Movies to look forward to

The Perineum Falcon said:

and back to something of substance: ;)

images from the film adaptation of The Road

Click to expand...

Sounds interesting; I'm glad they didn't go with CGI on this one.

Guts' intestines said:

Honestly, he used as much of the original source material for the Lord of the Rings as anybody could, besides moving the Shelob fight, I can't really think of anything else that was changed.

Click to expand...

Well I disagree about using as much of the original material as possible and I can think of many other things that were changed (I'm sure there's plenty of fansites out there listing them exhaustively if you're interested, like this one). Anyway, because Peter Jackson's adaptation of the Lord of the Rings wasn't utterly shitty doesn't mean he'd make a good adaptation of Berserk.

Aazealh said:

Well I disagree about using as much of the original material as possible and I can think of many other things that were changed (I'm sure there's plenty of fansites out there listing them exhaustively if you're interested, like this one). Anyway, because Peter Jackson's adaptation of the Lord of the Rings wasn't utterly shitty doesn't mean he'd make a good adaptation of Berserk.

Click to expand...

How about as much as possible to fit it within three movies, considering that they were already getting to a length that only those truly into the material would probably be willing to sit through. You're definitely right about their being more cuts, such as the cutting of Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire, but these were minor in comparison, plus Jackson left Miramax because the amount of the cutting they wished to do on the movies, hell they were trying to make it a two-parter. I just meant that of anyone I can think of he'd probably be the best, though a Berserk movie is a bad idea to start with, but if someone does it their best bet is to follow the manga as closely as possible.

Guts' intestines said:

How about as much as possible to fit it within three movies

Click to expand...

I still disagree, seeing as they added material they had made up.

Guts' intestines said:

You're definitely right about their being more cuts, such as the cutting of Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire, but these were minor in comparison

Click to expand...

I don't think they were minor. Tom Bombadil is probably my favorite character in that story.

Guts' intestines said:

plus Jackson left Miramax because the amount of the cutting they wished to do on the movies, hell they were trying to make it a two-parter.

Click to expand...

Actually, Miramax wanted to do it as a single film and Jackson touted it as a two-films project. Then when New Line Cinema became interested, it was decided to make 3 films.

Guts' intestines said:

I just meant that of anyone I can think of he'd probably be the best

Click to expand...

Yes but the only reason you think that is because he's worked on the LotR movies.

Aazealh said:

Yeah it isn't the right place for it. But really, this sort of discussion never goes anywhere so it doesn't matter much. There's a giant thread in Speculation Nation about it. It's ugly to look at.

Click to expand...

Hey! I take pride in that thing thank you very much... Then again, I do have a thing for dead hookers too.

ELEKTRO said:

Yeah that did sound a bit creepy Nomad. What did you do when you watch Batman the Dark Knight?

Click to expand...

I buttered that popcorn like there was no tomorow baby.

Anywho, not to get too out of content here. This morning I read in a article of a Storm Riders sequel, but no luck searching on the net. Either it's to soon, or my ubber Google skills joined the same fate as "Chasity" here in my basement

Sorry to go back to The Road.

Loved the book (and I usually avoid the Oprah lists out of principal)

If you have a chance to read it please do. It takes about 4 straight hours in one sitting. I literally couldn't put it down.

The author has two other books that are movies. All the pretty horses was ok. (and you all know the other one I'm sure.) You need to be bilingual to read any of his westerns, though. I knew I should've paid more attention to Spanish is High School.

Aazealh said:

I don't think they were minor. Tom Bombadil is probably my favorite character in that story.

Click to expand...

Interesting character yes, important to the story as a whole? No, after they left that forest you didn't see him again unless I'm mistaken, I very well could be I haven't read the books in like 7 years. The Scouring of the Shire just let you know what happened to Saruman, of which you could use your own imagination especially since Sauron was far more important.

Aazealh said:

Yes but the only reason you think that is because he's worked on the LotR movies.

Click to expand...

Bingo, there's plenty more room if you wish to jump on the bandwagon, hell I want him to actually do a damn Halo movie, and while he's at it why not God of War. Of course many will probably disagree.

_Noone_ said:

Sorry to go back to The Road.

If you have a chance to read it please do. It takes about 4 straight hours in one sitting. I literally couldn't put it down.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I read it in one sitting as well. However, Blood Meridian is McCarthy's best work, by far. Still, this is looking to be an awesome flick.

Guts' intestines said:

Bingo, there's plenty more room if you wish to jump on the bandwagon, hell I want him to actually do a damn Halo movie, and while he's at it why not God of War. Of course many will probably disagree.

Click to expand...

Please consider that Jackson is a LOTR's fan. His directing of a Halo movie or a God of War movie would most likely be strictly professional. Unless he's a major fan of Halo and God of War. What that basically means is that the quality of his work is not guaranteed to be the same. People handle projects differently when they want to do it. If he's just doing it for the money, well I wouldn't expect a great movie to say the least.

Guts' intestines said:

Interesting character yes, important to the story as a whole? No, after they left that forest you didn't see him again unless I'm mistaken, I very well could be I haven't read the books in like 7 years. The Scouring of the Shire just let you know what happened to Saruman, of which you could use your own imagination especially since Sauron was far more important.

Click to expand...

I don't see your point here. Weren't you talking about faithfulness to the original material earlier? Where's it gone? I told you I find those parts important and you're not going to change my mind (or that of tons of other readers) by just stating otherwise. I can already imagine you telling me that some part of Berserk isn't as important as another one, justifying it's removal, which is precisely the problem I have here. And there's plenty of more things that were changed as detailed in the link I provided you anyway.

Guts' intestines said:

Bingo, there's plenty more room if you wish to jump on the bandwagon, hell I want him to actually do a damn Halo movie, and while he's at it why not God of War. Of course many will probably disagree.

Click to expand...

Indeed, many will probably disagree. And I don't think you understood what I was getting at: because Jackson's done a decent heroic fantasy trilogy doesn't mean he's the perfect director for every heroic fantasy story ever. Not to mention that like Ramen said, Jackson's a die hard fan of LotR and that it showed through his dedication in getting that specific project done.

Aazealh said:

I don't see your point here. Weren't you talking about faithfulness to the original material earlier? Where's it gone? I told you I find those parts important and you're not going to change my mind (or that of tons of other readers) by just stating otherwise. I can already imagine you telling me that some part of Berserk isn't as important as another one, justifying it's removal, which is precisely the problem I have here. And there's plenty of more things that were changed as detailed in the link I provided you anyway.

Indeed, many will probably disagree. And I don't think you understood what I was getting at: because Jackson's done a decent heroic fantasy trilogy doesn't mean he's the perfect director for every heroic fantasy story ever. Not to mention that like Ramen said, Jackson's a die hard fan of LotR and that it showed through his dedication in getting that specific project done.

Click to expand...

Yes, but I also mentioned being faithful as much as possible. When adapting long works of written fiction there's only so much of the original material that you can include before you get a movie that's way to long, either to the point that the casual fan won't want to sit through it, or a director can run into problems with the film's producers due to length. Lord of the Rings has a lot of narrative in the beginning which mostly describes Hobbits as well as their old heroes, of which is something that to do in a movie would be excessive. So when someone like Peter Jackson goes into making the film he has to go into a long work such as the Lord of the Rings and actually look for "minor" things to cut in order to maintain most of the meat of the film. Now I get that you liked Tom Bombadil's character, but in terms of his overall importance to the story he was so self contained that there really was little reason to keep him, especially since the movies were like three hours a piece anyway. Once you got past the part where the Hobbits departed from Tom, he was never seen again, I mean I liked him but I kept waiting to see him come out of nowhere riding an ent to the battlefield in the books, but he was done long before.

