I'm Sad Now

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Not G. Ivingname:

Neptunus Hirt:

Not G. Ivingname:

Well, the Hobbit is going to suck because it is a prequel and Hollywood hasn't made a good prequel since the second Godfather and Indiana Jones films :'(

I doubt it. The Hobbit is going to be fantastic, just you wait.

That is what we all said when the Phantom Menace came out, don't let your nostalgia cloud your judgement.

That is a perfectly fair comparison, with absolutely no gaping holes in logic to be found whatsoever.

/sarcasm

MovieBob:
MovieBob: I'm Sad Now

Sometimes, looking ahead isn't always such a fun thing to do.

Read Full Article

Heath didn't die of a drug overdose. He had multiple doctors who didn't know what the others were giving him. It was the combinations of medications he took, not the amount. At least that's what the news was saying here when it happened.

Why is it so bad that we don't get a Justice League movie? For starters I can't possibly pair up Superman or the Green Lantern with Nolan's Batman, that would just look silly. The only way to fix that would be rebooting Batman which would be even sillier. And besides, wouldn't that just kind of be a "let's panic-jump on the money wagon" kind of move? Trying to sow together a bunch of movies that were never meant to be sown together. I don't know, I can see a lot of reasons to be happy they aren't doing it.

MovieBob:
Egh. On the plus side... I guess The Hobbit is still coming out, right?

Unless the hobbits in the film become a racially diverse rainbow...

Look Bob at the end of the day you know what two films that were based off of comics came out this year that you loved? Kick-Ass and Scott Pilgrim. Truth be told I knew a whole lot of peole who had never heard of either of these franchises before the movies, and now you, me, and whole bunch of movie fans loved them; and you know the best part. They came to us. So while I understand that we geeks have alot of dissapointment coming at us, but at the end of the day its the little things like Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim, Splice, Moon, and all those other great films that ussually make our top ten lists of the year.

Being cynical sucks. :(

Personally I'm not so sure why people are so upset about the JLA thing.

I guess I don't subscribe to Bob's 'Campy is cool!' view when it comes to comics... but to me, the JLA is one of the worst idea from DC - it's a continuity nightmare and quite frankly, the whole idea that people like red/green arrow or Batman could still be around when the colleteral damage of some of the JLA fight involves entire city block getting leveled is ridiculous... I LOVE Batman is his own books, but when he's in the JLA, I can't stand him, he just shatters my suspension of disbelief... so the idea of seeing superman/batman on the big screen? Ugh.

Yes, I know Caps does it in the Avenger, but let's be frank, by the far the power level in DC is way higher (Superman, Green Lanter and even the Flash are basically 'cosmic being' when it comes to Marvel power level).

I'd much rather Nolan finish his vision of Batman and gives us a good Superman movie than have him work in some tie in... hell, you said yourself that Iron Man 2 was essentially a trailer for Avenger... ok... you think that has nothing to do with it being a much poorer movie than the first one? I don't.

I'm still going to line up to see The Avengers... but I don't expect it to be any good.

ZippyDSMlee:
Well it can always be worse, I think Batman 7( I think tis 7 now not counting the 60s tv films) will be more like beginnings ok but could have been better.

Spider man was a mess if 3 was not a train wreck it might could sustain the weight of further continuity, I liked the first film so in all I bet the new one will suck, unless they figure out that copying ultimate marvel crap is not the way to go....

A shame transformers needs a reboot and less junk heap designs..... lets follow the 80s TV plot a bit more minus the human focus on the stories....

Like I said in another thread mixing batman and super man is easy enough but the way hollywood dose things it will suck.....

Batman 8 if you count the 60's film....maybe 10, 12 or higher if you also count the animated films....but not counting those, we have:

Batman (Campy 60's movie)
Batman (Burton 89 film)
Batman Returns
Batman Forever
Batman & Robin
Batman Begins
Batman The Dark Knight
and the new one.

