODY who ever said #WalrusYes.
Monday morning quarterbacking the situation? The 600 screen release was way too ambitious. If you're going to open on that many screens, you have to spend far more than we did to let people know there's a movie in theaters at all. We could have likely done close to the same opening number on half the amount of screens. In retrospect, a more traditional platform release might've worked better. TUSK is opening that way this Friday in Canada, debuting on 4 screens across the entire country in Toronto, Winnipeg, Montreal and Vancouver. If there's interest, it will expand accordingly.
As for why TUSK didn't do better: it's a weeeeeird movie, man. It was always a midnight movie, not a mainstream movie. When A24 said they wanted to go out on 600 screens (and at one point, there was even talk of 1000 screens, if you can believe that), it was a wonderful vote of confidence. Now we know that wide release vote of confidence was misplaced on me and my walrus movie in this instance.
But TUSK is by no means a disaster. It's a three million dollar movie, kids: everyone's financially okay. And while I can't predict the future (obviously), I think the flick will do quite nicely on VOD.
Naturally, I wish more folks had come to see it in theaters, but I've been here before and I know how it all works out - because the TUSK release is akin to the MALLRATS theatrical release. That flick cost $5 million in 1995 and was release on 700 screens. It did only slightly better than TUSK, earning $400k on the opening Friday. But while I lost the box office derby on that 1995 opening weekend, I won the marathon with MALLRATS - as it's the movie people talk to me about the most and the biggest gateway/intro to the rest of the films and all the podcasts. TUSK will have people talking for the rest of my life. Some people will love, some will hate. But it'll make you feel something. And that, they tell me, is art.
I honestly don't mind all the roasting of my flesh online or being the whipping boy of the moment because even if I "failed", I did so doing trying something different. But on the purely financial side - the biz of the showbiz equation? Because of TUSK, I got to make YOGA HOSERS (which is turning out nicely). And also because of TUSK, we just secured financing for CLERKS III. And right after that, we wrap the third part of the True North Trilogy that began with TUSK, continues in YOGA HOSERS, and ends with MOOSE JAWS (which is my JAWS with a moose movie). TUSK was the bridge to all that. If that's failing, yes: I'm a big, fat failure. And I hope to fail lots more just like it in the near future.
Don't be afraid to do weird stuff, so long as you do it cheaply and cover everyone's bets. Be bold. Be stupid, if you have to: so long as you don't hurt anybody, what's it matter how dopey your dream is? If I hadn't made TUSK? If I'd let it die as a podcast? I wouldn't have three other movies I'm now making within the span of a year. Some folks will try to shame you for trying something outside the norm; the only shame is in not trying to accomplish your dreams.
People have been telling me I'm a failure and that I'm doing it all wrong for 20 years now. Never trust anybody when they tell you how your story goes. You know your story. You write your own story.
I am gratified both that Smith is doing well and that I was totally correct in my assessment.
I think Peter Cushing may have been the nicest man in showbusiness. No one has ever said a bad word about him, and most stories are of his patience and kindness and old-worldly manners.
I like Christopher Lee's story of how, upon complaining vociferously in their dressing room about some film they were in or other, Cushing stops him dead with a mildly critical "Well, we must make the best of it, my dear boy". Lee says it struck him like a bullet, so astonishing was it to hear a reproof from Cushing.
I just assume the sheer Britishness of that statement snapped Lee's stiff-upper-lip into place so hard he couldn't complain anymore.
You just reminded me of the James Bonding podcast. They always try to pick out the most british person in the movie. Peter Cushing would crush that if he would have ever been in a Bond film.
Am I a terrible person for really really enjoying the 12 angry men that HBO did in the 90s with Walter C Scott, and Jack Lemmon?
Because it was pretty fucking good, and I liked playing around with some of the ethnicities and such.
Made it interesting.