And yes I look at Berserk and see that it would be impossible to include every story arc into a movie or movies, simply because they are so individually fully developed and each brings something that pushes the canon forward. I'm also not trying to convince you otherwise, you're the type of person who long ago weighed the pros and cons of a Berserk movie in your mind and made your decision, to which I know is written in stone to anyone who would try to convince you otherwise, and I expect no less. I just want you to fully understand what I'm trying to get across, even though it won't convince you. I look at LotR and know that it took a lot of careful scrutiny to decide what parts to keep and where they should go, Jackson never said it was a 1:1 transition, it's an adaptation, one that is done to bring the best possible movie experience. And on a sidenote I think that site is old because I think I've seen it before, and when I say old I mean prior to the many of the extended director's cut dvds of LotR that Jackson released, so there may be parts that were no longer cut that appeared in one way or another. I also understood that you meant that just because he did LotR, doesn't mean he could do another fantasy, well I think you need to appreciate the amount of attention to detail he put into the movies, down to the attire of the characters and the time that was spent on each movie. Of which all are positive things when bringing fantasy alive to the hardcore fan, who in most cases would raise hell if parts of the story don't make it to the movie(s).

Also Tolkien's work is some hacks job, Tolkien is widely regarded as the father of modern fantasy, so to do a pretty good job on his work may carry a lot more into other works than had Jackson done something else. I also know that you're saying he did that much work because he was a big fan, but who's to say he couldn't read Berserk and grow to like it the same? The last thing's I want to say are that I think also the way you and I each first experienced Berserk may also influence our thoughts of a movie. I was pretty young when I first saw Berserk in '02, and I didn't get my start in the Manga I first saw the anime, so when I finally started reading the Manga I was pretty blown away and my impression of Berserk went higher. I know you started with the Manga so your general appreciation of the anime is probably way lower than mine, when I watched the Anime it was all I knew of Berserk and it was enough to hook me, you had the much better manga to go off of so you probably watched the Anime and instantly knew what was excluded so this may have hampered your enjoyment of it. I think as long as everyone who is a die hard fan to the sometimes cynical die hard fans, goes into any would be Berserk movie and knows to go in with a grain of salt and also understand that a movie has a lot of potential to bring in fans who might not have heard of Berserk before, and it could do so in a much bigger extent than a Dreamcast game or Japan exclusive PS2 game could then it could be a benefit for the series. And yeah it could suck but chances are that it'll suck only to us, who are most familiar with the series.

One last thing... you'll think Peter Jackson's LotR was the Holy Grail of fantasy movies if you ever are unfortunate enough to see Uwe Boll's Dungeon Siege, ugh 'nuff said.

Guts' intestines said:

Yes, but I also mentioned being faithful as much as possible.

Click to expand...

And the movies weren't.

Guts' intestines said:

When adapting long works of written fiction there's only so much of the original material that you can include before you get a movie that's way to long, either to the point that the casual fan won't want to sit through it, or a director can run into problems with the film's producers due to length. Lord of the Rings has a lot of narrative in the beginning which mostly describes Hobbits as well as their old heroes, of which is something that to do in a movie would be excessive.

Click to expand...

You seem to overlook the fact that lots of stuff beyond hobbits and Bombadil was removed, and that other worthless material was added, like Arwen's struggle for love and whatnot. The changes went way beyond what you're describing, which down the line simply amounts to a justification of why it was alright to modify the story. I've said it before, but actually I think Peter Jackson should have rather made his own LotR inspired story instead of adapting the books. That would have solved a lot of problems.

Guts' intestines said:

Now I get that you liked Tom Bombadil's character, but in terms of his overall importance to the story he was so self contained that there really was little reason to keep him

Click to expand...

Says who? Who's to decide what's important or not? That sounds rather arrogant to me. I wouldn't want the same reasoning to be applied to Berserk.

Guts' intestines said:

I just want you to fully understand what I'm trying to get across, even though it won't convince you. [...] I also understood that you meant that just because he did LotR, doesn't mean he could do another fantasy, well I think you need to appreciate the amount of attention to detail he put into the movies, down to the attire of the characters and the time that was spent on each movie.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, it's not the problem. I just don't agree with the idea that because Jackson made LotR he'd be perfect or even simply better than another director for a Berserk movie. Believe me, I've likely paid more attention to the details in those movies than you have, and I wouldn't even call myself a LotR fan.

Guts' intestines said:

Also Tolkien's work is some hacks job, Tolkien is widely regarded as the father of modern fantasy, so to do a pretty good job on his work may carry a lot more into other works than had Jackson done something else.

Click to expand...

I'm not convinced.

Guts' intestines said:

I think as long as everyone who is a die hard fan to the sometimes cynical die hard fans, goes into any would be Berserk movie and knows to go in with a grain of salt and also understand that a movie has a lot of potential to bring in fans who might not have heard of Berserk before, and it could do so in a much bigger extent than a Dreamcast game or Japan exclusive PS2 game could then it could be a benefit for the series. And yeah it could suck but chances are that it'll suck only to us, who are most familiar with the series.

Click to expand...

Actually, I wouldn't be too sure about it only sucking to people familiar with the series, considering how arduous making an adaptation would be. And I don't see how hypothetically bringing in more fans would benefit the series either. It'd benefit the editor and eventually the author's bank account, but it wouldn't impact the series' quality.

In the end, is a movie needed? I don't think so. And if one absolutely had to be made, you can check my thoughts on it in the appropriate thread.

After seeing Hellboy 2 I'd say Guillermo del toro might have an interesting take on how an Apostle could look. Assuming of course he'd make any original ones and not follow the manga. However like its been said a live action Berserk movie is highly unlikely at least here in the states. Japan though....they've made quite a few live action movies from anime and manga.

Aazealh said:

Says who? Who's to decide what's important or not? That sounds rather arrogant to me. I wouldn't want the same reasoning to be applied to Berserk.

Click to expand...

The director. And its not really arrogant, the fact is that the books, nor the movies were made or broken on the back of Tom Bombadil or the other cuts that were made. All of those things were fine for the books because the trilogy was part of many books and writings of Tolkien that were meant to interweave with the rest of his works which formed the Middle earth universe, the purpose of the movies seemed mostly to provide an overview of this universe by bringing it to life on film. Now of course, very few people would want this for Berserk but it's a natural process for bringing any long work of fiction to film. And I don't think its fair to question how much I paid attention to any detail of LotR, neither the books or the movies; because I've written three critical analysis papers on (not to sound like a whiney bitch but its true) it, including my senior research paper, I also have seen the movies many times, and I'd definitely call myself a fan, LotR along with his unfinished tales were the things that introduced me to fantasy earlier on, the only book that I hated was the Silmarillion because it bored me to tears. Though I'll drop this and leave it as differences in our opinions.

Yea stop bickering. Guillermo del toro is awsome. If you havn't seen hellboy 2 go see it. I can't tell you how cool it was.Such great fun in single movie. THe coolest creature was hellboy's Death at the end, it looked like something strait out of Pans Labyrinth.

Guts' intestines said:

The director. And its not really arrogant, the fact is that the books, nor the movies were made or broken on the back of Tom Bombadil or the other cuts that were made.

Click to expand...

I disagree. The director's take on the story doesn't hold any kind of special authority, nor does your opinion despite the fact you keep asserting it as if it did. "The fact is"... No, sorry. I'll take the author's word on it, not someone else's.

Guts' intestines said:

All of those things were fine for the books because the trilogy was part of many books and writings of Tolkien that were meant to interweave with the rest of his works which formed the Middle earth universe

Click to expand...

Actually that isn't the case. Tolkien never meant for his works other than The Hobbit and LotR to be published, it all happened after his death and against his will (you can thank his son for that). Which is why he reused a lot of material from the Silmarillion in the Lord of the Rings (even similar names and events). It's not so much interweaving as it is redundant at times.

Guts' intestines said:

the purpose of the movies seemed mostly to provide an overview of this universe by bringing it to life on film.

Click to expand...

It's an adaptation of the novel, that's its purpose.

Guts' intestines said:

And I don't think its fair to question how much I paid attention to any detail of LotR, neither the books or the movies; because I've written three critical analysis papers on (not to sound like a whiney bitch but its true) it, including my senior research paper, I also have seen the movies many times, and I'd definitely call myself a fan, LotR along with his unfinished tales were the things that introduced me to fantasy earlier on, the only book that I hated was the Silmarillion because it bored me to tears. Though I'll drop this and leave it as differences in our opinions.

Click to expand...

