I'm Sad Now

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
I'm Sad Now

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

Read Full Article
 

ZippyDSMlee

New member
Sep 1, 2007
3,959
0
0
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.....
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,158
4,923
118
I'm actually glad their not making a new Spidey with the original cast or with Raimi at the helm.

I love the first 2 movies, but by the 3rd one you could tell everyone was getting really tired of reprising the same role. Tobey Maguire didn't really have that boyish enthusiasm anymore which made him so endearing in the the first 2 movies, Kirsten Dunst started to look old, and Danny Elfman and John Dykstra were either dropped or left the production. The later of which I'm sure nobody was really bothered with but me.

I don't have any hopes for the reboot, but I'm glad the original was laid to rest.
 

Gunnyboy

New member
Sep 25, 2010
103
0
0
Transformers 3 will be fine. I'm sure it would be like the first, which was very entertaining and wasn't dumb like the sequel. I know people romanticize the cartoons, and act like Bay is the most offensive person out there, but there was a country named CARBOMBYA people!

deeper into the dark side of post-9/11 anxieties in a manner that no mainstream genre film had yet dared
Actually War of The Worlds did. Spielberg even deliberately used 9/11 imagery such as the ash on people's faces and clothes, and the board with the missing people's names on it. This, combined with the panic of being under constant attack by a devastating enemy, gave that film a terrifying, yet grounded, atmosphere. I know most people don't like it, but I find it pretty underrated.

In fact there was an article about it:
irector Steven Spielberg says his version of the 1898 H.G. Wells novel about hostile alien invaders reflects American anxiety over the threat of Middle Eastern terrorists infiltrating the USA and causing mass devastation like the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

"Every iteration of War of the Worlds has occurred in times of uncertainty," he says. "We live under a veil of fear that we didn't live under before 9/11. There has been a conscious emotional shift in this country."

As mechanized tripods crawl across civilization, zapping people to dust inside their clothes and toppling buildings, War of the Worlds includes many images as indelible as the 9/11 attacks.

The dust-caked faces of thousands of terrified, fleeing citizens. The hundreds of "Have You Seen ... ?" posters with photos and contact information for loved ones trying to find the lost. One line of dialogue ? "Did you lose anybody?" ? was a common New York greeting at the time.

Orson Welles' infamous 1938 radio version, which caused panic on the East Coast among people who thought it was real, "preyed upon American fears of Hitler running rampant over eastern Europe," Spielberg says. 1953's movie version produced by George Pal was fueled by Cold War hysteria and the threat of nuclear destruction.

New York Post critic Lou Lumenick had mixed feelings about Spielberg's film but says using 9/11 imagery was "a valid form of artistic expression."

"I don't think any subject is off-limits, depending on how it's handled," Lumenick says. "If Spielberg had planes crashing into towers, I think that would upset a lot more people."

Village Voice critic Michael Atkinson says the images might be coming too soon for many New Yorkers.

"It might be just a matter of how close you were to Ground Zero that day," Atkinson says. "That might determine how much you're ready to have those things be used as aspects of mass entertainment."
 

Venereus

New member
May 9, 2010
383
0
0
I'd like more good news about The Hobbit. Is Guillermo del Toro still not directing it like I always dreamed?
 

Ravenshaw

New member
Mar 30, 2010
2
0
0
I'm a little more optimistic about Batman 3's prospects. I'm a little confused though as to whether Bob thinks it won't be a good film or it won't be a commercial success. Batman Forever and Spiderman 3 were both more successful financially than their predecessors, even though they were clearly less interesting. Given that Nolan was able to get 800 Million box office on a non-sequel, hard (-ish) sci-fi film, I'm willing to bet Batman 3 will be massive.

If Nolan has as much creative control as he's had previously, I've got high hopes for the quality of Batman 3, even though I thought the end of The Dark Knight was a bit dire.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
The Dark Knight was good, but hardly earth-shattering beyond its commercial weight.
I walked in not knowing about Ledger's death and came out surprisingly satisfied (I just about swore movies off forever after watching Pirates 3, and how they completely missed the point of what made the first movie so damn fun and memorable).

Perhaps I'll have the benefit of anti-hype again, and "Batman 3" (doesn't that film already exist?) will turn out to be good.

As for the Spiderman reboot...I can't wait for it to tank. I'm so eagerly waiting for it to fail.
Seriously. I hate the three modern Spiderman films. The first one I admit was promising and well-paced, but the second movie drove me nuts. The third movie was just torturous to even be near.

The only thing I'll remember from those movies 10 years from now is the magic cube that Doctor Octopus referred to as "Tritium" (I wasn't aware heavy water came in solid gold cubic form. It's just Hydrogen with 3 neutrons. IT ISN'T THAT FUCKING RARE. WE CAN MANUFACTURE IT.)

