Author Topic: New Films 2009 (Read 62311 times)

Minty · « **Reply #120 on:** March 27, 2009, 09:08:34 PM »

Sorry for the self publication but 'Let The Right One In' is fucking stunning and I'm certain that many of you whores would love it, here's my two cents:

tp://mintyblonde.wordpress.com/2009/02/16/let-the-right-one-in/

Beware though, there has been hugely fucked up changes on certain formats:

http://iconsoffright.com/news/2009/03/let_the_wrong_subtitles_in_to.html

As you'd imagine this has caused some controversy, make every effort to see it on the big screen where you can, it's more than worth it. Best Vampire evar yadda yadda etc....

I do enjoy this C&B communities clued up approach to cinema, I am also incandescent with hope about Malick's 'Tree Of Life'. He is one of the genuine poets (Vigo, Murnau, Lang, Herzog, Kubrick, Tarr etc.) - anyone got any links to what is happening with that?

Did anyone else shake their head in knowng disgust at Xan Brooks one paragraph dismissal at 'Martyrs' in todays Guraduan today?

OK, maybe just me....<sob...>

Santa's Boyfriend · « **Reply #121 on:** March 27, 2009, 10:58:12 PM »

I saw it a couple of months ago, when I'd already heard of it but could find no info on it coming out in the UK. it is fucking fantastic. Awful news about the US subtitles though - even worse than the US subtitle job on La Haine, which somehow made it over here. (Insisted on gangsta-speak in the subtitles right down to the spelling of "muthafucka", exchanged Asterix for Snoopy... Thank god for the re-issue.)

Sam · « **Reply #122 on:** March 28, 2009, 03:24:22 AM »

Quote from: Minty on March 27, 2009, 09:08:34 PM

I am also incandescent with hope about Malick's 'Tree Of Life'. He is one of the genuine poets (Vigo, Murnau, Lang, Herzog, Kubrick, Tarr etc.) - anyone got any links to what is happening with that?

I'm CaB's resident Malick fan-boy and have been banging on about him for years on here to a response of bemusement and annoyance. To say that Malick has changed my life would be no exaggeration. I count his films among the most beautiful and profound things I have ever come across in my life. Days of Heaven is my favourite film of all time. I have watched the beginning of The Thin Red Line maybe 100 times. I think The New World is a masterpiece and contains certain moments of genuine ecstatic and transcendental beauty that is unsurpassed in cinema. I'd DEFINITELY put him in the same category as other poets such as Tarkovsky and Herzog. He's a living legend in his own life time. In 100 years people will look back on his films in the way we look back at Murnau, Renoir etc now. A real genius of modern cinema.

I am beyond incandescent with hope about The Tree of Life. When it comes out I will be seeing it many, many times in the cinema. If there's anyone placed to make the best film of modern times, it's Malick. I think as monumental and majestic as his slim canon already is (oo-er etc), we've yet to see the best of him.

Catalogue Trousers · « **Reply #123 on:** March 28, 2009, 06:15:19 PM »

So, Tim Burton can only do Goth shit, can he?

Well, I'm really looking forward to this....

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

And sod it, it looks like the story has been (understandably) much broadened, but this looks like the nuts as well!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--N9klJXbjQ

chocky909 · « **Reply #124 on:** March 28, 2009, 06:29:59 PM »

Vitalstatistix beat you to it.

Quote from: Vitalstatistix on March 26, 2009, 11:56:48 AM

Full trailer for "Where the Wild Things Are"

http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/where-the-wild-things-are-running#extended

That '9' looks interesting although it's not Burton directing, just producing.

Jemble Fred · « **Reply #125 on:** March 28, 2009, 06:41:46 PM »

Sorry, but that '9' looks to me like an Xbox platformer that would ultimately get about 68%.

thugler · « **Reply #126 on:** March 29, 2009, 11:23:53 PM »

I think 9 looks a bit gash. I used to think Tim Burton was really overrated. But Ed Wood is excellent, so he's only a bit overrated. I even enjoyed sweeney todd, and I hate musicals.

I watched Knowing the other day. I implore you not to see it, even for a crappy cage movie it's poor:

It also turns out to be horrible piece of thinly veiled christian 'rapture' propaganda. Which was the audacity to frame the end of the world like it's a good thing, including jaunty humorous music as the world and everyone in it burns to horrible deaths and look on in terror.

But it's alright, because some fucking twatty kids get to swan around in a meadow/heaven.

I really liked dark city as well, what the hell happened.

Also, The Damned United is a decent film, well acted, but it's a bit safe and not on a par with frost nixon.

samadriel · « **Reply #127 on:** March 29, 2009, 11:27:21 PM »

Lordy, Alex Proyas did that shit?