I know that one of the animated Batman films saw theatrical release (Shadow of the Bat? I forget the name now, remember seeing it in the theatre, though) but the rest were straight to video, I'm pretty sure.

/Batman trivia off

Unfortunately for us the dimension where 2010 was a great year is also where the anti-thinker lives.

I actually find myself in a position where I can't doubt Nolan. I don't honestly believe he can do no wrong, but as there may be statistical factors pointing to a weaker film, I believe there are some that point to a stronger one. To be honest, however, it's hard to argue the impact Ledger's death had on The Dark Knight's success, though I doubt it would've been so successful had his performance actually been underwhelming (I don't remember a huge fuss being made over his part in Parnassus, his entirely final film role).

You cited the mediocre response to Batman Begins. I would agree, pointing out a trend in fluctuating quality. Except that's not the case. Begins may have only been a solid flick, but it was followed by Nolan's stellar The Prestige. Nolan's successes in the quality of his films, I believe, can't be tracked or categorized in any linear or rhythmic fashion.

There's also the aspect of familiarity and the waning influence of Goyer. Adept though he may be, Goyer's influence can be felt intensely in Begins, yet noticeably more distant in The Dark Knight. That's a trend I don't see reversing. The other part, familiarity, has to do with Nolan's time spent in the Bat-verse. Begins was fresh ground, but Dark Knight reunited him with a tested cast and allowed him to dig deeper into the Bat mythos. I believe Nolan's more psychological and carefully-constructed methodology, combined with a third plunge into this comic book world, will pay off in spades.

Not G. Ivingname:

That is what we all said when the Phantom Menace came out, don't let your nostalgia cloud your judgement.

How is the Phantom Menace comparable to the Hobbit? First off, the Hobbit is going to be based on an existing book, one that is widely considered to be an excellent work of fiction. Furthermore, it's not been that long since the LotR trilogy was produced, so we're not going to see such a huge shift in visual style.
There is nothing that indicates, to me, that the Hobbit will be a bad movie. Don't let your pessimism cloud your judgment.

Here's something to be thankful about this year: both John Carpenter and Zach Snyder are releasing movies about ridiculously hot chicks in insane asylums.

what's not to love about insane asylum movies? what's not to love about gaggles of hot ladies? what's not to love about john carpenter working again?
(well, those last two questions might be sketchy. but. i think they offer incentive to think positive!)

Plus, David Fincher is shooting his needless remake of Men Who Hate women, and Trent Reznor just announced he's already been working on the score for it for several weeks. Don't know if this progress means it is due to come out this year. but. if so: it's a film to be excited about!

Also, Darren Aronofsky is tackling The Wolverine! I'd bet money he'll get fired before he can make the first genuinely disturbing and artistic comic book movie. but. who knows!

think positive!

(plus, del toro and cameron teaming up to make "the first grand hp lovecraft adaptation" is exciting, no? even though it won't be out for several centuries after the end of mankind's brief reign on this insignificant pebble? Cheer up!)

In other news, i'm sure Nolan and the WB producers are smart enough to already know they can't match The Dark Knight's box office phenomenon, and are designing their film to fit in appropriately as a step down from that super-money-maker.

Also, why be bummed when a batman movie doesn't make enough HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars? I'd be bummed if Nolan had bailed and some hack had taken over the reigns while everyone was trying to pretend it'd turn out "ok" (ala x-men 3). But even if the box office fails to compare, Nolan's final batman will almost certainly be something interesting for us comic book nerds to chew over. forever.
(and it will certainly make many HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars). I agree that making less buck will be the story many douchey press types run with. but. I can't fathom why that's depressing.

Neptunus: I agree with what you're saying. (Phantom menace was an over thought pandering to fanboys that sadly hit all the wrong notes, storywise, without taking any interesting chances - while TheHobbit story was already written before the epic followup)

But, consider this nerd trivia (from the LOTR commentary tracks) : at some point Jackson and writing crew were trying to wedge arwen into the battle at helm's deep so they could have more of a marketable simplified love story. Until it leaked to the internet and they witnessed the frothing fan backlash. The fact that this zany idea was soooo close to going in - deeply worries me. I'm sure it would have been lovely and romantic on some level. but. I think it demonstrates a disturbing interest in formulaic blockbuster pandering over fan-service and adherence to the source material.

Jackson and crew are impressive workers. However. It's valid to guess that TheHobbit isn't going to recapture the magic of LOTR. It'll be a miracle if they dodge the bullet of fanboys (like me) ripping it apart for years after. It'll either be too similar to the book (and thus too kiddy and full of weird songs and zero romance) or too different from the book (adopting darker elements and unnecessary characters from LOTR). walking this line is next to impossible! And even if they do it perfectly, fanboys love to complain about shit on the internet for no good goddamn reason. Which will ruin the magic. It's like the project was fucked at birth. Doomed to be this hobbled thing which some huge group of people is going to perceive as disgusting travesty.

I doubt they'll make weird ruinous changes to the story for romance (??? wait! We'll have to wait and seeeEEEee! remember this! I doubt it less every second!), but I think his team straight fucked up with their last movie, The Lovely Bones : A magical coming of age story we can all enjoy - about child rape and death. I would applaud them as rock stars for tackling this bizarre topic as a "pretty fantasy movie for girls", except they softened it into merely being about child death. TOO LATE, PEOPLE! And then it was bizarrely marketed as something else entirely. Bleh. I'd bet Jackson made the movie because his wife-ish loved the book, but he couldn't resist taking it in rambling wrong directions - to weakly try to please more people.

Also, I would argue that King Kong was a rambling example of : obvious problems.
and hubris.

man. i'm being so mean. sorry. I'm just enjoying fan boy rage rambling here. sorry. I'm not really angry about any of this. eek. heh. hmmf.

There is no way it can be bad.
When DelTorro was gonna do it I was skeptical but hopeful... but with Peter Jackson doing it himself... It's gonna be gold.
May not be as good as LOTR, but it will be up to par.
LOTR is his baby when it comes to film, and I'm sure he's gonna wanna wrap it up in a good way.
Now, if we start hearing talk about "The Samarillian" some 10 years down the line... god help us. There is NO way that a book like that can be put into film, and if it does ever happen it's gonna be a complete mess.
uggghhhh.... don't even wanna think about that. (shutters)

akkuma420:
There is no way it can be bad.
When DelTorro was gonna do it I was skeptical but hopeful... but with Peter Jackson doing it himself... It's gonna be gold.
May not be as good as LOTR, but it will be up to par.
LOTR is his baby when it comes to film, and I'm sure he's gonna wanna wrap it up in a good way.
Now, if we start hearing talk about "The Samarillian" some 10 years down the line... god help us. There is NO way that a book like that can be put into film, and if it does ever happen it's gonna be a complete mess.
uggghhhh.... don't even wanna think about that. (shutters)

So Peter Jackson is going to take control of the Hobbit after all? Then there is some hope.

As for the Silmarillion being impossible to make into a film, they said exactly those words about LOTR ten years before it came out. Look at it now.

CatmanStu:
I saw Inception last week for the first time and it left me with one overriding thought; Nolan can do no wrong.
Let me clarify that statement. He got tons of praise for The Dark Knight even though it had little characterisation, a very uneven dialogue to action beat ratio, ropey fight scene editing (obviously didn't learn from the first one) lacked cohesion and too many endings. It was a very entertaining movie with great dialogue but it wasn't the comic book masterpiece that a lot of people made it out to be. Then he made Inception, and what a giant load of self serving pretension that turned out to be. Convoluted beyond belief (no, I understood the plot), completely lacking in any charm or charisma, special effects that, although breathtaking, were as unnecessary as the whole of the 'snowy mountain fortress scene' and finishing off with the most trite end of film cliché it could have.
Then it goes and gets rave revues, so like I said; he can do no wrong.
Judging by the reaction too his 'Matrix for the pretentious', he could phone in the next Batman and people would still be queuing up to kiss his ignoble behind.