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
0
Options
MattitudePaste Pot PeteKicking The BucketRegistered Userregular
Surprisingly, Kevin Smith’s Tusk dropped as hard as A Walk Among the Tombstones, going from $886K in its first weekend to $267K, just $617 per theater. Cumulatively, it has earned $1.4 million on an estimated $3 million budget.
Ouch so it won't even make back its meager budget.
Honestly I think they fucked up by opening it in 600 theaters. It's the definition of a word-of-mouth movie, where you give it a very limited release to start with so that people go, "You won't believe what I saw!" and then drag their friends back to the theater when it opens slightly wider.
There are very few cases where you should be opening any movie in 100-1500 screens. Either you go below that and hope to build, or you go above that so that hopefully get the "I dunno what's playing but we should see a movie tonight" crowd based on availability.
It hasn't open in Canada and some foreign markets. Between that and VOD sales/rentals I'm sure it'll make it's money back at least.
It apparently got Smith funding for Clerks III, so I guess there's that. Though I dunno who actually wants that movie.
Me. I do. And my housemate.
And maybe Brian O'Halloran.
I got this Tumblr and I don't know how to use it.
Decide on the next line by the rhyme when I choose it.
Also I put songs on YouTube
The musings of this lonely rube.
I made a thread once. It didn't end well for me.
+1
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
I rewatched T2 after hearing an interview with Robert Patrick about his new show, and man does that still hold up, Pepsi product placement and time paradoxes aside. There's only two really glaring moments where they kind of cheated with the otherwise great filming: escaping the hospital they had the usual greenscreen/stationary car stuff, and at the end with the final chase there's a really weird practical over the screen moment where Ahnald jumps off the tanker truck.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
I rewatched T2 after hearing an interview with Robert Patrick about his new show, and man does that still hold up, Pepsi product placement and time paradoxes aside. There's only two really glaring moments where they kind of cheated with the otherwise great filming: escaping the hospital they had the usual greenscreen/stationary car stuff, and at the end with the final chase there's a really weird practical over the screen moment where Ahnald jumps off the tanker truck.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
I rewatched T2 after hearing an interview with Robert Patrick about his new show, and man does that still hold up, Pepsi product placement and time paradoxes aside. There's only two really glaring moments where they kind of cheated with the otherwise great filming: escaping the hospital they had the usual greenscreen/stationary car stuff, and at the end with the final chase there's a really weird practical over the screen moment where Ahnald jumps off the tanker truck.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
Terminator's aged gracefully too.
No, it really hasn't. The ending effects have aged really badly.
I rewatched T2 after hearing an interview with Robert Patrick about his new show, and man does that still hold up, Pepsi product placement and time paradoxes aside. There's only two really glaring moments where they kind of cheated with the otherwise great filming: escaping the hospital they had the usual greenscreen/stationary car stuff, and at the end with the final chase there's a really weird practical over the screen moment where Ahnald jumps off the tanker truck.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
Spider-man 2, The Dark Knight, Captain America?
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
+4
Options
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
I rewatched T2 after hearing an interview with Robert Patrick about his new show, and man does that still hold up, Pepsi product placement and time paradoxes aside. There's only two really glaring moments where they kind of cheated with the otherwise great filming: escaping the hospital they had the usual greenscreen/stationary car stuff, and at the end with the final chase there's a really weird practical over the screen moment where Ahnald jumps off the tanker truck.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
Terminator's aged gracefully too.
No, it really hasn't. The ending effects have aged really badly.
I don't know. I kind of liked the claymation rigid movement of the first Terminator at the end. Made it feel even more inhuman, and for lack of a better word, robotic.
I prefer tje first Terminator to Judgement Day but thats more of a guilty pleasure thing.
Also went and saw the Box Trolls. Really enjoyed but definitely not as great as some of the best animated movies but a solid movie. A lot of families came with really small children and this was not a movie for kids under 10.