*checks Wikipedia* Oh... he did "I, Robot" too; not such a surprise then.

dr beat · « **Reply #128 on:** March 30, 2009, 12:42:42 AM »

I've just been very annoyed by a description of 'The Boat That Rocked', which states:

Quote

An ensemble comedy about a misfit group of 1960s pirate radio DJs playing pop music from a boat in the middle of the North Sea, 24 hours a day. Led by brash American ‘The Count’, the motley DJ crew throw themselves into the rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle and captivate Britain by playing the music that defined a generation and standing up to a government that, incomprehensibly, preferred Jazz.

Yes, because of course, for example, Charlie Watts and Ginger Baker absolutely hated jazz.

Grrrr.

Jemble Fred · « **Reply #129 on:** March 31, 2009, 10:19:34 AM »

More GB speculation:

Quote

The original 'Ghostbusters' stars will appear in the new movie.

A third instalment in the comic franchise is currently being written, and writer Harold Ramis - who starred as Dr. Egon Spengler in the first two films - has promised he, Bill Murray and Dan Akyroyd will all made appearances in the new story.

He said: "We're all going to be in it in different kinds of roles. We're going to be the sage mentors. There are going to be young Ghostbusters.

"Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky, both of whom I mentored, are now writing the new 'Ghostbusters'. I'm consulting with them, as is Dan Aykroyd and original director Ivan Reitman.

However, Harold admits that 'Groundhog Day' star Bill may take some persuading to appear.

He joked to MTV News: "Bill Murray is just waiting for the truckload of money to arrive to get him out of his office.

"He is in. I haven't talked to him about it. I want to talk to him about it eventually. I think we just need a script, because he's the thorniest of the group."

Despite rumours circulating over who will star as the new generation of Ghostbusters, Harold insists no definite casting decisions have been made.

He said: "Here's how old the rumours are. Chris Farley was one of the rumours. It was going to be Chris Farley, Ben Stiller and Chris Rock.

"Someone asked Seth Rogen, and he said, 'What?' That would have to be one great f**king script for anyone to touch that.' He's right about that."

The original Ghostbusters - a group of parapsychology professors offering a ghost removal service - were Harold's Egon, Bill's character Peter Venkman and Ray Stantz, played by Dan. They were later joined by Winston Zeddmore, played by Ernie Hudson.

Am I the only one sad enough to hope that the new 'Busters are based on the Extreme Ghostbusters team, if just for neatness' sake? Ah well.

thugler · « **Reply #130 on:** March 31, 2009, 06:52:36 PM »

Quote from: Jemble Fred on March 31, 2009, 10:19:34 AM

More GB speculation:

Am I the only one sad enough to hope that the new 'Busters are based on the Extreme Ghostbusters team, if just for neatness' sake? Ah well.

Yeah! they were so extreme, one of them was in a wheelchair!

Jemble Fred · « **Reply #131 on:** March 31, 2009, 07:06:44 PM »

As I recall, it was: Annoying hispanic guy, ginger in a wheelchair, utterly bland bloke, and goth chick. But seeing as this film seems to have exactly the same set-up, they may as well try and tie it in somehow.

Famous Mortimer · « **Reply #132 on:** April 01, 2009, 07:40:14 AM »

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1196334/

"After Last Season", and a few film blogs I read seem to be convinced this is an April Fool's joke and is going to be revealed today. After having seen the trailer, I can't quite decide. I've seen so many bad trailers in my time that this one doesn't especially stand out from the crowd.

Deadman97 · « **Reply #133 on:** April 01, 2009, 09:04:58 AM »

So, the Wolverine workprint on pretty much every torrent site in the world is real, is good quality and isn't an April Fool. Now I've downloaded it though I'm getting an attack of the fear- how likely is it that I'm in for some legal hassle at the hands of a very angry studio which stands to lose millions from the digital theft of a massive summer release?

samadriel · « **Reply #134 on:** April 01, 2009, 09:18:15 AM »

Infinitesimal!

...I wouldn't keep seeding it though...

How is it? X3-like bollocks, or X2-like decency?

Deadman97 · « **Reply #135 on:** April 01, 2009, 09:33:14 AM »

It's actually not half bad. Nowhere near the shite that was X3, there's a pre-credits bit in particular that's really decent. I'm blown away by the quality of the rip though- it's straight-up DVD quality, no timecodes or watermarks or blurred bars or anything, crisp and clean.

Santa's Boyfriend · « **Reply #136 on:** April 01, 2009, 10:19:15 AM »

Presumably it isn't the final cut though?

I'm interested in seeing it, but I doubt I'll download it - it seems heartless to do so. If this had happened to me I'd be utterly mortified, I'm sure that the producers are beyond furious. Someone's going to get sued to buggery over this, if they don't get whacked first.

boxofslice · « **Reply #137 on:** April 01, 2009, 10:32:17 AM »

From what I've heard, if it is true, it's not the complete film - CGI unfinished (lots of wire work and green screens still visible apparently) and no soundtrack. Why would you watch it?

Deadman97 · « **Reply #138 on:** April 01, 2009, 10:33:25 AM »

Quote from: Santa's Boyfriend on April 01, 2009, 10:19:15 AM

Presumably it isn't the final cut though?

Well, the score all seems in place and there are no jarring cuts or anything that gives it away as a work-in-progress. The only elements that mark it out as a workprint are some half-done effects shots. Compare it to last year's workprint of Rambo which had scenes without sound, greenscreen and a timecode- or, for that matter,the print of Ang Lee's Hulk which actually (and fascinatingly) cut to CGI animatics at points- and it there doesn't seem like much that needs finishing.

All morning I've been imagining "J Jonah Jameson" types at Fox, chomping cigars and banging their fists on tables while I watch their film a month early smoking a joint in my dressing gown.

gmoney · « **Reply #139 on:** April 01, 2009, 10:35:07 AM »

Quote from: boxofslice on April 01, 2009, 10:32:17 AM

From what I've heard, if it is true, it's not the complete film - CGI unfinished (lots of wire work and green screens still visible apparently) and no soundtrack. Why would you watch it?

I'd watch it for the novelty of seeing some half finished effects. Maybe what until I'd seen the finished version first though thinking about it.

Deadman97 · « **Reply #140 on:** April 01, 2009, 10:36:46 AM »

Quote from: gmoney on April 01, 2009, 10:35:07 AM

I'd watch it for the novelty of seeing some half finished effects.

Well yeah- a big reason I love workprints is seeing a colossally expensive production stripped down to wire-work and camera tricks. It gives a lot of insight.

Angst in my Pants · « **Reply #141 on:** April 05, 2009, 01:15:45 PM »

Quote from: thugler on March 29, 2009, 11:23:53 PM

:
I watched Knowing the other day. I implore you not to see it, even for a crappy cage movie it's poor
:

Seconded. I quite enjoyed the first half of the film, and was intrigued as to where it was heading - the disaster scenes are quite impressive - but as it became clear what was going on I sat pretty much open-mouthed at how awful it was.

It reminded me of the horrific Revelations-based films that we used to watch as a group when I was a teenage Evangelist Christian. Only worse.

I think I'll get to work on scripting an autobiographical horror film, just so I can call it "I was a Teenage Evangelist Christian".

Famous Mortimer · « **Reply #142 on:** April 06, 2009, 06:37:23 AM »

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Of course, I didn't download it then watch it last night with my mates, as that would be illegal. But let's say I had...

First things first, there's a lot of special effects missing. Pretty much every fight scene is missing them, and the end one, where he fights Deadpool and Sabertooth on top of the tower thing, is almost like one of those special features where you get to see how a fight scene is put together. Most of the film is fine, though. It's quite the eye-opener, I must say, and is interesting for its own sake.

Unfortunately, the film blows. I can see now why Fox were so desperate to keep it under wraps. Too many superheroes thrown at the screen, too much rewriting of a history which has already been rewritten beyond all ability of most people to keep up with it, and all that. Waste of Deadpool, and I fail to see how they're going to make a film out of him when he got his head cut off, among other things.

Thumbs down from this reviewer. Don't bother.

Minty · « **Reply #143 on:** April 06, 2009, 08:29:26 PM »

This may pique your interest Sam:

http://theplaylist.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-second-terrence-malick-tree-of-life.html

ThickAndCreamy · « **Reply #144 on:** April 07, 2009, 10:49:55 PM »

I'm really looking forward to Pixar's Up. The idea of it sounds fantastic and Pixar have never disappointed me. The whole premise sounds brilliant and after Wall-E I believe I have good reason to think this will be one of the greatest films this year and one of the best animation films of all time.

Also, reading numerous articles forecasting commercial failure for Pixar is quite uplifting. Knowing that a company that had a brilliant formula has managed to manipulate it into becoming less and less commercial over time whilst creating some of the greatest animation films of all time as they progress is truly inspirational. They could of easily just gone down the child orientated route and made millions, yet instead they create films questioning morality and highlighting flaws in the world today, as well as appealing to children.

jennifer · « **Reply #145 on:** April 07, 2009, 11:38:55 PM »

I realise I am probably very alone in this, but I look forward to a Richard Curtis film the way other hipster douchebags get excited about an Ed Wood film. I know it's going to be the worst thing in the world, and I enjoy it immensely.