I'm not calling your attention to details into question, just saying I've likely paid more attention regardless, which I think showed a little in this discussion. And I didn't dislike the Silmarillion myself, though it's clearly more a bunch of notes put together than an actual novel. Anyway you're right, better stop with this before everybody else gets annoyed.

So on another note, I still haven't seen Hellboy 2 myself and I'd really like to.

Watchmen, The film I am mostly looking forward too, As well as Punisher: War Zone, Hellboy II the Golden Army & The Spirit. Mostly just comic book movies, lol.

Oh shit I forgot about the Spirit. Looks great. Directed by Frank MIller in Sin City fashion. I can't wait for that.

I love Del Toro. He seems to excel at making creepy kids. The Hellboy Jr into made me cringe, but other than that (and the Barry Manilo karaoke) I had straight up loved Hellboy 2.

He does collaborate with Peter Jackson, I've noticed. Still, Del Toro hasn't really changed from his earlier days as a director whereas Jackson has dramatically and for the worst. I thought his adaption of LOTR was bloated and pretentious. I wish he stuck to splatstick.

On a separate note:

I will definitely check out Blood Meridian. Thanks, Walter!

A couple of years ago when LOTR was big and the movies were in theaters I was a huge fan. But I was younger (I'm 20 now) and honestly I feel like I've grown past them. The films are still great because they seem like the wizard of Oz or Star Wars trilogy of my generation (well, maybe not that) and I loved them to death. But since then I've moved on. If I feel like tapping into the pure genius that is LOTR, I'll pick up one of the books and indulge. The movies are amazing though, just not THAT amazing. Jackson is a great director, at least for hollywood. I can't say I haven't enjoyed any of his recent blockbuster adaptations (especially in the theaters). I think it's fair to say he's one of our better modern hollywood directors. About him and Berserk- It's a cute thought but he is NOT qualified to make Berserk the movie.
Del Toro so far hasn't done any wrong. His earlier stuff was well... a modest effort. Whereas Peter Jackson's earlier stuff is just awsome, but he did have more control I mean he wasn't making his own movies with his material, Del Toro was a studio director. They both rock and I can't see why from film buff's perspective anyone could hate (I mean HATE) them or their movies.

I've seen a number of films recently (at least one a day), so here's a brief summary of some of them:

*and I'm avoiding spoilers, for the most part in this, so never fear!

Pineapple Express

I was soooooo looking forward to this, and how could I not after that excellent trailer? James Franco stole the show as the loveable drug dealer, Saul. He has the best lines, gives the best performance, and in turn gets the most sympathy. I just loved the guy!
This had plenty of great moments through out, and some not so great. It's pretty much a stoner/action-flick; pure entertainment. Some of my friends were describing this as Cheech & Chong (level of drug use) meets Pulp Fiction (level of violence), which is fairly apt in this case. The characters are stoned the entire time, and there is a surprising number of (sometimes) VERY violent sequences, but somehow most of these come off as comedic.
The film was directed by David Gordon Green, whose previous films are quite different from this (and I enjoyed quite a bit), as has been well reported, and I was intrigued by his choice to direct this. His previous films already had moments of wonderful comedy (and Danny McBride) that came off as true and genuine moments between real characters. They also had a wonderful pace and moments of intimacy that brought the audience in closer to the characters. I was hoping these aspects would carry through to this +loads more comedy and action......
Ultimately, as much as I loved this in the theater, I haven't thought a lot about since I walked out. The scenes, the jokes, and the characters didn't stick with me as long as, say, Superbad (which was fucking superb). It's certainly worth a viewing, but probably not 10 bucks.
Your call.

Tropic Thunder

Another whose trailer had me drooling from the beginning. The last movie that Ben Stiller directed himself was Zoolander, which has remained one of my all-time favorite comedies since I saw it (which was sometime ago). So, needless to say, I was quite excited by the prospect.
This film is a satire of Hollywood and aspects of Popular Culture in America. It starts off with a bang, so to speak: fake trailers and commercials that seem so true and right on the money, that it's almost cringe worthy, but at the same time you can't help but laugh.
Again, as I said with Pineapple, there are plenty of great moments in this (much of them coming from Robert Downey Jr, who fucking owns this). Unfortunately, though, a lot of this is a hit-or-miss, at least for me. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed this a little more than Pineapple, but some gags/jokes were continued for far too long, and others didn't seem developed enough for me to really care about them.
I'm also on the fence on how it ended; seems like they ultimately fell into exactly what they started out making fun of, but then again, maybe I'm just reading that wrong.
If it comes down to a choice between this and Pineapple, see this without hesitation.