"Self-parody" is the name of the game in "Dragon Ball Z: Battle of Gods". While it still has several action sequences, "Battle of Gods" is mostly a comedy in that it takes elements of the franchise (such as "the villain is bent on destroying the Earth but will wait while the hero powers-up") and intentionally makes them more absurd (such as by having the villain go try some sushi from a local vendor while the hero powers-up in the background). Even for someone like myself who doesn't really understand why I liked the franchise so much as a child, "Battle of Gods" pokes fun at itself often enough that I think it will be a real treat for anyone who thinks they have outgrown Dragon Ball Z.
I rewatched T2 after hearing an interview with Robert Patrick about his new show, and man does that still hold up, Pepsi product placement and time paradoxes aside. There's only two really glaring moments where they kind of cheated with the otherwise great filming: escaping the hospital they had the usual greenscreen/stationary car stuff, and at the end with the final chase there's a really weird practical over the screen moment where Ahnald jumps off the tanker truck.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
Terminator's aged gracefully too.
No, it really hasn't. The ending effects have aged really badly.
I don't know. I kind of liked the claymation rigid movement of the first Terminator at the end. Made it feel even more inhuman, and for lack of a better word, robotic.
I think another big effect scene that didn't age well (even at the time) was the "self-repair" scene. Either Stan Winston or James Cameron didn't like what they had (which was a steel skull with clay/plaster that someone would tinker with) but the other convinced them "it works to show the machine underneath, so of course it looks fake". Luckily they did a much better job in the T2 deleted "CPU" scene and the Cyberdyne hall walking scene (where Arnold had to match his gait with the robot so they could better edit the shots of him walking/getting shot by the police).
While the special effects in the first Terminator movie look dated and the hairdos are deeply, embarrassingly '80s, I still very much prefer the first film to the second one. I find it more grim, more desperate. The T-1000, while a very cool special effect, always felt first and foremost like a special effect to me, something for ILM's portfolio. I've seen T2 a couple of times but haven't felt like rewatching it in the last 15-20 years, whereas I feel like watching T1 every now and then.
In case it matters, I can't say which of the films I've first; I kinda think it was T2 at the movies, and if I've seen the first film first, it would've been on TV around the same time.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Posts
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Mr Smith goes to the Pacific Rim
Intro:
http://blip.tv/the-cinema-snob/brad-introduces-midnight-heat-5376433
Movie:
http://blip.tv/the-cinema-snob/midnight-heat-5376409
Ouch so it won't even make back its meager budget.
pleasepaypreacher.net
First, let's temper some expectations. This is not ParaNorman (which I thought was great), and it is not Coraline (which was goddamn fantastic), though the quality of the animation is top notch and the movie is just completely gorgeous to look at. I'm always happy to see new instances of actual stop-motion, and this was executed beautifully. The architecture of this bizarre, cone-shaped city is haunting, the boxtrolls themselves are delightfully modeled and animated, all the characters look great.
The story, meanwhile, starts off strong and has a great hook. This is a dark movie, by the way. Populated almost entirely by people who are various combinations of shallow, selfish, ignorant, and outright evil, the town comes off as almost a PG Sin City. Even the heroine of the story is initially driven by some pretty disturbing motivations. One could be forgiven for interpreting this movie's core message as "Human beings are generally awful and we should probably just wipe them out and let something else take over."
The story honestly stays strong until the final act. Unfortunately, that final act doesn't play out so well, which left me feeling... I dunno, confused? Unsatisfied?
Spotty ending aside, I'd strongly recommend the movie. It's fun and different and definitely worth a look.
edit: The film also gets bonus points for having pretty much the best pun ever.
i'd say it's tied with this
http://imgur.com/a/EleOK
I have! Let's talk about it.
Also, Pattinson blew me away. Had no idea he had that in him. His characters story was pretty much a Greek tragedy.
Basically, David Michod needs to direct The Last of Us film.
