Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,053
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 3, 2011 12:19:31 GMT -5
Scott Pilgrim's box office was a damn shame. Great movie, and deserved to do better. Perhaps it's a DVD/Blu hit. Yeah it happens. For a lot of reasons some movies that are good just don't get noticed. I guess people have to be more choosy about that they see and maybe the marketing campaign just didn't grab em. I think Scott Pilgrim can become something of a cult classic on dvd/Blu Ray too. I can think of a ton of movies I've come to love over the years simply by watching them on some kind of home format instead of in a theater. |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 3, 2011 12:49:34 GMT -5
Oh and regarding Scott Pilgrim, yes it flopped in theaters, but its fanbase it's growing and growing every day. People who didn't see it on theaters are discovering it on cable and DVD. It's just a very good, fun and well-made film. It's hard not to appreciate it on some level. Even Chris Brown loves it. I think the film is already a cult classic. www.facebook.com/OfficialBrandonRouth#!/ScottPilgrim Oops it was my intention to post this instead of that link: www.facebook.com/ScottPilgrim |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 12, 2011 13:52:14 GMT -5
So for those interested.. it seems yesterday was the day that Bryan Singer received his award. I think this is the vid they showed at the ceremony, it was uploaded by SitgesFilmFestival yesterday,
BRYAN SINGER. Grand Honorary Award SITGES 2011
I'm about to see more videos of interviews with him at the event, but several people on twitter (people who attended) say that Singer said that MICHAEL JACKSON wanted to play professor X....
;D
Here is one of those tweets (in spanish):
buskyworld Albert B.
Bryan Singer dice en #Sitges2011 que Michael Jackson se ofreció para el papel de Profesor X de X-Men
EDIT: there is him arriving at the event,
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 13, 2011 13:44:33 GMT -5
Been reading some interviews in spanish. Very revealing. They asked Singer why he didn't do XMen 3 and he said that he didn't have many ideas for another one, and then the opportunity to do a Superman film came up.
He also said that SR should have premiered in the winter, that it was not what audiences expected in the summer. He said he was very proud of some sequences and that the movie was very nostalgic, but that he's moved on...
He also said that studios only care about artificial fireworks and action for these movies. And also that a movie needs to have heart in order to be really good.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 13, 2011 16:31:04 GMT -5
Then why did SR feel like a manufactured heart instead of a genuine one?
|
|
Rod
New Member
Believe it or not
Posts: 498 
|
Post by Rod on Oct 13, 2011 17:25:13 GMT -5
Then why did SR feel like a manufactured heart instead of a genuine one? i can feel a genuine heart in SR. it is a genuine angst heart. great yin yang of chicks in the signature! |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 13, 2011 19:43:14 GMT -5
Because you didn't like the movie and it didn't work for you.
What you might have felt about SR, I instead felt for X3.
All subjective.....
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 13, 2011 19:50:45 GMT -5
The only heart in SR was borrowed emotion from STM or 3rd rate soap opera clichés.
Similar to American Pie 2 and Bridget Jones 2: both lazy sequels that appealed to the audiences' "reservoir of goodwill" and affection of the original characters.
Sadly, SR was a quarter of a century later; it unsuccessfully attempted to convince audience it was a follow up to Superman 2. How can the audience pick up emotionally from a 1980 film with all new actors? The characters needed to earn our interest again.
Imagine Superman Returns with entirely new characters and you might see my point.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,053
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 13, 2011 20:26:30 GMT -5
Not exactly. Many of the characters from SR were rather different from the characters in the Reeve films. I don't look at Langellas Perry White and see them trying to emulate Coopers Perry White to play on our emotions. Same is true for Saints Martha or even Jimmy. The only characters it really applies to are Superman, Jor-El and Luthor. Even Bosworth's Lois doesn't seem to be a copy of Kidder in any way. Every one else is fairly or very different.
What WB was trying to appeal to was the general sense of affection and nostalgia of the Reeve films. Thats why you see borrowed visuals, music, certain story elements. But its not a direct continuation.
What your saying applies just as much of not more to Star Trek than SR, the only difference Star Trek was silly and light hearted fun whereas SR was more somber and introspective. Most of those characters where trying to play off our affection for the originals far more directly. Urban was basically doing a DeForrest Kelly impression.
SR was trying to attempt two things: a loose continuation AND a relaunch at the same time. Thats partly why Singer cast so young with the leads...for longevity. But a relaunch or continuation are hard enough to do on their own. Doing both is even harder and I think that was something Singer should have though about more. But the continuation aspect was far looser than most sequels. The movie didn't even say WHICH version of SII is cannon. Its really vague.
The reason SR is perceived to have "failed" to catch on with audiences wasn't because it tried to play on peoples nostalgia with an unoriginal story but because it didn't take people on a roller coaster ride. That and SR cost so damn much that it didn't turn enough of a profit. Ghost Rider is getting a sequel and most people think its a FAR bigger piece of shit than Superman Returns.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 13, 2011 22:59:45 GMT -5
I couldn't disagree more---I was suprised that enough of the movie works WITHOUT seeing STM. I won't go as far as to say that the movie completely works without it (the quasi sequel continuity thing coulda/shoulda been refined a bit better, but it wasn't a deal-killer)--- but the basics to me are there - interesting characters I liked, an interesting journey for the character & engaging interaction between the characters, though--- yeah, the superheroics and action were underwhelming to me, too.
Still, the character bits were fantastic to me- and felt like Superman, but extending the story elements to a deeper level- that's part of why I support the film so much. The movie worked for me, and as much admiration as I have for Singer's work, I'm still critical of the parts that DON'T work for me--- so, I'm not a blind believer by any means. (I've also constantly harped on the idea that SR could have had more superhero action and improved it as well if they had reinvented Luthor and by NOT having him be interested in real estate as his motivation for evil).
Bosworth was not a perfect Lois Lane- but she did have a giant amount of chemistry with Routh, and I did buy her as a young mom (I have a couple of friends that are/were young moms and looked amazingly young even after having a kid or two) so that worked for me.
The love 'triangle' worked on a great level for me--- If you subtracted the characters' names & put them into a regular drama w/comedy elements, it would lose the fantasy element of it- but to me, it'd still be a solidly done drama (Similar to Speilberg's "Always" in a sense--- where the hero 'goes away' and has to come to terms with the idea that the world and his love has moved on without him). The kid could have been sappy (like in Superman III), but I thought they made him come off as a real kid, and well done.
On the other hand--- the criticisms you have, I totally felt that way towards Brett Ratner's Xmen 3--- forced sentimental situations I didn't believe in.
I know a number of people expressed that they saw Bosworth as too young for them to believe as Jason's mom--- if that's so, then I could see how much of the drama would fall flat, then.
With all the time that's passed, though, the painful thing is feeling that a lot would be accepted/forgiven by those who disliked SR, if Singer had just done an action packed SR 2 within that gap of time between SR and MOS filming now.
Ah well.... but, if Bosworth didn't work for you, then, yeah, I can see how the main story totally falls apart.
My worries are with Snyder's 'work' with actors on "Watchmen".... he had some good actors on that film--- and - with his editor- made for some VERY flat dramatic sequences.
If the action is there, depending on the budget, maybe it'll make a modest profit--- like every other superhero film out there.
Pity it's not being treated as a multipart epic on the scale of Lord of the Rings. Can you imagine if it had that kind of support? *sigh*
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,053
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 13, 2011 23:39:35 GMT -5
Ratners X-men 3 makes my point. Its so f***ing stupid and devoid of GENUINE character moments and emotions on most levels. its all cliche by the numbers stuff. But people went to see it in droves because it was playing off peoples interest in the first two and seeing how the saga ended and because it ramped up the action. of the 3 movies it was the one that tried to be the biggest roller coaster ride.
But the core of the movie is just a failure. Jean is NOT a sympathetic enough character. Not enough is done to make us feel for her and her struggle. She just wakes up in the lake and suddenly she's evil. The transition should have been more gradual or at least the internal struggle should have been better showcased. I know some stuff was shot but was cut but even looking at the cut stuff they didn't do enough. Because we don't feel sympathy for her her big arc in the movie simply does not work as well as it should have. They wanted to cram the movie with as much as possible and thus the big arc in the movie got shortchanged. Same thing happened in Spider-man 3.
The best new addition to X3 was Kelsey Grammer's Beast. And we can thank once and future X-men director Matthew Vaughn for that.
Superman Returns and X-men 3 had problems at the opposite end of the spectrum. SR needed to be more exciting while and X3 needed to be smarter. But I'll take SR over X-men 3 any day. The entire X-men 3 movie is a copout by the end of it because Fox didn't want to give a definitive ending just in case they wanted to make more money in the future. The left a back door to an already weak idea of a story.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 20, 2011 21:58:14 GMT -5
nice pic  |
|
|
|
Post by MAVERICK on Oct 20, 2011 22:24:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer01 on Oct 21, 2011 12:53:01 GMT -5
Where you going, Mav? ;D don't go, don't leave me alone!  Another nice pic and vid:  love this vid! |
|
botz1
New Member
Posts: 422
|
Post by botz1 on Oct 21, 2011 19:13:40 GMT -5
Sadly, SR was a quarter of a century later; it unsuccessfully attempted to convince audience it was a follow up to Superman 2. How can the audience pick up emotionally from a 1980 film with all new actors? The characters needed to earn our interest again. |
|
botz1
New Member
Posts: 422
|
Post by botz1 on Oct 21, 2011 19:16:52 GMT -5
Imagine Superman Returns with entirely new characters and you might see my point. And thats what we're getting with MOS entirely new characters, thats why the film will rock... |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 23, 2011 4:56:31 GMT -5
Will see..... Does anyone here REALLY think it's a done deal and that MOS is definitely going to be any good?  |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 23, 2011 5:06:46 GMT -5
Good Lord, no.
But I REALLY want it to be friggin excellent.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 23, 2011 5:09:38 GMT -5
That was the challenge... I was hopeful, but also skeptical until I saw the film. I thought that in spite of some awkward ambiguous continuity, that the characters DID earn interest, and were different, but with essentially the same core as Donner's STM.
MOS on the other hand--- too early to tell how things will or won't work, but if anything, the bar is higher from those who liked SR, because imo- MOS has a MUCH easier job in starting from scratch, with a lazy reboot. If something is different, then imo it's got to be solid gold.... otherwise why replace something that didn't need replacing?
Anyone can reboot. Trying to maintain elements of the original that made it work is much harder. BB got praise from some comic fans because it drew more from the original comics--- over drawing from the later Burton films. Joker didn't kill Batman's parents, and Joker didn't die until Dark Knight Returns* (*if that continuity still exists)... and was much better for it.
We know that some elements of the comic are already being dumped, for whatever reason- be it legal, financial, or whatnot. But, it'll be hard for any strong Superman fan to approach MOS with a totally clean slate. It's easier for those who didn't like SR, I think- but for me, it's as was discussed earlier--- since it is a re-make, it better be a magnificent remake (of sorts) that stands head and shoulders with the Donner films.
Or, if it offers something fresh- then hopefully there's something special and personal enough about this new telling that will make it withstand comparison to the other films.
But, again, will see....
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 23, 2011 7:13:54 GMT -5
Why? People who like SR are allowed to like this movie too. Quite a telling statement. I get the feeling people who love SR will have their claws out, which is a real shame.
From the pics we've seen, its evidently not a "tick the box" reboot.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,820
|
Post by atp on Oct 23, 2011 12:27:46 GMT -5
Why? People who like SR are allowed to like this movie too. I can't imagine people who liked SR not liking any movie. |
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 23, 2011 13:11:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Oct 23, 2011 15:21:07 GMT -5
The way that you phrase it, makes it sound like an SR fan who was conditioned to resent MOS is irrational.... but, c'mon- it works both ways- you really disliked SR, so wouldn't it be natural for anyone who did to welcome a giant change of approach?
Conversely, if one really liked SR- and felt that a GIANT number of elements were 'just right'--- then was told that: 'ok, changing up the cast, director, costume, music and story'--- then OF COURSE it's natural to say, 'alright--- if you're not going with the people who want to bring the next chapter'--- then wouldn't there be a natural resentment- and to balance or wipe OUT that resentment- WANT something as good as or better for MOS than what he/she thought they were going to get with SR 2 and demand more than just an 'ok' Superman film?
If it was a case of Singer and company having SR be the intended end chapter of a series--- then a reboot would feel more welcome with open arms. But because it was only the setup & transition film--- wanting to get something just as good (or better) is a natural response.
If you call it 'getting the claws out', you can.
I call it just being spoiled by something really really good and wanting something just as good as STM/SR, even if it's not what I expected.
Thus, if MOS is only 'ok' - (Watchmen, Xmen 3, Fantastic Four 2), then I'd be disappointed.
On the flip side, if you hated/disliked the whole of SR, then almost anything would still be better than SR. And the demand is lower- just so that MOS feels better to them than SR.
WB gets one ticket sale 'on the house' from me just because it's a Superman film. It'd be a fool who just goes to see MOS with ONLY the intent of hating on it.
In short, I know people who have posted who disliked/hated SR just want anything different from MOS.
For those who loved SR, I hope I love it, but two factors really come to mind above all else: (1) will the movie 'pull me in' to the story, whatever it is, and force my mind to push out all previous incarnations for its two hours of movie and/or (2) will I be excited to see it again afterwards, perfect or not?
Right now, I bitch and complain a bit about what leaks come out and what is predicted from every small leak, but to me, it's all in good fun and 'filler' while we wait for the actual event.
There might be people out there who REALLY would wait in line, pay the ticket price, ready to hate the film from frame one, but chatter about what I like/dislike ahead of the event is like me complaining about a dinner event I'm going to go to anyways. When all is said and done, I may have doubts about a film, but I'm such a comics nut, that I'll go see almost any superhero film at the theatres.... once, with an open mind. (Or open enough. Of course, no one is totally unbiased)
After that, it's open season.
I'm just suprised if there are Superman fans who are ok with a 'good' Superman film, rather than wanting something that shakes their world to the roots.
When I hear 'fun' being demanded for a Superman film, sometimes I also associate it with 'superficial'. STM was fun, but Donner's perfectionism made every chapter in Supes' life seem like it HAD to be told from its music to cinematography/etc. - There was heart to spare in that film and layers for sure.
'Watchmen' was taken seriously by Snyder, but aside from a few sequences, the drama was done badly.
If the drama was well done by Snyder for what should have been a slam-dunk in "Watchmen", then I'd have less worries. I have very little faith in Nolan's name on the production at this stage, after seeing Speilberg's name on the latest Transformers film.
Donner has had his name as producer on the "Omen" tv show, and has said how much he's regretted it after seeing the results.
Anyhow, I'm not JUST putting aside that MOS is a replacement for SR 2, but I'm also putting aside Snyder's past history with "Watchmen" and "Sucker Punch" as well to try to have an open mind with this film--- not to mention putting aside Goyer's writing/directing with "Blade 3" and most of his showrunning for the disappointing "Blade" tv show.
It's a lot to put aside, so one has to take that into account when trying to have a real open mind to MOS..... it ain't easy, but I'm tryin'..
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Oct 23, 2011 16:18:24 GMT -5
Yes of course - but be clear on one thing: if I loved SR, I still want the new film to be a giant success. Why? Cos Superman is much more than Superman Returns. I love the character and the legend more than one film. Oh, and for the umpeenth time  , I don't "really dislike" it. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,053
|
Post by Metallo on Oct 23, 2011 17:15:11 GMT -5
I have my doubts about MOS because most of the DC stuff WB has touched recently has been shit.
And I'd rather MOS WASN'T a "checklist" reboot.
Green Lantern tried to follow the typical superhero movie checklist but they forgot to check the part that said "make a good movie that people might give a fuck about seeing."
|
|
, I don't "really dislike" it.