Movies to look forward to
- Thread starter ranemaka13
- Start date
That full trailer looks so good, the teaser looked good enough but the music on this is cool.
I saw Godzilla last night and to be honest... it's got Godzilla sized holes in it's plot. It's internally inconsistent and the characters are paper thin (and annoying to boot). Whoever thought that Kickass could carry a whole movie must be smoking crack.
having said all that, the Godzilla fight scenes are more than worth the price of admission.
having said all that, the Godzilla fight scenes are more than worth the price of admission.
Walter said:
Yes, but they went and hired a rather phenomenal cast (with the exception of Kickass) and did nothing with them. Monster movie or not, I hate seeing a movie that just wastes talent.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
IncantatioN said:
It's Evey Reborn by Dario Marianelli from the V for Vendetta soundtrack (so it probably isn't in the movie). And yeah, it's so cool I worry that it's why the trailer is so effective. You could play that over a snail crawling and it would feel important and awe-inspiring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjgTFd6XAg8
NightCrawler
Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless
Griffith said:
Meh. Liked the first teaser better. The dialogue was atrocious: "we don't need more engineers", two scenes about murphy's law, really?
I was hoping for something a bit more cerebral, specially since it's Nolan, but it just looks like a mediocre Spielberg movie.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
NightCrawler said:
The teaser was definitely more in line with what you say you want from this, but a bit abstract on its own. The engineers thing was certainly an interesting choice of words to me as well. Really, we're running out of food and engineers couldn't potentially help with that!? Isn't that actually what you're bringing him in for? It looks like you REALLY need engineers. The whole point is engineers are going to save the world! That being said, we don't know that guy's role or the context, for all we know those scenes actually have little to nothing to do with the interstellar mission. It was a cool way to introduce the problem in the trailer though so I don't mind, "...we ran out of food." *cue hauntingly beautiful and weighty music* You know, as opposed to running out of TVs; what engineers make. =)
I don't get your objection to the references to Murphy's Law though. It was more about his daughter and outlook. Also, as a firm believer in Murphy's Law, I'm thrilled to see it be a plot point in a major film, even if they're trying to turn it into a neutral or even potentially nice thing (sweet blasphemy, though expanding Murphy's Law to cover EVERYTHING that happens is cool). Anyway, if we're going to criticize those minor trespasses, we have to give it up for Michael Caine and his dialogue/delivery. They should just have him read the script over the movie so everything sounds brilliant.
NightCrawler said:
Do you say that because it was actually written to be a Spielberg movie or is this just an amazing coincidence/insight (he's not doing it, so maybe that's a good sign it wasn't mediocre enough =)? Anyway, this trailer doesn't preclude any of that being in the film, just gives us an idea that it's going to be grounded to things that could really make that heady subject matter relatable. Frankly, I don't think we have to worry about there not being enough cerebral dialogue about the meaning of it all and blah blah blah with Nolan (I mean, even if it ends up disappointing, I don't think it's going to be retarded like Transcendence or something). You just hope the logic is sound and there's enough purpose, emotional weight and melodiously vital sounding Michael Caine dialogue to make it all work. Really, I just can't stop watching it with the simultaneous crescendo of music and interstellar travel to save mankind/one man's family that will theoretically be dead even if he does come back (either that's creative editing of McConaughey's and Caine's dialogue for the arc of the trailer or the movie has the potential, as Nolan does, to get really weird). Fuckin A.
Griffith said:
Seems pretty simple to me: they want him to pilot the interstellar mission, and in trying to convince him (maybe it's just the trailer edit) tell him his engineering skill won't make a difference on Earth (likely in reference to his drone solar cells/farm powering earlier talk). Now of course the whole "we didn't run out of planes or television sets, we ran out of food" bit is missing on the fact there exists agricultural engineers, but I wouldn't put that past Hollywood, and again, it could just be the trailer edit that spliced different things together. For all we know in the actual movie they tell him his engineering skills are part of why they want him: he should pilot the mission, then do whatever he does once he arrives wherever he's going.
Griffith said:
Well there are some variations to that saying. It seems to be a reference to the earliest similar quote by Augustus de Morgan, which was more neutral. Honestly it feels like the chaos theory talk in Jurassic Park to me, it's just there to sound cool. Except chaos theory is an actual field of study and not a completely unscientific proverb. I don't get NightCrawler's surprise though: this kind of falsely deep stuff is right up Nolan's alley.
Griffith said:
Yeah the edit is quite effective; the swelling music does wonders. But I don't think there'll be any problems with him coming back once his daughter is an adult (as is alluded to near the end of the trailer I believe). What we see of the travel implies it's faster than the speed of light. My guess is that Mackenzie Foy plays the girl as a kid and Jessica Chastain plays her as an adult.