Honestly I think they fucked up by opening it in 600 theaters. It's the definition of a word-of-mouth movie, where you give it a very limited release to start with so that people go, "You won't believe what I saw!" and then drag their friends back to the theater when it opens slightly wider.
There are very few cases where you should be opening any movie in 100-1500 screens. Either you go below that and hope to build, or you go above that so that hopefully get the "I dunno what's playing but we should see a movie tonight" crowd based on availability.
Pattinson being in the movie is the main reason I've avoided it.
Closer to The Road than Mad Max. Pattinson's performance is a revelation.
It hasn't open in Canada and some foreign markets. Between that and VOD sales/rentals I'm sure it'll make it's money back at least.
It apparently got Smith funding for Clerks III, so I guess there's that. Though I dunno who actually wants that movie.
if your movie marketing has to be "well there was this joke in a podcast months ago.." you might want to reassess if that's a movie you should actually make
The mental image pleases me no end. Just two old time movie stars, painting model airplanes in amiable silence.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I like Christopher Lee's story of how, upon complaining vociferously in their dressing room about some film they were in or other, Cushing stops him dead with a mildly critical "Well, we must make the best of it, my dear boy". Lee says it struck him like a bullet, so astonishing was it to hear a reproof from Cushing.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Mitchum's biography is fantastic for this kind of thing.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
He wrote a pretty great response, which seems way less cynical than he's been in a while.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
pleasepaypreacher.net
You would be too if you smoked weed as much as Kevin Smith.
This is a pretty spot on review of the film, especially the climax having one peak too many.
God I wanted to punch Winnie's Dad in the face. There's not paying attention to your kid and there's outright neglect. Not to mention corruption with the Children's Hospital-cum-Brie wheel. I know that was the movie's point that the adults are awful, but it stretched believability just a little bit.
And before scapegoating the Box Trolls, what was Snatcher's plan with the giant robot? Just seize the hat outright?
Nitpicks aside, it was still pretty great. And yes, that pun was great. I also loved:
I just assume the sheer Britishness of that statement snapped Lee's stiff-upper-lip into place so hard he couldn't complain anymore.
Fetishist may be a bit strong, but she was definitely into it.
I am gratified both that Smith is doing well and that I was totally correct in my assessment.
You just reminded me of the James Bonding podcast. They always try to pick out the most british person in the movie. Peter Cushing would crush that if he would have ever been in a Bond film.
a film completely premised on the beginning of monty python and the holy grail?
Because it was pretty fucking good, and I liked playing around with some of the ethnicities and such.
Made it interesting.
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Me. I do. And my housemate.
And maybe Brian O'Halloran.
Decide on the next line by the rhyme when I choose it.
Also I put songs on YouTube
The musings of this lonely rube.
I made a thread once. It didn't end well for me.
When it comes to no contest better movie than the original, it's T2, Empire Strikes Back, and....Mighty Ducks 2?
Terminator's aged gracefully too.
No, it really hasn't. The ending effects have aged really badly.
Spider-man 2, The Dark Knight, Captain America?
I don't know. I kind of liked the claymation rigid movement of the first Terminator at the end. Made it feel even more inhuman, and for lack of a better word, robotic.
Also went and saw the Box Trolls. Really enjoyed but definitely not as great as some of the best animated movies but a solid movie. A lot of families came with really small children and this was not a movie for kids under 10.
MWO: Adamski
I think another big effect scene that didn't age well (even at the time) was the "self-repair" scene. Either Stan Winston or James Cameron didn't like what they had (which was a steel skull with clay/plaster that someone would tinker with) but the other convinced them "it works to show the machine underneath, so of course it looks fake". Luckily they did a much better job in the T2 deleted "CPU" scene and the Cyberdyne hall walking scene (where Arnold had to match his gait with the robot so they could better edit the shots of him walking/getting shot by the police).
In case it matters, I can't say which of the films I've first; I kinda think it was T2 at the movies, and if I've seen the first film first, it would've been on TV around the same time.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods