 New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in Entertainment. |
| User | Post |
| Rogue Posts: 5550/11918 |
Here's the new trailer for the A-Team movie.
I'm probably going to see it in the cheap theaters. I was a huge A-Team fan when I was a little kid. I actually was looking up the show's intro on YouTube because I had this weird dream that I was the female member of the A-Team (there obviously is no female member) and that Face and I were into each other. Weird, but I liked it.  
No one could really duplicate the original team, though. No one. |
| Xeoman Posts: 8178/11757 |
Topher Grace for Spiderman, please! |
| Lord Vulkas Mormonus Posts: 3371/4541 |
Thought: I hate Sony, but I admire Sam Raimi for finally saying that if he's going to make a movie, he's not going to rush it this time.
I guess that he didn't want another Spider-Man 3 thing to happen. |
| Rogue Posts: 5530/11918 |
So Spider-man 4 is going to be a reboot.
Thoughts? |
| Elara Posts: 5468/9736 |
Since it's Ridley Scott, are there going to be any actual changes to the reboot for Alien? They aren't going to show the Alien this time are they?
Since I just finished reading the book and Ben told me what they did to butcher it in the movie, I honestly wouldn't mind it if they did a remake of Relic and do it right this time. Never saw the movie, but from what I've learned they basically rewrote the entire thing. |
| Rogue Posts: 5520/11918 |
Originally posted by Xeu To be perfectly honest, the original's pretty cheesy. What makes it special was Ray Harryhausen's claymation effects. Like the argument about a Back to the Future reboot not having the feeling of that decade of which the original was made, in this case it just wouldn't have Ray's magic. Now granted we're in an era where newer and "better" looking effects can be thrown together on a computer, it's just not the same. For some reason the thought of redoing that one kept reminding me of the episode of "South Park" where Trey Parker and Matt Stone came out to say that now that computer technology is available to them, they'd always meant to have the characters CG'd with AT-AT walking around inthe background of some shots instead of using just crappy old construction paper to put the show together. |
| Xeoman Posts: 8174/11757 |
So the original Clash of the Titans is good? Definitely have to check that out myself. At first my friends and I thought the preview was for a reboot of the Odyssey or something, lol (when we saw it during Avatar). But yeah, the new one looks potentially awesome.
Originally posted by Rogue Well you've probably looked into this more than me, but I've heard the original cast pretty much said "No Whedon? Hell no!"... haha. Not a Buffy fan myself (even though I hear it is pretty good, just maybe too long), Whedon is awesome. Originally posted by Vulkar Holy crap! Awesome. With Ridley Scott behind it I'm sure that has to be promising and well ... it's a big reminder that I need to actually watch all of the first movie! Probably should revisit Aliens too. A good time to push the Aliens franchise again, with a new AvP game coming out soon as well (and remember the games have NOTHING to do with the movies!) ... a new Predator might be kind of cool, even if those are little more on the sillier side of things when compared to Alien(s). Nice to see the veteran directors are still doing stuff though. First James Cameron, now Ridley Scott. Can't wait to see what the Legendary Michael Bay could be doing 20-30 years from now! ... |
| Elara Posts: 5465/9736 |
I think that Clash of the Titan is fine to remake, as the original was just another telling of the Greek myth. And yeah, Liam Neesan is just amazing... though why he's in full plate I am not sure... at least it looks like full plate.
Remaking The Crow? Why? And Buffy? Let it die, please oh please just let it die. |
| Rogue Posts: 5519/11918 |
The Terminator franchise is an interesting beast.