The Ten

I loved Wet, Hot, American Summer, and as soon as I found out this was by the same people, I knew it was something I had to see as soon as possible. This didn't upset my expectations nary a bit. The ten stories based on the Ten Commandments are imaginative and hilarious, and they're short, too, so once a joke has been explored.... they move on.
It all ties together as the characters and stories begin to affect and appear in the other stories, so they don't come off as completely random. It's silly, irreverant humor and I loved every minute of it.
It's on DVD now, so there's really no reason you should NOT see this.

Manda Bala

What a great film, much less documentary, this was. Beautifully shot and intriguing throughout.
It's a story of Sao Paolo, and the frog farm there, the congressman who funds it, a plastic surgeon who specializes in ears, bullet proof cars, a woman who needs the reconstructive surgery, and the kidnappers who run amok. It's about fear. It's about politics. It's about corruption everlasting.
I really can't say much more at this point as I'm still processing it.
But I can't reccommend this enough, honestly. Even if you don't commonly enjoy documentaries (which I don't), you very well might enjoy this. It's just wonderfully put together.

Now it's time for Margot at the Wedding. Excuse me.

Good reviews Rainmaker. I have to say I felt Pineapple Express was the better of the two. Tropic thunder had me laughing harder, but there are parts of the movie I felt dragged on two long where nothing interesting happened. Pineapple Express' jokes weren't as good, but I felt they were better placed.

Either way, I felt they were both good and worth the 8 bucks. Just skip The Ten and Manda Bala, you've have plenty of money after that.

Excellent reviews Falcon. I watched Tropic Thunder and I agree the jokes were hit or miss. I'm surprised that you liked Zoolander ( I thought I was the only one) so I was very excited for this but honestly I wasn't laughing very often. Downy jr. is so very badass and some gags are wickedly sick and hilarious but for some reason I thought it was just too long and like you said some gags were stretched out way too far. The ending also sucked, even for a comedy. I didn't laugh at all the last 10 minutes. Everyone else seems to like it though. Maybe it's me?

Now I haven't see Pinapple Express but thats next on my list. Cheech and Chong meets pulp fiction? sign me up. And again I agree about Superbad. Fucking best comedy I've seen in long while. So yea can't wait. I hope I'm not as let down as I was with Tropic THunder.

And holy shit Perineum it took you that long to see The Ten!!! Along with Superbad, The Ten was fucking crazy funny shit. I was crying from laughter, something I never do. I cried with this, Theres something about Mary... Superbad, Zoolander, some Monty Python.... and those might be the only ones off the top of my head. So yea the ten is great fun. My favorite segment may be the prison story.
Duane Rosenblum: Sometimes I wonder what it would be like if I were the one who were ass-raping you every night.
Dr. Glenn Richie: You know, I think you're feeling the energy of our friendship and projecting it into something else that isn't there.
Duane Rosenblum: No Glenn, I'm not... I'm not projecting. I can't look at you without fantasizing about shoving you up against a wall in the laundry room, and punching you in the mouth... And then raping you. Without your consent, of course.
Dr. Glenn Richie: Hey, that's what makes it rape right?
Duane Rosenblum: That's what makes it rape.

I'm looking into the rumors of At the Mountains of Madness.

Right now The Spirit is my number one movie to look forward to, no question.


However I'm surprised no one has mentioned W.

Also on a side note, I'm probably the only one a little excited about Saw V. At first I thought the movies were just "kinda okay", but then I took a different perspective on them. If you look at them more like a mini-series, it sorta has that Lost/Heroes feel to it. You know you're not getting any closure, but they're still really fun to watch and figure out.

Deci said:

However I'm surprised no one has mentioned W.

Click to expand...

http://www.skullknight.net/forum/index.php?topic=8350.msg154357#msg154357