I largely agree with your view on Inception, though I liked the ending because of it's ambiguity (also, "Matrix for the pretentious" is redundant). Nolan did a couple of good things in the movie, but it was hardly worthy of the praise people showered on it.

Question, here.

According to boxofficemojo.com, Batman Begins had a production budget of $150 million. It made $205,343,774 domestically and $167,366,241 in foreign markets, for a grand total of $372,710,015, or $222,710,015 over production cost (which notably most likely does not include advertising budget.)

Conversely, The Fantastic Four had a production budget of only $100 million, made $154,696,080 domestically and $175,883,639 in foreign markets, for a grand total of $330,579,719, or $230,579,719 over production cost.

In short:

1) Batman Begins had higher box office receipts;
2) Batman Begins had significantly higher domestic take than FF, and a higher overall percentage of take from the domestic market, and
3) The films made very close to the same amount of money, the slight advantage going to FF being the result of a lower production budget.

So, how exactly was Batman Begins only "modestly successful" while The Fantastic Four was "the movie that broke the slump"? Because on paper, it sure as heck doesn't look that way.

Two things:

1. Of COURSE The Dark Knight Rises isn't going to reach the same levels as its predecessor, that doesn't happen a lot. It'll still probably make a ton at the box office, get good reviews, and altogether be a good sendoff for the franchise. And if you whine about how Robin isn't in it I suggest you be ready to get a load of angry e-mails telling you shut up and let that crap go.

2. About the Justice League: GOOD. Comic campiness is best kept solely to comics. On the big screen it has little to no place. The idea of the team up is what has me worried about The Avengers.

Not G. Ivingname:
That is what we all said when the Phantom Menace came out, don't let your nostalgia cloud your judgement.

George Lucas isn't directing the Hobbit

He is sad, and yet we are getting Captain america and mother fucking AVENGERS!

Personally I could care less for DC :P

I think you've been hitting the nerdbrew a bit much, Bob.

You seem to really distrust the idea of Christopher Nolan having a say over how Batman is handled, and I really can't see why.

I think that if Warners ever dared a JLA movie people wouldn't go for it. Really enjoyed the cartoons by Bruce Timm et all but I don't think it really works especially with the Christian Bale Batman so firmly planted in the audience's mind.

For rescuing Batman and giving us Inception, Memento and the like I'd follow Nolan into movie hell itself.

Also Armie Hammer as Batman... Not a chance in hell! Good as he is, he might be able to do a passable Bruce Wayne but he just doesn't look right to me.

Superman rumours... meh... Again, he'll need to bulk up.

Hang in there, Bob. You never know, things might just surprise you.

And come on, Rises was never going to be as BIG as The Dark Knight, but that doesn't mean it's going to have Ewoks!

JaredXE:
I'm glad that Raimi got canned by Sony. When hired to do a job in the way that the people with money want you to do it, YOU FUCKING DO IT! You don't sabotage your work and do it half-assed just because you don't like their ideas, you be a professional and do the best job you can.

Then count all the money you got paid for your work and anticipate another job from those folks whom you may think are idiots, but are the idiots with the money.

Raimi deserved to be canned, he did a shitty job with Spidey 3; it was so mangled in my opinion that it HAD to be done on purpose. I hope the reboot does well and that all the Raimi fans will shut the hell up.

Plus, the creepy kid from Pleasantville isn't in it, so already the movie is looking up.

You do realize that Raimi's two first spider-man movies were huge, incredible box office hits? And that the results from his work soared above everybody's expectations? 3 might've been a bad movie, but this doesn't affect the two movies preceding it.

Aiddon:
Two things:

1. Of COURSE The Dark Knight Rises isn't going to reach the same levels as its predecessor, that doesn't happen a lot. It'll still probably make a ton at the box office, get good reviews, and altogether be a good sendoff for the franchise. And if you whine about how Robin isn't in it I suggest you be ready to get a load of angry e-mails telling you shut up and let that crap go.

2. About the Justice League: GOOD. Comic campiness is best kept solely to comics. On the big screen it has little to no place. The idea of the team up is what has me worried about The Avengers.

Oh, thank God, you basically wrote what I was too afraid to :P

I've blown up on the forums about the addition of Robin in the Nolan-verse before... I loved him in the Animated Series, but that's about as far as you can go outside the comics.

The ship has sailed and the people have spoken. I'm sad to say I've very little sympathy for Bob.. although I do agree that Transformers are going to be very shit.

And the JLA just wouldn't work- the two comic houses have ripped one another off way too many times in the past for it not to look like a pale copycat attempt at making money.

Looking ahead is still good, depending on how far ahead you look. An adaptation of "At the Mountains of Madness" written and directed by Guillermo Del Toro is on the way.

Always look at the bright side of life Bob!

Anyway, as I've expressed so many times, the Godzilla movie would suck and/or be unwanted because there's a Godzillion of 'em. Not to say that they're bad, they're actually pretty good!

Godzilla doesn't need a reboot, as much as I'd love to see the huge B.M.F. on screen I'd much rather prevent more shit Godzilla movies.

And about Spiderman, as long as they make a good movie with the symbiote (I want Carnage D=) I'll be happy.

Not G. Ivingname:

Neptunus Hirt:

Not G. Ivingname:

Well, the Hobbit is going to suck because it is a prequel and Hollywood hasn't made a good prequel since the second Godfather and Indiana Jones films :'(

I doubt it. The Hobbit is going to be fantastic, just you wait.

That is what we all said when the Phantom Menace came out, don't let your nostalgia cloud your judgement.

Hey who's directing it. Is that Peter Jackson? Huh, isn't he that guy that never makes a bad movie? (So I've heard and agreed with for the movies I've seen so far)

Just because it's a prequel doesn't mean it's going to suck, check who's actually involved in the movie.

Cheer up Bob! Hey, it could be worse, for example, we could be getting a remake of say fright night. Oh wait, damn it.

The Dark Knight Rises is a terrible title. What the hell was the Dark Knight doing in the first two movies? Travelling sideways? Remaining inert?

JaredXE:
I'm glad that Raimi got canned by Sony. When hired to do a job in the way that the people with money want you to do it, YOU FUCKING DO IT! You don't sabotage your work and do it half-assed just because you don't like their ideas, you be a professional and do the best job you can.

Then count all the money you got paid for your work and anticipate another job from those folks whom you may think are idiots, but are the idiots with the money.

Raimi deserved to be canned, he did a shitty job with Spidey 3; it was so mangled in my opinion that it HAD to be done on purpose. I hope the reboot does well and that all the Raimi fans will shut the hell up.

Plus, the creepy kid from Pleasantville isn't in it, so already the movie is looking up.

Hehe. Nice to know that someone shares my opinion of Tobey Maguire in the "Spiderman" movies! Don't get me wrong, I think he's a decent actor, but he ain't no superhero. His death's-rictus of a grin made me want to put tobasco sauce in my eye-sockets.

I disagree with the prevailing opinion on "Spiderman 3" though. To me it was the most watchable - although, structurally speaking, it was definitely the worst of the three - because it KNEW how bad it was, and glorified in it by taking the sheer absurdity of it up to eleven with sand tornadoes, the infamous emo dance sequences, etc. Plus it didn't have a corrupt scientist turned father figure as the bad guy (like Spiderman 1, 2, and every other superhero movie ever made outside the Bat-verse).

To me, the Spiderman movies - at least the first two - were fun just because they were SO over-the-top, bombastic, and generally terrible, that they were like watching an enjoyable train wreck. The villains were awful, the dialogue was pompous beyond belief, the soundtrack was overwrought to the point that it's probably the worst thing Danny Elfman has ever done, MJ wasn't a character but an annoying action movie stereotype, and Maguire didn't even come close to carrying the role. So they were awful, but (unlike, say, "Transformers"), they were also a lot of fun because of it.

Hell, it says a lot about them that by far the most entertaining scene in the entire three movies is two guys talking in a lift.

On Godzilla:
It's like some Hollywood exec just goes "Who do we give this to? Who made something Godzilla-like this year?"
Somebody shows him the trailer for 'Monsters'.
He's like 'Eh. Close enough. Give it to that guy I guess?'

I agree with this except for Batman 3. I honestly trust Nolan's storytelling and habit of putting plot substance over flashy set-pieces enough that, if not truly great like Dark Knight, Rises will be infinitely superior to other threequels of its ilk.

Lightning never strikes twice, sure, but Nolan's Batman combined with the fact that Nolan said he wouldn't sign on to a sequel unless it told a story worth telling, is enough of an assurance of quality for me.

Edit: Oh, also, it's not too late to sign a different, or a second, director for Godzilla, right? I mean MovieBob's complaining about it and he has two series (AND a column!) on one of the most popular nerd culture websites on the internet, and if more people speak out about it surely the producers will take notice? Nerds are loud, angry people; and on a title like Godzilla, you better fucking pander to the nerds, eh?

It's like the world is just slowly but surely becoming shitter.

'Here have another movie aimed at mindless retards who don't want to think'.

'Just incase you missed the fact that this movie is about consumerism, here's the characters spelling it out for you. t, h, i, s, m, o, v, i, e, i, s, a, b, o, u, ...'

You should look forward to "Dark of the Moon."

Three is usually the point where a series peters out and dies, meaning that after this entry we should (in theory) see a Transformers movie hiatus for a couple years before rebooting with a new crew- which will undoubtedly give fans all new reasons to be pissed off because Transformers fans can never be happy with anything.

If 'At The Mountains of Madness' gets made like a couple commenters have mentioned, I will be extrememly happy and surprised. For some reason I assumed this died years ago.

Sober Thal:
Awww, poor guy.

So sad to see someone truly suffer over such important life changing events (movies?!).

LOL - yeah, I have more important things to worry about like WHERE IS MY HALF-LIFE 2 EPISODE 3!?

Bob, I would hate to be trapped on an elevator with you. On the plus side, your little rant reminds me of a song:

Everything is horrible
Really really really terrible
I'm really depressed
I'm really downtrodden

The whole world is doomed
We're all gonna die
25,672 people die every single minute
Seventeen hundred and fifty people just died

Cancer
Death
Aids
Inflation
Taxes
George Bush
Hell
Satan
Cancer of the face
Cancer of the colon
Cancer of the write
and John Denver on compact disc

Um....what?

Seriously this year has a ton of good movies coming out and others that might be good. I never liked Tobey as Spiderman myself but am a big fan of the comics. I felt the humor was always missing in the movies and I hope a reboot will fix that.

Add in all the other Marvel based movies (Thor, Xmen, Avengers) and the green lantern and you have a super hero buffet this year. I also like the choices in comedy's coming out and am really looking forward to Her Majesty which isn't that far away.

2010 wasn't horrid but 2011 certainly looks like it is going to be a better movie year to me. While not all the movies may be good, I have quite a few I would be willing to shell out money to see in the movies. I can only think of a few that drew me in for 2010 (Inception, Iron Man 2 etc).

Best year ever? We'll have to wait and see. I certainly think it has potential to be, but it would require all the movies to really work...which probably won't happen.

At the same time I can't imagine so many movies in my favorite genres not having at least one or two be really good. That is more then I get most years so I can't see how it would be a bad year at all.

If we get a Batman movie, A Spiderman movie, A Thor movie, A Captain America movie, An Xmen Movie and even possibly an Avenger movie all in one year? How can you call that bad?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here