First movie in 1984. It's a success. T2, still with James Cameron on board alongside Linda Hamilton and Ahnold, is handled by Carolco and distributed by TriStar. It's thousands of times better than the first. It's a huge success and permanently plasters itself in American culture. Carolco later filed bankruptcy due to the fantastic failure of "Cutthroat Island" (the most expensive cinematic flop in history) on top of their another little big budget bomb by the name of "Showgirls." Due to this, they cannot make T3. T3 is put on the backburner in hopes that it'll one day see light. Twelve years later, and now without most of the main actors (still have Ahnold) and Cameron, they put out T3. Fans are mixed, mostly disapproving. Though it profited, it still made much less than its older siblings. Several more years roll around and Halcyon, an independent company, picks up the rights to make "Salvation." Following this, Christian Bale is offered the role of Marcus, but demands to play John Connor, causing the story to have to be adjusted for more scenes with Connor. T4, considered a reboot, hits theaters and breaks even with a little extra to pay off the lawsuits. And now ... Halcyon has filed for bankruptcy, and is about to auction of the Terminator rights. Now, I do agree that there are some great reboots out there (I thoroughly enjoyed "Star Trek," and could not stop laughing during "Punisher War Zone"), and I also loved T4 (which was supposed to be the start of a new trilogy, but with the bankruptcy that may be in question). In regards to the Kate Brewster and Judgment Day consistencies between Ts 3 and 4, I think they kept that because should they leave those out the casual fans would throw a fit. Just easier to leave the big stuff in. On top of which, I think most people figured if they show John Connor in the future, it's the soldier/general fighting machines that they remembered so fondly from T2's beginning. |
| Lord Vulkas Mormonus Posts: 3368/4541 |
Originally posted by Rogue Really? I honestly did not see any contradictions between Salvation and T3, especially given that the end of T2 actually implied that Judgement Day was stopped. Salvation also has a reference to T3, by having Kate Connor be his wife. Catherine was the name of his romantic interest in T3, if I recall correctly. Anyway, on to the reboot thing. You have to admit that there have been plenty of good reboots. Star Trek, Batman, the Hulk, I was personally a fan of Terminator Salvation, etc. Mostly then Hollywood just is in the business to entertain. So, admittedly, I am entertained by its insanity. When I want something thought provoking, I'll usually go to indie films, books, or anime. Oh, they're also rebooting Alien, with Ridley Scott as a director. I cannot complain about this reboot. |
| Rogue Posts: 5518/11918 |
I remember hearing about that and shuddered, Valhalla. I think it's because there was a certain charm and magic to Ray Harryhausen's effects that should they use CG or what have you, it just wouldn't be the same.
Now I don't feel those remaking it are trying to take away from it or anything (I mean, Liam Neeson as Zeus! Hawt), and I'm sure I'll go see it, it's just when they announced this thing was coming the first thought that came to mind was, "Oh Sweet Georgia Brown, WHY?!" In other news, I can't believe they're rebooting "The Crow." And there's talk of a Buffy reboot sans Whedon. |
| Cteno Posts: 983/3416 |
One remake that I saw previews of is an exception to this: Clash of the Titans. I squealed like a little girl! |
| 天国JOE Posts: 2627/2999 |
Originally posted by CairoiYeah. But true, many indie films rawk. As do many foreign flicks. Pretty much non-Hollywood, for me. Though Hollywood is still good for mindless fun~ |
| Cairoi Posts: 3337/3807 |
Originally posted by Elara Our filmmakers have not stagnated. There are plenty of young, talented filmmakers making an independant mark on cinema today, in fact there's arguably more. There are constant innovations being made in cinema by these brave new minds. However, since the blockbuster revolution of the 80s, the 'entertainment industry' has truly geared itself into a business. Originality and quality do not matter to a business. What does matter to them is profits. That's why 'mainstream' movies have taken such a dip in quality. The main things the executives seek to exploit are brand loyalty and trend cashing. Regardless on where you stand on the new Terminator movies (I hate anything after T2), you wanted to see them because they were Terminator movies. This is an exploitation of consumer's inherent loyalty to brands. A Karate Kid movie will rake in money from people who loved the original. It's depressing, but true. Also, the whole Vamp-Lite fad is just another example of the mechanical nature of the blockbuster system. This whole attitude has leaked into all forms of entertainment. I'm writing a book and all the research I've done into how to get mine published has shown me that publishers look for reliable (aka unoriginal) material. Thankfully, the 'indie' scenes of each form of entertainment supply interesting, original material, but sometimes there's a thick layer of pretension you have to dig through to get to the good stuff. Geez, I need to learn to stop talking. |
| Elara Posts: 5458/9736 |
Honestly, I agreed with the choice to ignore T3, it was just horrible.
