Rob Zombie's Halloween Trailer
It's on the trailer reels for Grindhouse, and it's now posted online for all to view here.
Like I said before, I hate horror remakes, but so far I'm not really seeing or hearing anything I don't like. That's saying a lot considering the magnitude of the influence and the importance of the original Halloween to the horror genre.
My opinion won't sway at all until I see the finished product, which will be released August 31st. So far here's a few things I've noticed:
-The emphasis on Michael Myers' childhood, which is awesome because we got little of that in the original
-The lighting in the neighborhood shots when Michael is stalking the babysitters is AWESOME
-The new mask is as creepy as the original, but hard to say whether or not it's better
-Malcom McDowell looks like he'll be a great Dr. Loomis (you may know him as Terrance, Ari's old boss, on Entourage)
As a whole it looks like Zombie is going to be focusing more on the Myers character and not the babysitters. The studios that produced the original told John Carpenter there had to be babysitters in it (saw that on a documentary called "Going to Pieces") . I'm guessing Zombie has no such restrictions.
I'm also interested in seeing how he handles the invincibility of Myers. There's no question that Myers was invincible in the first one, even Carpenter admitted to that. Looking forward to how Zombie approaches that, which will in turn effect how he can end it.
Lastly, but most importantly, the death scenes. They look very promising in the trailer. Not unlike the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the original Halloween is talked about as being a very gruesome flick, however there's really no blood in it at all. Zombie's first 2 movies are notorious for violence, and that's cool, I just hope its as cool in his 3rd.
So one last time, here's the link to the trailer for the Halloween remake.
Let me know what you think...
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Grindhouse review
There's few times when going to a movie is an outright experience, but that's the easiest way I can sum up Grindhouse. It wasn't a movie, it was an experience.
Tarantino and Rodriguez really hold nothing back for the 3 and a half hours you spend with them. Right after the trailers end you are experiencing Grindhouse: fake movie trailers, fake commercials for fake businesses, hell they even have their own custom MPAA ratings graphics before each movie. Even the opening credits have this surreal "I can't believe I'm really watching this" feel. That alone is worth the admission.
Where Grindhouse is the experience, each respective movie truly stands out unlike anything else you've ever seen in a theatre in the last 15 to 20 years. The film quality is purposefully crappy, the lighting seems to change almost unprofessionally, parts of both movies are inexplicably missing, and the editing is campy as hell. And it all works. Even if you don't enjoy the narrative, you'll still enjoy what you're witnessing.
Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror is better then Quentin's Death Proof, but both are stylistically far apart. I shouldn't even say Planet Terror is a better film, it's just more enjoyable.
Planet Terror is pure decadence, I'm talking real horror gluttony. Sin City's violence pales in comparison. It's about a military experiment gone awry resulting in a chemical being spread through Texas that turns people into zombies.
You get that in about the first 30 seconds, and the next hour and a half is funner than any theme park you've ever been to. Not only is it bloody as hell, it's fucking hilarious. Not like chuckle funny, but like roll around on the floor funny. There's absolutely nothing serious about it, yet everything is so official to the genre. Not to mention the acting is just spot on: Rose McGowan kills it, and Marley Shelton, as Dr. Dakota Block, steals every scene she's in. If she looks familiar it's because she was Wendy the lifeguard in The Sandlot.
After Planet Terror is intermission. It's the only intermission I've seen since Kubrick's 2001. Do not leave during intermission. Repeat, DO NOT LEAVE during intermission. You have to see the fake trailers by Eli Roth, Rob Zombie and the Shaun of the Dead guys. I won't give anything away, but they are absolutely priceless.
Where Rodriguez's stamp is clearly on Planet Terror, his actual technique is unique to this one. Not a whole lot you can really pick out that you've seen him do before, as far as the actual directing is concerned. Not the case for Quentin with Death Proof.
If you're a Tarantino fan you will undoubtedly recognize some Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction in the shot selections. The dialogue really drives the film, not unlike other Tarantino gems, and Death Proof is the only other linear film he's done besides Jackie Brown.
It definitely feels longer then Planet Terror, and it's no where near as decadent, but in the end it feels exactly like a Tarantino horror flick. 70's style jive dialogue with throw back underground musical classics, retro sets, retro cars, and gritty to the bone characters.
Death Proof is about Stuntman Mike (how awesome is that name), he likes to kill people with his car. Since he's a stuntman his car is built to sustain heavy collisions. In turn, that makes it death proof. Get it. It's sort of camp slasher stalker flick meets the high octane gear head type. As much focus on car chases as on the murders. And with the car chases it's kind of like another 2 for 1 deal: not only do you get a Tarantino horror, you get a Tarantino car chase, neither of which he's ever done before.
I'll admit, I wasn't too hot on it right when it ended. Not like I was after seeing Kill Bill 1 and 2. But after thinking about it for a while I understand it. After the final shot in Death Proof ask yourself if you've ever really seen anything like it? You'll know what I mean.
All in all, Grindhouse was everything I expected and everything I didn't expect. There's nothing like it you've ever seen in a theatre, and it's something that really can't be ripped off. I can pretty much guarantee you will have fun, and unfortunately just having fun at a movie is becoming as rare as originality so do yourself a favor and take advantage of it while it lasts.
There's few times when going to a movie is an outright experience, but that's the easiest way I can sum up Grindhouse. It wasn't a movie, it was an experience.
Tarantino and Rodriguez really hold nothing back for the 3 and a half hours you spend with them. Right after the trailers end you are experiencing Grindhouse: fake movie trailers, fake commercials for fake businesses, hell they even have their own custom MPAA ratings graphics before each movie. Even the opening credits have this surreal "I can't believe I'm really watching this" feel. That alone is worth the admission.
Where Grindhouse is the experience, each respective movie truly stands out unlike anything else you've ever seen in a theatre in the last 15 to 20 years. The film quality is purposefully crappy, the lighting seems to change almost unprofessionally, parts of both movies are inexplicably missing, and the editing is campy as hell. And it all works. Even if you don't enjoy the narrative, you'll still enjoy what you're witnessing.
Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror is better then Quentin's Death Proof, but both are stylistically far apart. I shouldn't even say Planet Terror is a better film, it's just more enjoyable.
Planet Terror is pure decadence, I'm talking real horror gluttony. Sin City's violence pales in comparison. It's about a military experiment gone awry resulting in a chemical being spread through Texas that turns people into zombies.
You get that in about the first 30 seconds, and the next hour and a half is funner than any theme park you've ever been to. Not only is it bloody as hell, it's fucking hilarious. Not like chuckle funny, but like roll around on the floor funny. There's absolutely nothing serious about it, yet everything is so official to the genre. Not to mention the acting is just spot on: Rose McGowan kills it, and Marley Shelton, as Dr. Dakota Block, steals every scene she's in. If she looks familiar it's because she was Wendy the lifeguard in The Sandlot.
After Planet Terror is intermission. It's the only intermission I've seen since Kubrick's 2001. Do not leave during intermission. Repeat, DO NOT LEAVE during intermission. You have to see the fake trailers by Eli Roth, Rob Zombie and the Shaun of the Dead guys. I won't give anything away, but they are absolutely priceless.
Where Rodriguez's stamp is clearly on Planet Terror, his actual technique is unique to this one. Not a whole lot you can really pick out that you've seen him do before, as far as the actual directing is concerned. Not the case for Quentin with Death Proof.
If you're a Tarantino fan you will undoubtedly recognize some Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction in the shot selections. The dialogue really drives the film, not unlike other Tarantino gems, and Death Proof is the only other linear film he's done besides Jackie Brown.
It definitely feels longer then Planet Terror, and it's no where near as decadent, but in the end it feels exactly like a Tarantino horror flick. 70's style jive dialogue with throw back underground musical classics, retro sets, retro cars, and gritty to the bone characters.
Death Proof is about Stuntman Mike (how awesome is that name), he likes to kill people with his car. Since he's a stuntman his car is built to sustain heavy collisions. In turn, that makes it death proof. Get it. It's sort of camp slasher stalker flick meets the high octane gear head type. As much focus on car chases as on the murders. And with the car chases it's kind of like another 2 for 1 deal: not only do you get a Tarantino horror, you get a Tarantino car chase, neither of which he's ever done before.
I'll admit, I wasn't too hot on it right when it ended. Not like I was after seeing Kill Bill 1 and 2. But after thinking about it for a while I understand it. After the final shot in Death Proof ask yourself if you've ever really seen anything like it? You'll know what I mean.
All in all, Grindhouse was everything I expected and everything I didn't expect. There's nothing like it you've ever seen in a theatre, and it's something that really can't be ripped off. I can pretty much guarantee you will have fun, and unfortunately just having fun at a movie is becoming as rare as originality so do yourself a favor and take advantage of it while it lasts.
Friday, April 06, 2007
Grindhouse reviews are in!
So far the tomatometer has it %85 from 68 reviews (58 good, 10 bad). Here are some of my favorites:
"it summons the most crackerjack pop charge of any movie with Tarantino's name on it since Pulp Fiction." Owen Gleiberman - Entertainment Weekly
"In paying homage to an obsolete form of movie culture, Grindhouse delivers a dropkick to ours." Nathan Lee - Village Voice
"...once you get past the absurdity of it all, what you get is a one-two punch of fun the likes of which rarely come out of Hollywood." Cole Haddon - Orlando Weekly
""Grindhouse" is insider fun when Rodriguez is in charge and regrettable trash when Tarantino takes over" Tom Long - Detroit News
"So over-the-top, it makes 300 look like a study in minimalism" Lisa Rose - Newark Star-Ledger
And here are some of the bad ones:
"Rodriguez goes for full-blooded faithfulness, Tarantino goes for genre analysis and reconfiguration, and the results are, ultimately, about as coherent and fulfilling as a typical grindhouse double-feature." Nick Schager - Cinematical
"Planet Terror is a great bad movie; Death Proof is just plain bad." Jurgen Fauth - About.com
"“Grindhouse” has plenty of fun moments, and with a running time of more than three hours you can’t complain that you didn’t get your money’s worth. But it only half works." Robert W. Butler - Kansas City Star
So word is Rodriguez's "Planet Terror" is better than Quentin's "Death Proof." I've actually been hearing that for a while. However, the good reviews from the good reviewers is overwhelming, and reading good reviews for b movie exploitations flicks from drama loving critics is a breath of fresh air. Based on that alone you have to thank the two directors for bringing the b movie to this level.
Stay tuned for my review tomorrow night. I can't fucking wait.
So far the tomatometer has it %85 from 68 reviews (58 good, 10 bad). Here are some of my favorites:
"it summons the most crackerjack pop charge of any movie with Tarantino's name on it since Pulp Fiction." Owen Gleiberman - Entertainment Weekly
"In paying homage to an obsolete form of movie culture, Grindhouse delivers a dropkick to ours." Nathan Lee - Village Voice
"...once you get past the absurdity of it all, what you get is a one-two punch of fun the likes of which rarely come out of Hollywood." Cole Haddon - Orlando Weekly
""Grindhouse" is insider fun when Rodriguez is in charge and regrettable trash when Tarantino takes over" Tom Long - Detroit News
"So over-the-top, it makes 300 look like a study in minimalism" Lisa Rose - Newark Star-Ledger
And here are some of the bad ones:
"Rodriguez goes for full-blooded faithfulness, Tarantino goes for genre analysis and reconfiguration, and the results are, ultimately, about as coherent and fulfilling as a typical grindhouse double-feature." Nick Schager - Cinematical
"Planet Terror is a great bad movie; Death Proof is just plain bad." Jurgen Fauth - About.com
"“Grindhouse” has plenty of fun moments, and with a running time of more than three hours you can’t complain that you didn’t get your money’s worth. But it only half works." Robert W. Butler - Kansas City Star
So word is Rodriguez's "Planet Terror" is better than Quentin's "Death Proof." I've actually been hearing that for a while. However, the good reviews from the good reviewers is overwhelming, and reading good reviews for b movie exploitations flicks from drama loving critics is a breath of fresh air. Based on that alone you have to thank the two directors for bringing the b movie to this level.