So. The Boat That Rocked is everything awful about Richard Curtis condensed into two hours of loon pants. It's an orgy of people dressed like Austin Powers, snogging on VW bonnets, dancing with kind faced Asian shopkeepers and constantly waving homemade placards with daisies on like happened in the 60s. Best bits:

*Remember how funny 'Darling' was in Blackadder? Prepare to have that joke's legacy raped - there's a character called "Twatt". It's as hilarious as it sounds, and it's said a LOT.
*Just in case you wondered what Richard Curtis's attitude to lesbianism is, he's COOL with it. So much so Katherine thingy off the IT-crowd says "I'm a lesbian" about 11,000 times. Everyone's so relaxed with her sexuality they mention her being a lesbian every four and a half seconds. The 60s, eh!
*Just in case you wondered what Richard Curtis's attitude to black people is, he's COOL with them. So much so there's a black character on the boat, who says a thing once. Everyone else gets hours of screen time, but Black Character says about 3 words. He couldn't not be in it though, in case anyone thinks Richard Curtis is racist.
*Minor members of the government get to decide whether people live or die when their boat is sinking. Only stuffy old tory MP Kenneth Branagh gets to send out lifeboats to save the most popular DJs in Britain (the coastguard obviously wait until they get the appropriate instruction before saving anyone) , and instead he orders their actual deaths. But don't worry 'the kids' unite by rowing out to the north sea in dinghys and canoes and yachts, all wearing minidresses and go-go boots waving yet more placards they knocked up while rowing and sailing into the depths of the North sea (except the nurses, who are all dressed as sexy nurses, and some disturbingly sexy schoolgirls) Such is the power of rock and roll.
*The 60s were fun, kids, but don't forget to use a condom. *serious face*
*Attempted rape is fine and funny, as long as it's Nick Frost is comedically naked (like, fat, and with his socks on) throughout.
*Rhys Derby's character was supposed to have a point to it, but got all edited out so his heartfelt, reaching out to friends moment at the end makes no sense at all.
*Chris O Dowd is a surprisingly good actor, especially considering the scene he acts especially well in is one of the most unlikely and cruel things played for laughs ever.
* Richard Curtis ~~hates women~~ ~~wishes he had friends~~thinks groups of men all cruelly fuck each other's girlfriends and forgive each other instantly, in a creepy, all lads together way.
*The grand finale is an onscreen reminder, a little like a Comic Relief 'but seriously' video, that there are like loads of pirate radio stations still going in the UK, which is great cause, the kids, you know? Then the screen fills with album covers to demonstrate 'after 40 rockin' years!' rock n' roll is still popular. Albums like Duffy, Snow Patrol, Dire Straights... it's like Itunes cover flow for a terrible music collection. Then Duffy sings something to remind you how nothing like the 60s she sounds

Anyway, I watched it so you don't have to. Astonishing. Anyone else seen it?

Egyptian Feast · « **Reply #146 on:** April 07, 2009, 11:41:33 PM »

No, but your review was so funny I have to now. Thanks for wasting over two hours of my time, jennifer.

scarecrow · « **Reply #147 on:** April 08, 2009, 01:58:27 AM »

Quote from: jennifer on April 07, 2009, 11:38:55 PM

Anyway, I watched it so you don't have to. Astonishing. Anyone else seen it?

i attended a special 'talent introduced' screening, but left before the film even started for fear of it being like you just described. I hate reading reviews which claim it has the 'soundtrack of the century' (i've read two to be fair) as though it was a mind-bending headfuck of an idea to use the most obvious '60s bands' most obvious songs.

your write-up's ace.

by the way, what is the consensus here on the 'Darling' joke? i never cared for it myself.

The Boston Crab · « **Reply #148 on:** April 08, 2009, 07:28:45 AM »

That was ace, jennifer. Now I want to watch this too, just so I can tick off all of your points.

The last thing I watched was Frank Miller's 'Will Eisner's "The Spirit"', an absolute CINEMATIC SHITSHOW.

I remember seeing the trailer with Samuel L. Jackson and some other fella fighting in mud and thinking it looked like a Saturday morning kids' telly skit. Turns out the whole movie is like this. The best thing about the 90 minutes was how the red CGI tie moved.

samadriel · « **Reply #149 on:** April 08, 2009, 07:48:03 AM »

Quote from: jennifer on April 07, 2009, 11:38:55 PM

Best bits:

Replace the '60s with the '00s, and I'd have thought you'd confused Richard Curtis with Russell T. Davies.

[will watch first 60 minutes of the film under naive impression that Curtis will eventually be replaced with someone less shit, then said replacement will pull a 'Silence in the Library' just before they sta--]. Ohhh no, the British won't fool me again!