But yeah, the reboot craze started to annoy me back when they remade Ocean's 11 and then did sequels. Granted, I like those movies... but to make sequels of a remake just seems... wrong. It just seems that our filmmakers have stagnated. Nothing new or original really comes out anymore, half the time if it does it's crap. On top of that there is a slew of copy cats that follow each new craze (notice how many vampire related things have come out in books and tv lately?). Has the entertainment industry truly become parasites? |
| Rogue Posts: 5514/11918 |
Originally posted by Xeu Well, no one took well to an Indiana Jones sequel a couple years ago. And oh dear god, a Back to the Future reboot? That would definitely mark the end of days. This whole reboot thing needs to stop or at least slow down, though. In my American Studies class this semester, we watched the first Trekkies documentary. Beforehand the professor asked who considered themselves a Star Trek fan. I was the sole person who raised her hand. Then the prof asked who went to see the new Star Trek movie this summer. Almost every single hand in the class of 40 people was raised. The professor asked why they did, and several people said they heard it was a reboot so they didn't feel like they had to know anything about Star Trek and they like starting fresh with something. I don't know why, but I felt offended. It's also insane how superhero movies can be rebooted almost instantly (Punisher, Hulk, etc). People have been marching around Comic-Con for the last couple years demanding a Superman reboot. I'm already hearing BS about people protesting for Watchmen reboot. At the same time it's interesting, because some reboots will pick and choose what part of the franchise they want to follow. McG said that "Terminator Salvation" was going to follow T1 and T2, but ignore that T3 was even made. |
| Elara Posts: 5454/9736 |
David Cross is in the Squeakuel? Oh how low you have gone.
You know that now you've said it that a Family Circus movie will be made... it will be sad, but it will be made. Honestly, I always saw the office scenes from Drew Carey as a sort of Dilbert thing so I wouldn't freak out as much if they did that. Still wouldn't like seeing it done though. |
| Xeoman Posts: 8161/11757 |
The thing with The Karate Kid is that it's one of those great movies that's SO 80's it's awesome, and nobody will ever be able to replicate that kind of charm again. Seriously, who would want say ... a Back to the Future reboot? Hell no!
Kind of a random one, but they've already been talking about rebooting the Resident Evil (movie) series after this next one (yes, the 4th). The idea for it sounded a tiny bit more like the games but come on, I wish they'd just drop it already. There's no way anything good could come out of this. Rogue: Haha awesome, another reason to see Zombieland... kind of missed that one. All this said, I'd kind of like a Robocop reboot. No idea why I think that of all things could maybe work... but yeah! |
| Lord Vulkas Mormonus Posts: 3365/4541 |
Let's be honest...
With the exception of the two movies Rogue first posted, none of the others have gotten decent movies before. The Karate Kid and Free Willy were awesome, but... Like Garfield, the new one was pretty decent, I actually thought, but the old series was pretty lame. Alvin and the Chipmunks, on the other hand, should never have been created. On the other hand, if a Dilbert movie were made, I could get mad. |
| Rogue Posts: 5509/11918 |
I was going to post a Squeakquel video, but then again we all already know about it and ... yeah. I think what sort of sneakily drew me to thinking about it favorably was the fact that they included the Chipettes. It's sort of a low blow, especially since I'm such a sucker for the "Single Ladies" meme.
But then again, with the whole performance online, why bother seeing it in theaters?
It's funny. Bill Murry plays himself in "Zombieland." Avoiding as many spoilers on that one as I can, someone turns to him and asks if he has any regrets. "Garfield, probably," he says. I've got no interest in a "Marmaduke" movie. Never really got into the comic strip. I'm kinda surprised that with all this barrel bottom-scraping no one optioned a "Family Circus" movie. |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | |
