Options

Trailers: They're like movies, but shorter

1356760

Posts

  • Options
    Just Like ThatJust Like That Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Coltaine wrote: »
    This movie came out last year but it's so awesome and nobody else has seen it but me, so I'm posting the trailer for it

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-wqmnJrOFM

    it's hilarious and you should buy it



    I have nothing more to contribute then to say:

    I am buying the fuck out of this tomorrow.

    Yes! I have helped make the world a better place. I knew someday I would contribute to society.
    SHUT THE FUCK UP EUPHORIA

    That part almost had me crying because I was laughing so hard.

    Just Like That on
  • Options
    Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    It doesn't look anything like Gladiator, except they both have Russel Crow. Does it not look like Robin Hood to you unless he's in green tights?

    Bionic Monkey on
    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • Options
    HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    It doesn't look anything like Gladiator, except they both have Russel Crow. Does it not look like Robin Hood to you unless he's in green tights?

    It's the blue hue and way the camera cuts and some of the shots in the trailer are done, I guess.

    Henroid on
  • Options
    AdrenalineAdrenaline Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3THVbr4hlY&feature=related

    The end of this trailer is solid gold and sold me on the movie.

    As if P.T. Anderson directing wasn't enough.

    Adrenaline on
    I will show you fear in a handful of dust
  • Options
    Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    It doesn't look anything like Gladiator, except they both have Russel Crow. Does it not look like Robin Hood to you unless he's in green tights?

    It's the blue hue and way the camera cuts and some of the shots in the trailer are done, I guess.

    That just means it looks like a Ridley Scott film.

    Bionic Monkey on
    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • Options
    Caveman PawsCaveman Paws Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    It doesn't look anything like Gladiator, except they both have Russel Crow. Does it not look like Robin Hood to you unless he's in green tights?

    It's the blue hue and way the camera cuts and some of the shots in the trailer are done, I guess.

    That just means it looks like a Ridley Scott film.

    I'll admit right now that I'm one of those people who judge movies before they watch them based on trailers/commercials/etc. I tend to be pretty accurate, not hard considering the number of hack writers/lack of imagination in Hollywood these last few years (decades?).

    1st impression from the Robin Hood trailer= Just Gladiator again but Maximus is now Robin Hood. And his Daddy was killed by the Man instead of his wife+kid. So now he's gotta save his peeps via hit and run archer attacks, maybe give some rich peoples money to some poor people between axe swings, roll end credits.

    Caveman Paws on
  • Options
    UrianUrian __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    I'll give Ridley Scott a free pass for however many more mediocre movies he wants to make, because Blade Runner is still my personal choice for the best film of all time.

    Urian on
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    "AN OUTLAW!"

    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    It doesn't look anything like Gladiator, except they both have Russel Crow. Does it not look like Robin Hood to you unless he's in green tights?

    The only real Robin Hood.
    http://i44.tinypic.com/machox.jpg

    ANd I think its fair to say, looking at Star Wars, Indy, Wall Street 2, etc that even your favourite directors eventually become senile from the abundance of coke and alcohol through their lives because they all make terrible films now.

    EDIT: Better link that gif, its over a meg. This board needs its rules updating.

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Urian wrote: »
    I'll give Ridley Scott a free pass for however many more mediocre movies he wants to make, because Blade Runner is still my personal choice for the best film of all time.

    Ridley Scott gets a lifetime pass not only for Blade Runner (which I own six copies of, btw), but for Aliens, Gladiator, Matchstick Men, Legend, Black Hawk Down, and Kingdom of Heaven.

    Even with all the negative press about Robin Hood, critics are still citing the excellence of the direction, composition, and cinematography, so Scott still has it where it counts.

    For a director with his ubiquity, his frequent successes mandate at least a cursory glance at anything he has to offer. Only Spielberg and Scorsese come close in terms of longevity and prowess, and there's plenty of arguments to be had in citation of their flagging skills. At the very least, Scott hasn't yet devolved into self-parody and obsolescence the way so many other once-talented directors of his generation have.



    Yes, I'm talking to you, mssrs. Lucas, Coppola, and De Palma.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Is there any fucking reason why the new Robinhood movie looks like Gladiator 2? It doesn't look like Robinhood at all aside from a bow being shot and some guy saying someone else is an outlaw.

    "AN OUTLAW!"