NightCrawler
Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless
Griffith said:
Both the engineers line (like you said, they will need engineers duh) and his explanation of Murphy's Law to his daughter didn't make sense to me. They appear in the trailer some sort of catch phrase, but it just sounds really corny in a bad blockbuster way (as with Caine's shtick for gravitas in all he says in Nolan's movies), it rubs me the wrong way, but i can see that it can be mostly a problem with the trailer. Nowadays it seems that Fincher is the only one who knows how to cut a trailer. Well, the first Godzilla one was surprisingly good as well.
Anyway, all of that lead me to think of mediocre Spielberg. I didn't know he was attached at some point, but now it makes sense. Hopefully Nolan fiddled with the script enough and this doesn't turn out to be Contact 2: Prometheus Boogaloo. We desperately need good sci-fi.
Also, i hope they don't spend most of the movie on Earth.
Aazealh said:I don't get NightCrawler's surprise though: this kind of falsely deep stuff is right up Nolan's alley.
Indeed. But i always thought that Nolan could break away from that mold, he definitely has the chops to pull something more brainy and ballsy, and what i read about this movie was pointing in that direction. Both The Prestige and Inception were half good movies and half blockbuster-playing-safe. Here's hoping Interstellar doesn't end like those two.
Nolan also gets accused of being too clinical, and lacking a human element. I partly disagree, and actually believe that him constantly trying to shoehorn sappy stuff into his movies to charm the audience is one of the reasons they don't fully work in the end.
Walter said:
Haven't watched X-Men, so My vote goes to Godzilla.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
I've only seen X-men, and while it might be the best X movie, it also might be burdoned with more expectations/baggage for you. I mean, you don't really like any of these movies, right? =)
On the other hand, if you go the aggregater route, X-Men has 91% from critics and 95% from moviegoers on RT, Godzilla has a 73% and 74% respectively. Having only seen X-Men, I think it says a lot more about Godzilla that it doesn't rate higher. If nothing else Godzilla is a safe bet in that it should at least satisfy the urge to see Godzilla smash stuff.
Fuck it, just go to whichever one you want to see more. =)
On the other hand, if you go the aggregater route, X-Men has 91% from critics and 95% from moviegoers on RT, Godzilla has a 73% and 74% respectively. Having only seen X-Men, I think it says a lot more about Godzilla that it doesn't rate higher. If nothing else Godzilla is a safe bet in that it should at least satisfy the urge to see Godzilla smash stuff.
Fuck it, just go to whichever one you want to see more. =)
I can't wait to see the new Planet of the Apes movie coming out this summer. I love the originals from the 70's and enjoyed the new one. I know some people weren't too big on the CGI but I didn't really mind it, I thought it was well made and a little more realistic. The trailer for Dawn looks good from what I've seen; I hope they have the little easter eggs and tributes to the first series like they did with Rise.
Griffith said:
Saw x-men, since the giant monster genre has never done anything for me, and sitting through Pacific Rim was one of the most painful things I've ever volunteered for.
X-Men... Was fine. Worth the price of admission for me just to have a few more scenes of solo Fassbender/Magneto espionage action, which really made First Class for me. Loved the Sentinel design. Quite imposing and creepy. Reminded me of a Dark Souls enemy (black knights).
I'll have more to say once I collect my thoughts. But like Griff said, it's a perfect 7.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Walter said:
Yeah, I didn't mention it because I didn't want to unfairly bias you against Godzilla, but Pacific Rim's RT ratings... 72% and 78%, on par with 'Zilla and making me wonder if it's really much better or just features an A-list Kaiju and a more serious coat of paint (as opposed to looking like a live action anime story). I have to believe it's quite watchable though because it has Bryan Cranston yelling about Godzilla. =)
Walter said:
Looking forward to that, and I'm glad it was worth it to you. And yeah, Singer's methodical approach always makes for a solid foundation, but it's like he doesn't risk building anything too spectacular on it for fear that it will all collapse. To his credit, it doesn't, but I'm always left wondering what more could have been done, perhaps unfairly.
Griffith said:
It's pretty good for what it is - a stand alone kaiju movie that doesn't only involve kaiju's fighting each other, it adds the human element to it with obvious (and unfortunate) cheesy moments here n there. Some of the science makes sense while some doesn't but that's the way the franchise has been all along. A lot of people were disappointed with it because they expected
more kaiju fighting or action with the kaiju (which's where comparisons with Pacific Rim come in to play) but Gareth's film feels like you're a video game character jumping levels and getting to the end with the kaiju's wrecking everything behind you in the background, giving both aspects importance/ tying them in.
