Movies to look forward to

Walter · March 10, 2011

NightCrawler said:
. It seems now that Universal is backing out because of it being a R-rated 150M sci-fi horror film. Del Toro is still confident the project will eventually move forward at some point.

There's no predicting the MPAA. They decide what ratings movies will get based on a set of criteria and their review of the film. Their ratings can often be arbitrary, particularly if the movie contains racy or controversial material, even if they adhere to the movie rating standards.

Griffith · March 10, 2011

NightCrawler said:
But there's something bugging me... Why an R-rating in a Lovecraftian movie? I don't remember any gore or extreme violence in At the Mountains of Madness.

Reading between the lines, it looks like the problem isn't the studio or the MPAA, but Del Toro. After The Hobbit fiasco and now this, his recent batting average isn't looking so good... like he can't even get to the plate.

IncantatioN · March 10, 2011

Here's a decent article about the whole thing ...

http://collider.com/guillermo-del-toro-at-the-mountains-of-madness/79728/

At the Mountains of Madness was supposed to get a yes-or-no answer from Universal by the end of last year, but the process continued to drag on for months. del Toro is confused as most people by the late decision and how far pre-production went:

"Since the day of the decision, I haven’t had a face to face with [Universal execs Donna Langley and Adam Fogelson]. We’ve exchanged a few phone calls. I my mind, we were given the parameters of a budget and screenplay, and I was given the chance by the studio to create a visual presentation. They were blown away by the visual presentation, they openly admitted to loving the screenplay, saying it was dead on. And we hit the target on the budget they gave us, not a figure I arrived at. This came after months and months of story boarding, haggling with VFX companies, and bringing down the budget number. The week before the decision, I was scouting in the border of Canada and Alaska. We were a week away from opening offices in Toronto. We were crewed up, and frankly, I am as puzzled as most people are. One of the biggest, biggest points for me with this movie was the scope and the R, going hand in hand."
....
"Ultimately, I think the MPAA could rule the movie PG-13 because the movie and the book are not gory. If that is the outcome, fine. But I don’t want to put the PG-13 on paper, for one reason. We created Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark, thinking we would be safe looking for PG-13 because we had no profanity, no sex, no gore, but we made a very intense movie in a very classical mold. And the MPAA gave it an R. They said the movie was too intense for a PG-13. The only think I know about Mountains is, I do not want it to be bloody, I do not want it to be crass, but I want it to be as intense as possible. And those discussions were had in the open. Everyone knew this was my position, that I knew I was asking the chance for the movie to be what it needs to be. I don’t think it’s a good idea to relinquish that on paper."
....
"Even if you go back to the golden days of monster movies at Universal, some of the best ones were sequels. To me, Bride of Frankenstein is in many ways superior to Frankenstein. I don’t think that in principle, a sequel or a spinoff or a movie that comes something, or a remake, should be shunned. What is really dramatic to me is that most decisions are now being taken by comps, and charts, and target quadrants. All these marketing things we inherited from a completely different system, in the 80s, it has taken hold of the entire industry. Marketers and accountants seem to be running things and less and less of the decisions are in the hands of filmmakers. There are still some filmmakers that can push through. I will say though, I count my blessings. In my time, I’ve been able to make impossible things like a big superhero movie starring Ron Perlman. Frankly, I think we’ve come so close with Mountains that to me it’s an indicator of the great possibility we will get to make it, as soon as possible. As long as the idea stays fresh and no one beats me to it, in terms of the origins of the monsters, the scope and the aspect of Antarctica where these creatures are discovered, I will continue to press forward."

"We would have needed first to get the formal terms of turnaround from Universal before we could formally get an answer from another studio. We were gauging interest and there was interest, very serious interest, but nothing that could happen before Universal names the terms in which they would allow us to try and set it up somewhere else. That is my hope right now that they just allow us to seek a home for this. It will remain a timely premise for years to come, so I don’t have to do it next month. I know it’s not an easy proposition. It is, if you have faith. I think a studio needs to fully believe in that. Certainly, in the last year, you can find movies of that scope or bigger that have been green lit on a wing and a prayer. We are part of show business, and it seems the business side takes more and more command of things, and the show part of the business seems to be dwindling. It’s a sign of the times, in a way."

Walter · March 10, 2011

Griffith said:
Reading between the lines, it looks like the problem isn't the studio or the MPAA, but Del Toro. After The Hobbit fiasco and now this, his recent batting average isn't looking so good... like he can't even get to the plate.

Nah, I still blame the MPAA for stuff like this. They're really complete pussies when it comes to the content of movies. If the content is somewhat challenging for audiences, it's almost always an automatic R. But if a movie is light-hearted, with tons of levity, it could score a PG-13 or even a PG rating, even if there is cursing or even a bare ass.

Rhombaad · March 10, 2011

Yet in True Grit they went with a PG-13 rating despite the violence in the cabin being on the level of many R-rated movies I've seen in the past. I just don't understand them.

Vampire_Hunter_Bob · March 10, 2011

For anyone interested in watching a documentary about the MPAA check out This Film is Not Yet Rated http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Film_Is_Not_Yet_Rated

NightCrawler · March 11, 2011

Griffith said:
Reading between the lines, it looks like the problem isn't the studio or the MPAA, but Del Toro. After The Hobbit fiasco and now this, his recent batting average isn't looking so good... like he can't even get to the plate.

And they're almost starting to shoot The Hobbit. Del Toro must've caught the Terry Gilliam curse.
If he didn't want to pursue his other projects, mainly ATMOM (which is his dream project), he would still be right on time for The Hobbit.
Besides, it would be great for him to have a big financial success behind him (which The Hobbit will surely be) before adventuring into risky and big budget personal projects (see Nolan with Inception after The Dark Knight as a good example, and not Peter Jackson's King Kong :troll:

). No wonder the studio is afraid to greenlight ATMOM.

IncantatioN · April 1, 2011

You make a good point, NightCrawler.

I remember posting the first trailer for Source Code a while ago. The movie comes out today, rated pretty high on RT ... was at +90% all week till last night. Anyone gonna watch it soon?

nomad · April 15, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6ERgApz0_g&feature=player_embedded#at=569
;)

NightCrawler · April 15, 2011

IncantatioN said:
You make a good point, NightCrawler.

I remember posting the first trailer for Source Code a while ago. The movie comes out today, rated pretty high on RT ... was at +90% all week till last night. Anyone gonna watch it soon?

Yeah, it's getting really good reviews. Moon was pretty good, so i'm definitely going to see this one.

IncantatioN · April 18, 2011

NightCrawler said:
Yeah, it's getting really good reviews. Moon was pretty good, so i'm definitely going to see this one.

I watched it a few days ago ... it has it's loop holes, but overall, it felt better than Moon. The director has his way of holding back information from the audience and revealing it little by little where and when it matters.

Walter · April 18, 2011

I liked Moon a lot. But Source Code's premise reminds me too much of 12 Monkeys.

Aazealh · April 18, 2011

Walter said:
I liked Moon a lot. But Source Code's premise reminds me too much of 12 Monkeys.

The premise is also very similar to that of Déjà Vu. Man can review the past to prevent a catastrophe, but falls in love with a woman who died and tries to push the system beyond its limits to save her. Anyway, the movie intrigues me and I'll most likely see it, but the title bothers me because it feels like it's going to be a dumb reference. Hopefully I'm wrong about that, but it's hard to shake that first impression.

Rhombaad · April 18, 2011

I saw Source Code yesterday and it was very entertaining. It had some similarities to Twelve Monkeys; I haven't seen Deja Vu, but from what Aazealh says, the basic plot is the same. I think it's worth seeing and I thought the concept of "source code" was interesting, even if the name isn't.

IncantatioN · April 18, 2011

Everything's tied to the end and in a realistic way. The movie starts a little slow in terms of what information's given to the audience. By the way, the soundtrack for Moon was darn good! I like the way Jake's acted in this one, academy nod - nope.

NightCrawler · April 19, 2011

Just saw it. Started good, but boy did it took a quick turn to lame town. Mediocre movie. There's no comparison to 12 Monkeys. It's more like a bad sci-fi version of Groundhog Day.

Rhombaad · April 19, 2011

NightCrawler said:
There's no comparison to 12 Monkeys.

Well, yeah. :guts:

I just showed it to my girlfriend the other day. She'd never seen it before (nor any other Gilliam film) and she was pleasantly surprised. One of the best time travel movies ever made.

IncantatioN · April 19, 2011

Timecrimes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfyQia26_mU&feature=related ... the other trailers give away too much) is another really cool under-the-radar time travel flick.

NightCrawler · April 29, 2011

Star Wars

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1qskrW0U34

Not new, but looks amazing.

IncantatioN · May 7, 2011

Martha Marcy May Marlene - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nP4qqrMj5Q

Another Earth - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJoXfTxOEuw&feature=player_embedded#at=124

(I know I know ... I never liked 300 or the idea of over-used slo-mo scenes, but this looks a little cool - I'll watch it for the Cinematography alone because of Tarsem's The Fall) Immortals - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LDF9wCxfBc&feature=player_embedded

Melancholia - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_xsm46s2Gg&feature=player_embedded

Xem · May 12, 2011

Chuck Norris is supposedly signed on to be in it. :serpico:

Anyone?

Rhombaad · May 12, 2011

Deci said:
Anyone?

Nope.

Aphasia · May 12, 2011

Hahahah, Oh wow...I'll go see it as long as they don't get rid of the token black guy.

NightCrawler · May 21, 2011

ZOMG it's Tom Hardy as Bane.

Walter · May 21, 2011

Looks like James Gandolfini.

Movies to look forward to

Administrator

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

Administrator

Video Game Time Traveler

Cats are great

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

"Bring the light of day"

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

Administrator

Administrator

Video Game Time Traveler

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

Video Game Time Traveler

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

Xem

Guest

Video Game Time Traveler

ALL MYSTERIES MUST BE SOLVED

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

Administrator