Stay tuned for my review tomorrow night. I can't fucking wait.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Grindhouse countdown...
Take 2 of the most entertaining directors ever, let them each shoot a b style, 70's exploitation horror flick, put an intermission between them with fake movie trailers shot by Rob Zombie, Eli Roth and the guys from Shaun of the Dead, and only charge the price of 1 movie for admission.
God damn.
Grindhouse. It opens Friday and I already bought my ticket...on Monday. Running time is 3 and a half hours and most theatres are only running it 3 showings a day because of the length.
This is the next most highly anticipated film of the year since 300 came out, and the last most anticipated movie until Spider Man 3. As for myself, I'm anticipating Grindhouse the most, of all 2007 films. It's freaking horror movies by Tarantino and Rodriguez at the same time, I mean come on.
Unlike 300, however, the hype hasn't been nearly as intense, and I don't expect the box office to be either. Grindhouse is going to draw the "hardcores" and the "hardcores" that bring their friends to see it. It's not for everyone, and I love that.
The hype Grindhouse has been getting is the basic stuff, interviews and magazine spreads of the like. I saw Tarantino and Rodriguez on a late night ABC news show a few nights back. Watching a tight wad, scantily clad middle aged white dude sweat uncomfortable while Tarantino explained why his movies are so violent was interesting to say the least.
Here's a couple tidbits I've come across in the recent press storm:
-Both films were edited heavily from their original cut for 2 reasons: To make an R rating and to make the running time reasonable
-Both films will be released in their original entirity on DVD
-Planet Terror is shown first, intermission, then Death Proof
-Eli Roth's trailer, "Thanksgiving," had to be trimmed down to avoid an NC-17 rating
-Rob Zombie's trailer "Werewolf Women of the SS" was greenlit just off of him telling Rodriguez the title
-The order of the films was determined after they were shot, the directors agreed it worked best that way
-Rose McGowan is the only actor to appear in both films as a different character
-Some characters will appear in both films as the same person
-Every other country is showing both films seperate, under their own titles, and charging for each. We're the only country where it's titled Grindhouse, and get to see both films for the price of 1
The good people over at rottentomatoes.com have posted an A-Z guide to Grindhouse if you're interested. It's pretty much a list of what inspired the two maniacs to make this, but very cool nontheless.
Check back to see how the reviews are coming and of course my review will be posted late Friday evening as soon as I get back.
I'm typing a lot faster since I started working out.
Take 2 of the most entertaining directors ever, let them each shoot a b style, 70's exploitation horror flick, put an intermission between them with fake movie trailers shot by Rob Zombie, Eli Roth and the guys from Shaun of the Dead, and only charge the price of 1 movie for admission.
God damn.
Grindhouse. It opens Friday and I already bought my ticket...on Monday. Running time is 3 and a half hours and most theatres are only running it 3 showings a day because of the length.
This is the next most highly anticipated film of the year since 300 came out, and the last most anticipated movie until Spider Man 3. As for myself, I'm anticipating Grindhouse the most, of all 2007 films. It's freaking horror movies by Tarantino and Rodriguez at the same time, I mean come on.
Unlike 300, however, the hype hasn't been nearly as intense, and I don't expect the box office to be either. Grindhouse is going to draw the "hardcores" and the "hardcores" that bring their friends to see it. It's not for everyone, and I love that.
The hype Grindhouse has been getting is the basic stuff, interviews and magazine spreads of the like. I saw Tarantino and Rodriguez on a late night ABC news show a few nights back. Watching a tight wad, scantily clad middle aged white dude sweat uncomfortable while Tarantino explained why his movies are so violent was interesting to say the least.
Here's a couple tidbits I've come across in the recent press storm:
-Both films were edited heavily from their original cut for 2 reasons: To make an R rating and to make the running time reasonable
-Both films will be released in their original entirity on DVD
-Planet Terror is shown first, intermission, then Death Proof
-Eli Roth's trailer, "Thanksgiving," had to be trimmed down to avoid an NC-17 rating
-Rob Zombie's trailer "Werewolf Women of the SS" was greenlit just off of him telling Rodriguez the title
-The order of the films was determined after they were shot, the directors agreed it worked best that way
-Rose McGowan is the only actor to appear in both films as a different character
-Some characters will appear in both films as the same person
-Every other country is showing both films seperate, under their own titles, and charging for each. We're the only country where it's titled Grindhouse, and get to see both films for the price of 1
The good people over at rottentomatoes.com have posted an A-Z guide to Grindhouse if you're interested. It's pretty much a list of what inspired the two maniacs to make this, but very cool nontheless.
Check back to see how the reviews are coming and of course my review will be posted late Friday evening as soon as I get back.
I'm typing a lot faster since I started working out.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Rob Zombie's Halloween, Return to Sleepaway Camp update, and the Gears of War Movie
As this blog continues to grow so will my intense hatred for horror movie remakes. I mean, what the fuck, really? Was it really necessary to remake Texas Chainsaw Massacre or the Hills Have Eyes? Short of the Dawn of the Dead remake, it's all shit. And because of horror remakes being so damn saturated these days, movies like Saw and Hostel are becoming box office standouts by default because they're the only original ideas being bought up by major studios. Believe me, I'm marking this rant to be continued...
However, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little excited when I heard Rob Zombie got John Carpenter's approval to remake Halloween. Why? Because of Zombie's first two flicks I know he is one of us. If there's ANYONE I'm OK with remaking a classic, it's Zombie. Well, for now at least, until I see it.
Apparently an early draft of Zombie's script has hit the web. By all standards almost anything Hollywood has been hiding in it's chiuahua sized bladder leaks to the web, and thankfully our friends over at retroslashers.net scooped a copy for urinalysis.
The review was basically a B, but it was the kind of B that you would give a hot girl that really deserved a C, but because she's hot she gets the benefit of the doubt (Amber Tamblyn, anyone?)
Word is Zombie intends to focus a lot more on Michael's childhood, which pretty much went completely fucking unexplained in the original aside from Michael killing his family. We also get a look at Michael's relationship with Dr. Loomis as he grew older. My favorite part, by far, is we're supposed to see that young Mr. Myers actually fashioned multiple masks which he wore to reflect his mood. Nice touch Dragula.
Cons include the lack of the daytime stalking we got in the original, but some other Pros are bloodier deaths and answers to questions such as where Michael got his jumpsuit, where Laurie's parents are, and how Michael got to Judith's headstone. Plus we get to see hot girls dress up like they're living in the 70's, which I find oddly hot, that is unless they go into full on character and heat up the retro bush.
And oh, Zombie recently said the first trailer will be tacked onto Grindhouse, as if Grindhouse could really get any better. Another to be continued conversation...
Some new RTSC news
Our friends over at sleepawaycampmovies.com have completey redone the site, and added some juicy Return to Sleepaway Camp updates.
So far we got a FAQ on the most ambiguous sequel ever, including answers to why the hell it still isn't out.
Even better, there's 6 interviews with cast members. Five of them are with new commers, and one's with Jonathan Tierston who played Ricky (Angela's cousin) in the original. Unfortunately half of his interview is about his band, but we do get to see even more clips of the film, as well as some history behind it.
Best thing is, the interviews are even further evidence that the movie was actually made. Thank God.
They also posted a reunion page for the SC reunion of the cast and crew back in '01. Very cool stuff.
Check it all out at sleepawaycampmovies.com
And Finally, the Gears of War movies
Gears of War was picked up by New Line Cinema. If the movie can be anywhere near as good as the game then I'm all for it. And, I'm getting increasingly excited with this new flood of videogames turned to movies. Why? Because finally studios are picking the right fucking games.
Gears of War the game was like playing a movie, and in 2009 I'll be able to relieve it and be a lot more lazy in the process.
Time to get a bit whiney though. I've been getting this itch to adapt a good game into a screenplay. Mostly for personal reasons, but if I can get a bite well hey I'm all for it. Now, first idea was to do a Castlevania adaptation. Well, it's already been done by the dude that did Alien vs Predator.
Next idea was Gears of War, which just got optioned. Now I'm starting to think I'm on the right track. A little less procrastination, a little more screenplay, uh, -nation. (?) Anyway, Metal Gear Solid has already been optioned also, so I need some suggestions. Devil May Cry anyone?
Still to come...Why exactly does Hollywood Remake Horror Fims more then any other genre? Why does Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon matter so much? Just really how amazing can Grindhouse be? Stay tuned
As this blog continues to grow so will my intense hatred for horror movie remakes. I mean, what the fuck, really? Was it really necessary to remake Texas Chainsaw Massacre or the Hills Have Eyes? Short of the Dawn of the Dead remake, it's all shit. And because of horror remakes being so damn saturated these days, movies like Saw and Hostel are becoming box office standouts by default because they're the only original ideas being bought up by major studios. Believe me, I'm marking this rant to be continued...
However, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a little excited when I heard Rob Zombie got John Carpenter's approval to remake Halloween. Why? Because of Zombie's first two flicks I know he is one of us. If there's ANYONE I'm OK with remaking a classic, it's Zombie. Well, for now at least, until I see it.
Apparently an early draft of Zombie's script has hit the web. By all standards almost anything Hollywood has been hiding in it's chiuahua sized bladder leaks to the web, and thankfully our friends over at retroslashers.net scooped a copy for urinalysis.
The review was basically a B, but it was the kind of B that you would give a hot girl that really deserved a C, but because she's hot she gets the benefit of the doubt (Amber Tamblyn, anyone?)
Word is Zombie intends to focus a lot more on Michael's childhood, which pretty much went completely fucking unexplained in the original aside from Michael killing his family. We also get a look at Michael's relationship with Dr. Loomis as he grew older. My favorite part, by far, is we're supposed to see that young Mr. Myers actually fashioned multiple masks which he wore to reflect his mood. Nice touch Dragula.
Cons include the lack of the daytime stalking we got in the original, but some other Pros are bloodier deaths and answers to questions such as where Michael got his jumpsuit, where Laurie's parents are, and how Michael got to Judith's headstone. Plus we get to see hot girls dress up like they're living in the 70's, which I find oddly hot, that is unless they go into full on character and heat up the retro bush.
And oh, Zombie recently said the first trailer will be tacked onto Grindhouse, as if Grindhouse could really get any better. Another to be continued conversation...
Some new RTSC news
Our friends over at sleepawaycampmovies.com have completey redone the site, and added some juicy Return to Sleepaway Camp updates.
So far we got a FAQ on the most ambiguous sequel ever, including answers to why the hell it still isn't out.
Even better, there's 6 interviews with cast members. Five of them are with new commers, and one's with Jonathan Tierston who played Ricky (Angela's cousin) in the original. Unfortunately half of his interview is about his band, but we do get to see even more clips of the film, as well as some history behind it.
Best thing is, the interviews are even further evidence that the movie was actually made. Thank God.
They also posted a reunion page for the SC reunion of the cast and crew back in '01. Very cool stuff.