    It's funny, because it looks like John's job is to wear a series of silly hats that don't fit properly. (Well, headgear, anyway)

    Fencingsax on
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited May 2010
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Ridley Scott has a knack for making great looking perfectly crafted films that evaporate from relevance the moment you leave the theater

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited May 2010
    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I dunno Robinhood looks like generic movie of genericness. What is with every medevil themed movie having to be about our ideals. Like freedom and liberty, they did that with 300 too and it comes off as hollow.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Rogue_KRogue_K Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    TURN OFF YOUR ELECTRODE GUN!!!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2ukRYsYPmo

    Rogue_K on
    And through it all i gamed.
    ssig-654898.jpg
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Elki wrote: »
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Director's Cut only. The studio cut that was in the theaters was mostly rubbish. If you've not seen the DC, it adds almost an entire hour and major subplots to the film not even hinted at in the theatrical cut.


    Orlando Bloom was not the right choice for the lead, granted, but everything else in that film is fantastic. Especially the strong anti-dogmatic message.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Ridley Scott has a knack for making great looking perfectly crafted films that evaporate from relevance the moment you leave the theater

    The guy made Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator, Legend, and Thelma & Louise. Hardly what I'd call films that have evaporated from the popular consciousness.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I liked American Gangster.

    KalTorak on
  • Options
    David_TDavid_T A fashion yes-man is no good to me. Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Elki wrote: »
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Director's Cut only. The studio cut that was in the theaters was mostly rubbish. If you've not seen the DC, it adds almost an entire hour and major subplots to the film not even hinted at in the theatrical cut.

    And by adding an hour it manages to feel shorter. So much better than the theater cut.

    David_T on
    euj90n71sojo.png
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited May 2010
    Elki wrote: »
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Director's Cut only. The studio cut that was in the theaters was mostly rubbish. If you've not seen the DC, it adds almost an entire hour and major subplots to the film not even hinted at in the theatrical cut.


    Orlando Bloom was not the right choice for the lead, granted, but everything else in that film is fantastic. Especially the strong anti-dogmatic message.

    I guess I could check that out. I try to stay away from things labeled Director's Cut because they usually just mean Director and Studio Want More Money Here Is That Movie You Watched + Random Scenes From the Cutting Room Floor ENJOY.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    David_T wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Director's Cut only. The studio cut that was in the theaters was mostly rubbish. If you've not seen the DC, it adds almost an entire hour and major subplots to the film not even hinted at in the theatrical cut.

    And by adding an hour it manages to feel shorter. So much better than the theater cut.

    Well, perception of time slows down when you're trapped in a dark theater and bored to tears because all motivations and actions within the film don't make any sense and you've given up caring. When all you want to see is the final credits, a watched pot never boils.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Elki wrote: »
    I guess I could check that out. I try to stay away from things labeled Director's Cut because they usually just mean Director and Studio Want More Money Here Is That Movie You Watched + Random Scenes From the Cutting Room Floor ENJOY.

    You're absolutely right about that assumption, most "Director's Cuts" are a tawdry cash grab, but this is the one case where the difference is staggering. I would actually consider it a greater difference, as far as storytelling goes, than the theatrical and director's cuts of the LOTR trilogy. As lengthy as those add-ins were, they never changed the central story, only embellishing it and doling out the occasional fanwank. The Kingdom of Heaven DC is an entirely different movie.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I enjoyed the theatrical cut of Kingdom of Heaven, but the DC is far and away better. Having seen Robin Hood I really hope the same is true about it's eventual DC. It definitely feels like there was quite a bit of editing involved, and the current version is just meh.

    Tomanta on
  • Options
    UrianUrian __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Elki wrote: »
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Director's Cut only. The studio cut that was in the theaters was mostly rubbish. If you've not seen the DC, it adds almost an entire hour and major subplots to the film not even hinted at in the theatrical cut.


    Orlando Bloom was not the right choice for the lead, granted, but everything else in that film is fantastic. Especially the strong anti-dogmatic message.

    Love this moment.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6aPgA5549g

    The DC was great. Scott is a fantastic director and he's probably only made like 2 or 3 bad movies in his entire career.

    Urian on
  • Options
    ColtaineColtaine Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Coltaine wrote: »
    This movie came out last year but it's so awesome and nobody else has seen it but me, so I'm posting the trailer for it

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-wqmnJrOFM

    it's hilarious and you should buy it



    I have nothing more to contribute then to say:

    I am buying the fuck out of this tomorrow.


    It doesn't matter that I had to buy a region one import.

    It doesn't matter that my wife spent 90 mins going 'what'?

    I thought this was great!

    Coltaine on
    I am feeling unusually loquacious. Thus.

    As many-handed as a cuttlefish.
  • Options
    Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Elki wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    For Kingdom of Heaven? Goodness.

    Director's Cut only. The studio cut that was in the theaters was mostly rubbish. If you've not seen the DC, it adds almost an entire hour and major subplots to the film not even hinted at in the theatrical cut.