As for other movies...I honestly have nothing else on the docket.
Less than zero, if we're counting on Michael Bay raping my childhood yet again.
 

SamElliot'sMustache

New member
Oct 5, 2009
388
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
I'm actually glad their not making a new Spidey with the original cast or with Raimi at the helm.

I love the first 2 movies, but by the 3rd one you could tell everyone was getting really tired of reprising the same role. Tobey Maguire didn't really have that boyish enthusiasm anymore which made him so endearing in the the first 2 movies, Kirsten Dunst started to look old, and Danny Elfman and John Dykstra were either dropped or left the production. The later of which I'm sure nobody was really bothered with but me.

I don't have any hopes for the reboot, but I'm glad the original was laid to rest.
I agree. 3 pretty much wrapped everything up, even if it did stumble across the finish line, so when I heard Raimi and Co. wanted to do a fourth, part of me was skeptical.

That said, I'm really dreading the reboot. An unproven director (who was likely hired on the cheap to be a Yes-Man), a script from the guy who wrote Zodiac, a.k.a. 'David Frincher going downhill', and a lot of otherwise talented people who are miscast (except Emma Stone, I think she's the only spot-on choice) all made me uncomfortable with the idea of the reboot. Then, I saw the first photo from filming, showing Andrew Garfield looking like a constipated Robert Pattinson with wool mitts
 

mireko

Umbasa
Sep 23, 2010
2,003
0
0
As long as there's no ferry scene, Rises will rock.

Also: Michael Bay is, and always has been, a massive douchebag.
 

snowman6251

New member
Nov 9, 2009
841
0
0
Sucker Punch comes out in 2011.

I cease to care about any movie woes knowing that I will be watching Sucker Punch in approximately 3 months.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
Jan 4, 2010
12,010
0
41
Country
United States
Good thing I concern myself with game releases rather than movies. But don't worry Bob, if Cap and Thor do well that gives us two more reasons to be excited for the Avengers film, making 2012 an amazing year to be a Marvel fan. :D
 

rayen020

New member
May 20, 2009
1,138
0
0
.....eeeehhhhhh... I dunno these days. i figure movies will be the way they always have; piles of shit and money that has to waded through to find a couple of diamonds. Its just that now the piles of shit are the watered down dust of the monuments that stood in my childhood.

Also Is it just me or is christopher Nolan coming off a more of a douche than anything else? I mean great films aside this guy doesn't seem like a good person the way some others (George Lucas, Stephen Speilberg, Clint Eastwood) have been.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
mireko said:
Also: Michael Bay is, and always has been, a massive douchebag.
So, making movies you don't like apparently makes him a douchebag now?

Or do you have any other, more susbtantial reasons?

OT: I have noticed that most of those have to do with superhero movies. And most of those don't really seem like news THAT bad.
 

mireko

Umbasa
Sep 23, 2010
2,003
0
0
JourneyThroughHell said:
mireko said:
Also: Michael Bay is, and always has been, a massive douchebag.
So, making movies you don't like apparently makes him a douchebag now?

Or do you have any other, more susbtantial reasons?

OT: I have noticed that most of those have to do with superhero movies. And most of those don't really seem like news THAT bad.
It's not just that I don't like them, after watching Transformers I felt like I had just become a worse person. Like it had burned away a part of my brain that I could never get back.

No substantial reasons though, I obviously don't know the guy.

OT: I don't see how a lull in superhero movies is such a disaster either. Maybe some incompetent directors will ruin a few franchises for a while, but it's not like they won't come back to superhero movies eventually anyway.

I mean, even after Joel Schumacher ruined Batman for everyone, they still gave Christopher Nolan hundreds of millions of dollars to reboot the franchise.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
mireko said:
It's not just that I don't like them, after watching Transformers I felt like I had just become a worse person. Like it had burned away a part of my brain that I could never get back.

No substantial reasons though, I obviously don't know the guy.
Well, that's not the problem with Bay, but with your self-perception.

Bay openly admits his movies kind of suck and that he makes them for a specific demographic.

I find some of the stuff he does enjoyable, but even when I don't (Armageddon, Pearl Harbor etc.), I don't feel like I've become a "worse person" for watching it.
 

NotSoNimble

New member
Aug 10, 2010
417
0
0
"Godzilla is one of the most important movie icons in cinematic history."

What the hell are you smoking?
 

Sylocat

Sci-Fi & Shakespeare
Nov 13, 2007
2,122
0
0
JourneyThroughHell said:
mireko said:
Also: Michael Bay is, and always has been, a massive douchebag.
So, making movies you don't like apparently makes him a douchebag now?

Or do you have any other, more susbtantial reasons?
Well, it's also the opinion of just about every actor who's ever worked under him...