Check it all out at sleepawaycampmovies.com
And Finally, the Gears of War movies
Gears of War was picked up by New Line Cinema. If the movie can be anywhere near as good as the game then I'm all for it. And, I'm getting increasingly excited with this new flood of videogames turned to movies. Why? Because finally studios are picking the right fucking games.
Gears of War the game was like playing a movie, and in 2009 I'll be able to relieve it and be a lot more lazy in the process.
Time to get a bit whiney though. I've been getting this itch to adapt a good game into a screenplay. Mostly for personal reasons, but if I can get a bite well hey I'm all for it. Now, first idea was to do a Castlevania adaptation. Well, it's already been done by the dude that did Alien vs Predator.
Next idea was Gears of War, which just got optioned. Now I'm starting to think I'm on the right track. A little less procrastination, a little more screenplay, uh, -nation. (?) Anyway, Metal Gear Solid has already been optioned also, so I need some suggestions. Devil May Cry anyone?
Still to come...Why exactly does Hollywood Remake Horror Fims more then any other genre? Why does Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon matter so much? Just really how amazing can Grindhouse be? Stay tuned
Friday, March 23, 2007
The final Spider Man 3 Trailer
It's 3 a.m. and I should be in bed but there's no way I couldn't write something about this.
The good folks over at comingsoon.net just posted links to the final Spider Man 3 trailer. Lets face it, what's really getting everyone so excited about this one...VENOM! And on yeah, Venom is in the final trailer.
Now there's about 10 different trailers and video blogs and featurettes on the web for Spider Man 3, but the only inkling we've seen of Venom is about a 1 frame shot of him jumping toward the screen. That clip didn't even come out til about 2 months ago, and since then everything surrounding this movie has been Venom-less.
Until now. And it's not as though the final trailer has a lot of Venom, but it definitely shows Venom's full figure, in motion, fighting Spidey and swinging on his oh so kick ass black web. It's only a few seconds, but if you're a true nerd/geek like myself, you can pause it and see him full bore, swinging around!!!!!
There's 2 trailers, one domestic and one international. I recommend the internation trailer; more Venom and a significantly larger video (by larger I mean screen size, the domestic one is the size of a figure skater).
Internation Trailer Domestic Trailer
Enjoy
It's 3 a.m. and I should be in bed but there's no way I couldn't write something about this.
The good folks over at comingsoon.net just posted links to the final Spider Man 3 trailer. Lets face it, what's really getting everyone so excited about this one...VENOM! And on yeah, Venom is in the final trailer.
Now there's about 10 different trailers and video blogs and featurettes on the web for Spider Man 3, but the only inkling we've seen of Venom is about a 1 frame shot of him jumping toward the screen. That clip didn't even come out til about 2 months ago, and since then everything surrounding this movie has been Venom-less.
Until now. And it's not as though the final trailer has a lot of Venom, but it definitely shows Venom's full figure, in motion, fighting Spidey and swinging on his oh so kick ass black web. It's only a few seconds, but if you're a true nerd/geek like myself, you can pause it and see him full bore, swinging around!!!!!
There's 2 trailers, one domestic and one international. I recommend the internation trailer; more Venom and a significantly larger video (by larger I mean screen size, the domestic one is the size of a figure skater).
Internation Trailer Domestic Trailer
Enjoy
Sunday, March 18, 2007
The Sequel to the best Slasher movie ever
Since the title of this post contains the phrase "best slasher movie ever," I'll go ahead and get that outta the way.
Sleepaway Camp is the best slasher movie ever. In my opinion, of course. Since this post isn't about the best slasher film ever, but instead the sequel, I won't go into detail why it is the best slasher ever. If you want to know, call me or email me (jud.scott@gmail.com) and we can discuss.
What this post is about is perhaps the most intriguing story ever surrounding a sequel to a movie.
Now, Sleepaway Camp was released in 1983 by writer/directer/film student Robert Hiltzik. Since then 2 sequels were released. Part 2 could be one of the 10 best slasher's of all time and part 3 in of itself is a hilarious satirical take on the slasher genre. They both hold their own in the slasher flick canon.
However, Hiltzik had nothing to do with the sequels (they were made by one Michael Simpson) and before they were even released he wrote his own sequel in 1985. No studio optioned it, instead they went for Simpson's for reasons I do not know.
In the early 1992 a 4th Sleepaway Camp went into production. "Sleepaway Camp 4: The Survivor" was never finished, either due to production costs, or because it was complete shit. Because of a huge fanbase, the original Sleepaway Camp Survival Guide boxset contained a DVD with the 34 minutes of footage from part 4. It was never completed.
In 2000 Robert Hiltzik rewrote his sequel to Sleepaway Camp and finally got some financing. "Return to Sleepaway Camp" was put into production a few years after, and since then it has become not only an internet sensation, but a complete and utter mystery.
Sleepaway Camp fans have been harping over Hiltzik's sequel since word came out, yet no one really knows of a release date, or even if it will ever be released. Hell, there are rumors floating that the sequel itself is a rumor and was never even made. Word is the film was wrapped in '04 or '05, but Fangoria magazine, a reputable resource, printed an article saying reshoots took place to make some of the death scenes even gorier. Fucking awesome right?
But here's the best part. Just recently someone actually found raw footage of what's rumored to be the actual ending of "Return to Sleepaway Camp." I found out about this in January, and since then I've tomb raider'd the web to try and find it.
Well I found it, and it is fucking incredible. The raw footage has no sound, and the time signatures stamped on it denote that it is in fact raw footage and not technically part of the final cut. Those who posted it had to deal with legal relegations to take it down before a lawsuit went into action. Thankfully our friends over at YouTube.com still have it up. I won't post the link, but just search the movie title and you will find it.
The interesting part about the supposed ending being leaked is that it validates that "Return to Sleepaway Camp" was at least somewhat shot, and, for myself and campers everywhere, it gives hope that the final product will at some point see light of day.
The people over at retroslashers.net (an outstanding horror resource) have produced their own Sleepaway Camp fan site titled, aptly enough, the Sleepaway Camp Official Site. There you can read about various rumors surrounding the sequel's release, as well as an entire page dealing with the original main character, Angela, and her role in the sequel (if you're a Sleepaway Camp fan that page will make you wet).
I've dug into the IMDB message boards , fan sites across the web, and even wikipedia to try and come to some conclusion about the progress of the film. The release date is perhaps the most anticipated piece of information that no one can even make a guess on. There aren't even any rumors about a release date, which is just as shocking as the quote on quote "leaked ending."
So far, no release date is confirmed. No studio has said to have picked up distribution rights, and no studio has said to be releasing it straight to DVD. Robert Hiltzik, the writer and director, has yet to come out to speak on any aspect of the film, and no one from the crew or talent have slipped up or said anything about where the movie stands. Vincent Pastore, of "Sopranos" fame, is in the film and even in his interviews about the "Sopranos" he's asked about "Return to Sleepaway Camp." He hasn't shed any light about a release either.
In all my years I've never seen more of a mystery surrounding the release of a single film. I'd give anything to find out if it's coming out or not. For the most part when rumors surround a movie it either goes public about going into production, or goes public about being scrapped altogether. "Return to Sleepaway Camp" has somehow remained in between for almost 4 years.
The official site has posted a bootleg trailer of the film shown at a horror convention a few years back (the trailer features Isaac Hayes as the chef, get it!!!!!) and even a behind the scenes featurette with one of the main characters of the first movie who has returned, yes, after 14 years, to star in the sequel.
What it comes down to is the old cliche: only time will tell. And I really hate cliches. I mean, really hate them. And the fact I have to use one to close this post is really disconcerning. Kind of like Han Solo getting mad at Leia because he thinks she likes Luke.
But like what Lando expects of Han in Jedi, deep down in my heart, I just know those shields will come down and the mystery of "Return to Sleepaway Camp" will finally be revealed.
Since the title of this post contains the phrase "best slasher movie ever," I'll go ahead and get that outta the way.
Sleepaway Camp is the best slasher movie ever. In my opinion, of course. Since this post isn't about the best slasher film ever, but instead the sequel, I won't go into detail why it is the best slasher ever. If you want to know, call me or email me (jud.scott@gmail.com) and we can discuss.
What this post is about is perhaps the most intriguing story ever surrounding a sequel to a movie.
Now, Sleepaway Camp was released in 1983 by writer/directer/film student Robert Hiltzik. Since then 2 sequels were released. Part 2 could be one of the 10 best slasher's of all time and part 3 in of itself is a hilarious satirical take on the slasher genre. They both hold their own in the slasher flick canon.
However, Hiltzik had nothing to do with the sequels (they were made by one Michael Simpson) and before they were even released he wrote his own sequel in 1985. No studio optioned it, instead they went for Simpson's for reasons I do not know.
In the early 1992 a 4th Sleepaway Camp went into production. "Sleepaway Camp 4: The Survivor" was never finished, either due to production costs, or because it was complete shit. Because of a huge fanbase, the original Sleepaway Camp Survival Guide boxset contained a DVD with the 34 minutes of footage from part 4. It was never completed.
In 2000 Robert Hiltzik rewrote his sequel to Sleepaway Camp and finally got some financing. "Return to Sleepaway Camp" was put into production a few years after, and since then it has become not only an internet sensation, but a complete and utter mystery.
Sleepaway Camp fans have been harping over Hiltzik's sequel since word came out, yet no one really knows of a release date, or even if it will ever be released. Hell, there are rumors floating that the sequel itself is a rumor and was never even made. Word is the film was wrapped in '04 or '05, but Fangoria magazine, a reputable resource, printed an article saying reshoots took place to make some of the death scenes even gorier. Fucking awesome right?
But here's the best part. Just recently someone actually found raw footage of what's rumored to be the actual ending of "Return to Sleepaway Camp." I found out about this in January, and since then I've tomb raider'd the web to try and find it.
Well I found it, and it is fucking incredible. The raw footage has no sound, and the time signatures stamped on it denote that it is in fact raw footage and not technically part of the final cut. Those who posted it had to deal with legal relegations to take it down before a lawsuit went into action. Thankfully our friends over at YouTube.com still have it up. I won't post the link, but just search the movie title and you will find it.
The interesting part about the supposed ending being leaked is that it validates that "Return to Sleepaway Camp" was at least somewhat shot, and, for myself and campers everywhere, it gives hope that the final product will at some point see light of day.
The people over at retroslashers.net (an outstanding horror resource) have produced their own Sleepaway Camp fan site titled, aptly enough, the Sleepaway Camp Official Site. There you can read about various rumors surrounding the sequel's release, as well as an entire page dealing with the original main character, Angela, and her role in the sequel (if you're a Sleepaway Camp fan that page will make you wet).
I've dug into the IMDB message boards , fan sites across the web, and even wikipedia to try and come to some conclusion about the progress of the film. The release date is perhaps the most anticipated piece of information that no one can even make a guess on. There aren't even any rumors about a release date, which is just as shocking as the quote on quote "leaked ending."
So far, no release date is confirmed. No studio has said to have picked up distribution rights, and no studio has said to be releasing it straight to DVD. Robert Hiltzik, the writer and director, has yet to come out to speak on any aspect of the film, and no one from the crew or talent have slipped up or said anything about where the movie stands. Vincent Pastore, of "Sopranos" fame, is in the film and even in his interviews about the "Sopranos" he's asked about "Return to Sleepaway Camp." He hasn't shed any light about a release either.
In all my years I've never seen more of a mystery surrounding the release of a single film. I'd give anything to find out if it's coming out or not. For the most part when rumors surround a movie it either goes public about going into production, or goes public about being scrapped altogether. "Return to Sleepaway Camp" has somehow remained in between for almost 4 years.
The official site has posted a bootleg trailer of the film shown at a horror convention a few years back (the trailer features Isaac Hayes as the chef, get it!!!!!) and even a behind the scenes featurette with one of the main characters of the first movie who has returned, yes, after 14 years, to star in the sequel.
What it comes down to is the old cliche: only time will tell. And I really hate cliches. I mean, really hate them. And the fact I have to use one to close this post is really disconcerning. Kind of like Han Solo getting mad at Leia because he thinks she likes Luke.
But like what Lando expects of Han in Jedi, deep down in my heart, I just know those shields will come down and the mystery of "Return to Sleepaway Camp" will finally be revealed.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
A Quick Update to the Let Down I'll Have to Get Used To
That I never updated my first post from last fall came to my attention by way of my good friend and co-worker Nasty Nick Longo.
After I found out through IMDB that "Meg" was already in production to be filmed and that there was in fact a finished script already purchased was confirmed after the author of the book, Steve Alten, promptly returned an email I sent inquiring:
Judson
MEG was optioned to New Line Cinema a few years ago, they hired Shane Salerno to do the script. he is working on a 4th draft as we speak.
As such, the door is closed on MEG. Sorry.
Best of luck with the writing! Stay with it.
--Steve Alten
So I was only a few years late. Interestingly enough, Shane Salerno, the guy who will be credited with the final script, also wrote Shaft and Alien vs. Predator 2, and helped write Armageddon. I can't help but laugh thinking that Steve Alten is breaking the news to a portfolio-less and universally unknown screenwriter that his prized smash hit novel Meg is no longer available for adaptation because the dude that wrote Armageddon already did it.
Here's the IMDB site for the flick. Fucking Jan de Bont is attached to direct. I'm already unexcited.
That I never updated my first post from last fall came to my attention by way of my good friend and co-worker Nasty Nick Longo.
After I found out through IMDB that "Meg" was already in production to be filmed and that there was in fact a finished script already purchased was confirmed after the author of the book, Steve Alten, promptly returned an email I sent inquiring:
Judson
MEG was optioned to New Line Cinema a few years ago, they hired Shane Salerno to do the script. he is working on a 4th draft as we speak.
As such, the door is closed on MEG. Sorry.
Best of luck with the writing! Stay with it.
--Steve Alten
So I was only a few years late. Interestingly enough, Shane Salerno, the guy who will be credited with the final script, also wrote Shaft and Alien vs. Predator 2, and helped write Armageddon. I can't help but laugh thinking that Steve Alten is breaking the news to a portfolio-less and universally unknown screenwriter that his prized smash hit novel Meg is no longer available for adaptation because the dude that wrote Armageddon already did it.
Here's the IMDB site for the flick. Fucking Jan de Bont is attached to direct. I'm already unexcited.
Friday, March 09, 2007
"300" review
A solemn victory of transpose with notorious visuals and dramatic inceptions of valor. And lots of slow motion.
Translation
I liked it. Will I be talking about it in 3 days? Yes. Will I be thinking about it in 3 days? Probably not.
300 is unquestionably a beautiful film to watch, start to finish, there's nothing on screen that you won't enjoy seeing. The second near perfect transition of a Frank Miller novel on the screen, there's nothing that doesn't drip his influence. That I joyfully applaud.
The directing was also spot on. I can't say it was brilliant, because the film wasn't brilliant, but it was exactly necessary to the product. Nearly every scene is grand in its own right, not unlike a single page in Miller's novels. As grandios as we all anticipated after the first trailer came out last year.
What keeps me from praising this film outright though is what I was just talking about. Confusing? Let me explain.
I knew this movie would quench the proverbial visual thirst. You knew this movie would look amazing. The fact that how the movie looked was the best part of the movie is what led me to walk away asking myself, "thats it?" Now, how a movie looks does not mean how it was directed. Don't kid yourself. I already said it was directed very well. However, I wanted to see what the next scene looked like more then I cared about what was going to happen.
The first battle is, on its own stage, epic. And thankfully there's plenty of fighting, so don't worry about any lack there of. Although King Leonidas (Gerard Butler) pledging the bravery of the Spartans, and their insatiable passion for battling the Persians, does get a bit repetitive. Actually, it's pretty much the only thing talked about for the last hour and a half of the film. After the first battle he need not say another word about it, because we just saw it.
Subplot is frivilous at best, with a back-and-forth of the war and what's going on with the Queen in Sparta. Pretty much I could have done without it altogether. But with so much slow motion I guess it was necessary to keep the film length acceptable (approximately 2 hours).
What adds up from repetitive dialogue and a snoozing subplot equals I don't really care about what happens to the characters.
But going into 300 all I cared about was the visuals and the fight scenes. Not once did I watch the trailer and think "man I really can't wait to see what happens to King Leonidas." That said, both the visuals and the fight scenes more then lived up to my expectations. Exceeded them if you will. That was all I wanted, that was all I needed. 300 definitely delivers, and in a world of C students, that's all you can really ask for. Go see it.
A solemn victory of transpose with notorious visuals and dramatic inceptions of valor. And lots of slow motion.
Translation
I liked it. Will I be talking about it in 3 days? Yes. Will I be thinking about it in 3 days? Probably not.
300 is unquestionably a beautiful film to watch, start to finish, there's nothing on screen that you won't enjoy seeing. The second near perfect transition of a Frank Miller novel on the screen, there's nothing that doesn't drip his influence. That I joyfully applaud.
The directing was also spot on. I can't say it was brilliant, because the film wasn't brilliant, but it was exactly necessary to the product. Nearly every scene is grand in its own right, not unlike a single page in Miller's novels. As grandios as we all anticipated after the first trailer came out last year.
What keeps me from praising this film outright though is what I was just talking about. Confusing? Let me explain.
I knew this movie would quench the proverbial visual thirst. You knew this movie would look amazing. The fact that how the movie looked was the best part of the movie is what led me to walk away asking myself, "thats it?" Now, how a movie looks does not mean how it was directed. Don't kid yourself. I already said it was directed very well. However, I wanted to see what the next scene looked like more then I cared about what was going to happen.
The first battle is, on its own stage, epic. And thankfully there's plenty of fighting, so don't worry about any lack there of. Although King Leonidas (Gerard Butler) pledging the bravery of the Spartans, and their insatiable passion for battling the Persians, does get a bit repetitive. Actually, it's pretty much the only thing talked about for the last hour and a half of the film. After the first battle he need not say another word about it, because we just saw it.
Subplot is frivilous at best, with a back-and-forth of the war and what's going on with the Queen in Sparta. Pretty much I could have done without it altogether. But with so much slow motion I guess it was necessary to keep the film length acceptable (approximately 2 hours).
What adds up from repetitive dialogue and a snoozing subplot equals I don't really care about what happens to the characters.
But going into 300 all I cared about was the visuals and the fight scenes. Not once did I watch the trailer and think "man I really can't wait to see what happens to King Leonidas." That said, both the visuals and the fight scenes more then lived up to my expectations. Exceeded them if you will. That was all I wanted, that was all I needed. 300 definitely delivers, and in a world of C students, that's all you can really ask for. Go see it.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
300 reviews, so far
Since I'm going to see 300 tonight I checked out the reviews over at rottentomaotes.com to see what the critics word was. If you're not privy to rotten tomatoes is (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/) it's a site that assigns a percentage formula to the grades of every prominent film critic in the land (print and web based) and takes a total average to give you an idea of what critics as a whole think. Not only does it implement film critics, it adds reader reviews also. I was a bit shocked to see what the total score is so far:
60%. Of 81 reviews so far 49 were good, 32 were bad. Want to know the score earlier this week? 100%. Now that's the grand total. They also have a sidebar titled "cream of the crop" which is basically the percentage based off of the most respectable critics in the land. "Cream of the crop" total: 50%.
Here's a few interesting ones:
"At least in the short run, "300" is something to see, but unless you love violence as much as a Spartan, Quentin Tarantino or a video-game-playing teenage boy, you will not be endlessly fascinated." LA Times critic Ken Turan (im still mentally teen aged, and I love violence, fucking great!)
"300 is a movie blood-drunk on its own artful excess. Guys of all ages and sexes won't be able to resist it." Peter Travers Rolling Stone
“300” is about as violent as “Apocalypto” and twice as stupid." A.O. Scott New York Times (hmmmm, this worries me a bit)
"There is so much slow motion that if they had run the entire film at normal speed, it would have been half as long. " (now this I definitely saw coming) Eric Melin SceneStealers.com
"The battle sequences are filled with grotesque spectacle: They start off entertainingly ferocious, then grow numbing with stylized spraying blood and severed heads. " (spraying bloods and severed heads!) Claudia Puig USA Today
"It's like Fight Club without the tongue-in-cheek satire, a celebration of fascistic war and violence as noble and heroic that cribs, without a shameful bat of the eyelash, from Gladiator, Braveheart..." (hmmm this one worries me a lot) Nick Schager Slant Magazine
"300 is about as subtle as a spear through the head. But it's also shamelessly entertaining, and not a bad way to make time move a little faster." (now THAT's what I'm talking about) Chris Vognar Dallas Morning News
...And of course there are many, many more. What I've gathered from this: 300 isn't as much about themes as it is about ass kicking, and as long as I get enough ass kicking on screen I'm cool with that. Any less then 30-45 ass kicking minutes, and I'll be pretty upset.
Check back late for the review.
Since I'm going to see 300 tonight I checked out the reviews over at rottentomaotes.com to see what the critics word was. If you're not privy to rotten tomatoes is (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/) it's a site that assigns a percentage formula to the grades of every prominent film critic in the land (print and web based) and takes a total average to give you an idea of what critics as a whole think. Not only does it implement film critics, it adds reader reviews also. I was a bit shocked to see what the total score is so far:
60%. Of 81 reviews so far 49 were good, 32 were bad. Want to know the score earlier this week? 100%. Now that's the grand total. They also have a sidebar titled "cream of the crop" which is basically the percentage based off of the most respectable critics in the land. "Cream of the crop" total: 50%.
Here's a few interesting ones:
"At least in the short run, "300" is something to see, but unless you love violence as much as a Spartan, Quentin Tarantino or a video-game-playing teenage boy, you will not be endlessly fascinated." LA Times critic Ken Turan (im still mentally teen aged, and I love violence, fucking great!)
"300 is a movie blood-drunk on its own artful excess. Guys of all ages and sexes won't be able to resist it." Peter Travers Rolling Stone
“300” is about as violent as “Apocalypto” and twice as stupid." A.O. Scott New York Times (hmmmm, this worries me a bit)
"There is so much slow motion that if they had run the entire film at normal speed, it would have been half as long. " (now this I definitely saw coming) Eric Melin SceneStealers.com
"The battle sequences are filled with grotesque spectacle: They start off entertainingly ferocious, then grow numbing with stylized spraying blood and severed heads. " (spraying bloods and severed heads!) Claudia Puig USA Today
"It's like Fight Club without the tongue-in-cheek satire, a celebration of fascistic war and violence as noble and heroic that cribs, without a shameful bat of the eyelash, from Gladiator, Braveheart..." (hmmm this one worries me a lot) Nick Schager Slant Magazine
"300 is about as subtle as a spear through the head. But it's also shamelessly entertaining, and not a bad way to make time move a little faster." (now THAT's what I'm talking about) Chris Vognar Dallas Morning News
...And of course there are many, many more. What I've gathered from this: 300 isn't as much about themes as it is about ass kicking, and as long as I get enough ass kicking on screen I'm cool with that. Any less then 30-45 ass kicking minutes, and I'll be pretty upset.
Check back late for the review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