    Orlando Bloom was not the right choice for the lead, granted, but everything else in that film is fantastic. Especially the strong anti-dogmatic message.

    I guess I could check that out. I try to stay away from things labeled Director's Cut because they usually just mean Director and Studio Want More Money Here Is That Movie You Watched + Random Scenes From the Cutting Room Floor ENJOY.

    Notable exceptions: Blade Runner, Dark City

    Centipede Damascus on
  • Options
    Fatboy RobertsFatboy Roberts Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I'm weird in that I prefer the European theatrical cut of Blade Runner.

    Some of my favorite Director's Cut/Special Editions:

    Brazil
    Alien 3
    Kingdom of Heaven
    Superman II
    Touch of Evil
    The Fellowship of the Ring
    The Abyss

    The Close Encounters Special Edition has some interesting shit in it, but isn't as cohesive. Same with Cameron's ALIENS and Terminator 2.

    I'm sure I'm forgetting a hell of a lot of notable director's cuts that really made the movie better, but they're not leaping to mind right now. I'm looking at that list and it seems like I'm woefully misrepresenting the number of films improved.

    Fatboy Roberts on
  • Options
    NocrenNocren Lt Futz, Back in Action North CarolinaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I'm weird in that I prefer the European theatrical cut of Blade Runner.

    Some of my favorite Director's Cut/Special Editions:

    Brazil
    Alien 3
    Kingdom of Heaven
    Superman II
    Touch of Evil
    The Fellowship of the Ring
    The Abyss

    The Close Encounters Special Edition has some interesting shit in it, but isn't as cohesive. Same with Cameron's ALIENS and Terminator 2.

    I'm sure I'm forgetting a hell of a lot of notable director's cuts that really made the movie better, but they're not leaping to mind right now. I'm looking at that list and it seems like I'm woefully misrepresenting the number of films improved.

    Highlander 2, Though the theatrical cut is bad enough that most people forget the movie entirely anyway.
    The "Renegade Cut" changes a few things (turning the Immortals back into Immortals and not as aliens, and changing one large fight back into 2 separate battles).

    Nocren on
    newSig.jpg
  • Options
    UrianUrian __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Blade Runner final cut on Blu-Ray is glorious.

    Urian on
  • Options
    OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? the foot of mt fujiRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    KalTorak wrote: »
    I liked American Gangster.

    Goddamn right you did, because American Gangster is a quality film

    Olivaw on
    signature-deffo.jpg
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I'm sure I'm forgetting a hell of a lot of notable director's cuts that really made the movie better, but they're not leaping to mind right now. I'm looking at that list and it seems like I'm woefully misrepresenting the number of films improved.

    Watchmen is one I'm torn on. Of the three versions available, I think the "Director's Cut" is actually the most cohesive and essential. I own the Ultimate Cut, but I think it's a strictly fans-only affair, as nearly four hours of anything is punishing.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    UrianUrian __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    I saw Robin Hood today and I'm definitely looking forward to the inevitable directors cut, though I did really enjoy it even as is. The cut just felt weird kind of like Kingdom of Heaven's theatrical version.

    Urian on
  • Options
    cj iwakuracj iwakura The Rhythm Regent Bears The Name FreedomRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I preferred the theatrical cut of Sin City. Usually deleted scenes are deleted for a good reason; usually.

    The 'X' version of Robocop is worth watching if nothing else.


    My favorite film ever is probably Dark City if not Ghost Dog, and I've yet to see the director's cut of the former(though I do own it).

    cj iwakura on
    wVEsyIc.png
  • Options
    DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Just added the directors cut of like half the movies on that list to my netflix queue Fatboy

    Doodmann on
    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    I like to ART
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I thought the directors cut of Aliens at the very least added one important scene and thats the smart guns. It at least showed why the aliens didn't just break their barricade by brute force. And I believe it added in the part about Ripleys daughter.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    cj iwakuracj iwakura The Rhythm Regent Bears The Name FreedomRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    It also showed the fate of Newt's parents, but that could have been left to the imagination.

    cj iwakura on
    wVEsyIc.png
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Some people were bothered by that, but its not like that story line was written after the movie was shot, they were supposed to be the ones who brought the aliens on board.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Raybies666Raybies666 Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    It also showed the fate of Newt's parents, but that could have been left to the imagination.

    I find that scene ruins the suspense in advance of when the marines actually enter and explore the area. An area where the original cut worked better. Somebody want to make a director's cut thread?

    Raybies666 on
    Beat me on Wii U: Raybies
    Beat me on 360: Raybies666

    I remember when I had time to be good at games.
  • Options
    DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2010
    Felt this might be interesting to people, X-posted in GV.
    Cannes 2010: Shia LaBeouf: We botched the last Indiana Jones


    The last time Shia LaBeouf came to Cannes, in 2008, it was to promote "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," the revival of the swashbuckling adventure franchise that went on to earn a whopping $787 million around the world. LaBeouf is back on the Croisette this weekend to flog "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps," another revival of a classic from several decades ago. But he's not willing to forget about what he says were rampant problems with Indy 4 -- and he doesn't expect fans to, either.
    "I feel like I dropped the ball on the legacy that people loved and cherished," LaBeouf said, explaining that this upped the ante for him before he began shooting the "Wall Street" sequel. "If I was going to do it twice, my career was over. So this was fight-or-flight for me."

    Meeting with reporters Saturday on a terrace at the Hotel du Cap, he had some strong, confessional words about his acting in the film, which he said he felt didn't convince anyone that he was the action hero the movie claimed him to be. "You get to monkey-swinging and things like that and you can blame it on the writer and you can blame it on Steven [Spielberg, who directed]. But the actor's job is to make it come alive and make it work, and I couldn't do it. So that's my fault. Simple.

    LaBeouf said that he could have kept quiet, especially given the movie's blockbuster status, but didn't think the film had fooled anyone. "I think the audience is pretty intelligent. I think they know when you've made ... . And I think if you don't acknowledge it, then why do they trust you the next time you're promoting a movie." LaBeouf went on to say he wasn't the only star on the film who felt that way. "We [Harrison Ford and LaBeouf] had major discussions. He wasn't happy with it either. Look, the movie could have been updated. There was a reason it wasn't universally accepted."

    LaBeouf added, "We need to be able to satiate the appetite," he said. "I think we just misinterpreted what we were trying to satiate."

    Asked whether this was difficult to say, given his deep relationship with Spielberg, LaBeouf continued with the directness.

    "I'll probably get a call. But he needs to hear this. I love him. I love Steven. I have a relationship with Steven that supersedes our business work. And believe me, I talk to him often enough to know that I'm not out of line. And I would never disrespect the man. I think he's a genius, and he's given me my whole life. He's done so much great work that there's no need for him to feel vulnerable about one film. But when you drop the ball you drop the ball."

    Interviewing LaBeouf is a unique experience. It's nearly impossible not to like the 23-year-old, who carries an honesty and a winning sincerity that endears him to you despite, or because of, his mispronunciation of words such as "schoolastic" and "hyperboil" (as though the word for exaggeration connotes a manic skin blemish). He's refreshingly honest, apparently engaged with subjects far beyond movies and willing to throw out whatever playbook his publicists no doubt beg him to use.

    He's also relentlessly intense and unfailingly earnest, taking every question hyper-seriously. When asked whether shooting "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" gave him some insight on what was wrong with our financial system, he said this, with exactly no interruptions:
    "You can make the marketplace more transparent. If people had known who was paying for the mortgages instead of having to rely on Moody's triple-A (bull) rating -- transparency would have helped. The triple A rating thing is ridiculous. That's like Oliver [Stone] paying you for a review. The people who were bundling this toxic crap were paying Moody's for the review of their crap. That's ridiculous. You can't have bank holding companies acting as hedge funds. You can't have them taking a million-dollar pension plan for Joe Schmo the bus driver and treat it with the same risk appetite that you treat George Soros' pocket money. It's fundamentally ridiculous. And it hasn't gotten better very recently, actually. They went from bundling mortgages that were crap to bundling life insurance policies and betting on people's deaths. And you can't blame it all on the Street.... People's mentality needs to change. If the Greece contagion thing takes off and it goes from Spain to Ireland to Portugal things are going to change drastically for the world. Soup kitchens, it won't be that type of change. You won't get a depression that way. But it'll be very difficult. I think, my generation, it's hard to have hope when you got a $700-trillion derivatives debt to pay and a bubble about to explode and $500 trillion worth of GDP. You took all the money in the world and put it in a pot, you're $200 trillion short. It's scary, man. You know the average person born today owes $8,000? The average person getting out of college owes $75,000 with no job. I mean it's scary. My generation, it's a scary situation."

    If only some of that energy had come through in the last Indiana Jones.

    -- Steven Zeitchik, reporting from Cannes, France

    45968513.png

    DarkWarrior on
  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    As much as people rag on Lebeouf, he never struck me as anything but a nice dude. He gets stuck with some shitty roles and I've yet to see any mindblowing acting from the guy, but it's nice to know he's not an asshole.

    KalTorak on
This discussion has been closed.