A promo has been posted online for "John Rambo" aka Rambo 4. Yes, Rambo 4.
It's basically 2 minutes of Rambo's soft side, and 2 minutes of Rambo's fuck you up side.
This clip is so official you may not even believe it's real, and I'm not even being sarcastic. If you hate militant terrorists in Bangkok and love black mullets then this is for you so click the title of the post to link up, and enjoy.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Style vs. Narrative
I just got done watching the Russian action/sci fi/horror/thriller Nightwatch and I gotta admit, I wasn't as impressed with it like many others. The "Watch" trilogy uses the same basic formula as Lord of the Rings: a bunch of good characters that aren't human racing against a bunch of evil characters that aren't humans to find the one thing that will determine if good or evil prevails in the end. The idea of a R-rated version of LOTR seemed wonderful, and "Nightwatch" is even based off of a book so it's like a Spanish person taking Spanish in high school, it gets a B just for showing up.
Now, when I got done with it I found myself strangely unsatisfied. Actually more like an emptiness, and I struggled with this because throughout the whole movie I kept thinking to myself how amazing the film looked and how unconventionally it was directed. Then I came to this crazy (sarcastic) realization about how much I really didn't care about what happened in the movie (kind of like I felt after "300").
So after nearly 18 years of watching movies that I can remember I realized that, to me of course, narrative is far more important in determining whether or not I like a film then style is. That's sort of an obvious statement, I know this, but at the same time it led me down a path of reminiscing about movies I should have liked but didn't, and ones that absolutely blew me away.
Funny conclusion, most of the ones that blow me away treated style and narrative equally. Let's examine...
Take Spiderman 3 for instance. I was so confused after this one I couldn't even review it. The first person that asked me what I thought about it, I told them "that was a lot of movie to take in." I still think that, and now I know what I mean. Instead of focusing on the style of Spiderman I think Mr. Raimi and co were relying way too heavily on narrative. Raimi attempted to show us arcs and emotional instability in Spidey, Parker, Brock, Venom, MJ, Harry/Goblin, Sandman, and Gwen Stacy. How hard is it to tell us about how 9 people feel in the beginning, and why they feel different in the end?
Hard enough to get a lot of people hating your movie.
You look at the first 2, there's style, that Raimi style he built off the Evil Dead trilogy and Darkman, and it's combined simple paced, question raising narrative that we can balance with the visuals.
How about the first Matrix, a perfect balance of style and narrative. Probably the most obvious example I can come up with.
With the Matrix, we realize that when the bar is raised with style, the bar must similarly be raised with the narrative. The film opens when a girl with a Pat Riley haircut dressed in bondage leather kicks the shit out of a whole platoon of cops, and lets not forget the infamous spinning camera shot all in the first 5 minutes. With that dish served so fast anything less then you telling me the entire world is a fake computer program built so that humans will survive in a coma like state so machines can use us as a power source to generate their being is going to make me leave unsatisfied.
This is where I realize there comes a point in every film where the director, in some way, decides what's more important, style or narrative, and I think it's the lack of taking on the responsibility to focus on both that's leaving us walking out of the theatre saying "that was alright" time and time again.
Now, when I got done with it I found myself strangely unsatisfied. Actually more like an emptiness, and I struggled with this because throughout the whole movie I kept thinking to myself how amazing the film looked and how unconventionally it was directed. Then I came to this crazy (sarcastic) realization about how much I really didn't care about what happened in the movie (kind of like I felt after "300").
So after nearly 18 years of watching movies that I can remember I realized that, to me of course, narrative is far more important in determining whether or not I like a film then style is. That's sort of an obvious statement, I know this, but at the same time it led me down a path of reminiscing about movies I should have liked but didn't, and ones that absolutely blew me away.
Funny conclusion, most of the ones that blow me away treated style and narrative equally. Let's examine...
Take Spiderman 3 for instance. I was so confused after this one I couldn't even review it. The first person that asked me what I thought about it, I told them "that was a lot of movie to take in." I still think that, and now I know what I mean. Instead of focusing on the style of Spiderman I think Mr. Raimi and co were relying way too heavily on narrative. Raimi attempted to show us arcs and emotional instability in Spidey, Parker, Brock, Venom, MJ, Harry/Goblin, Sandman, and Gwen Stacy. How hard is it to tell us about how 9 people feel in the beginning, and why they feel different in the end?
Hard enough to get a lot of people hating your movie.
You look at the first 2, there's style, that Raimi style he built off the Evil Dead trilogy and Darkman, and it's combined simple paced, question raising narrative that we can balance with the visuals.
How about the first Matrix, a perfect balance of style and narrative. Probably the most obvious example I can come up with.
With the Matrix, we realize that when the bar is raised with style, the bar must similarly be raised with the narrative. The film opens when a girl with a Pat Riley haircut dressed in bondage leather kicks the shit out of a whole platoon of cops, and lets not forget the infamous spinning camera shot all in the first 5 minutes. With that dish served so fast anything less then you telling me the entire world is a fake computer program built so that humans will survive in a coma like state so machines can use us as a power source to generate their being is going to make me leave unsatisfied.
This is where I realize there comes a point in every film where the director, in some way, decides what's more important, style or narrative, and I think it's the lack of taking on the responsibility to focus on both that's leaving us walking out of the theatre saying "that was alright" time and time again.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Spiderman 3 Countdown
What we know:
-There are 3 villains: Venom, the New Goblin and Sandman
-the budget is reportedly over $250 million, the most expensive movie ever made cost $286 million (Cleopatra). As of now this puts Spidey 3 at 2nd. Spiderman 2 is currently the 5th most expensive movie ever made
-running time is over 2 and a half hours
-Sandman was somehow involved in the death of Uncle Ben
-Venom kidnaps Mary Jane (this is shown in the trailers)
-Gwen Stacy is in the film and is played by Bryce Dallas Howard (the blind chick in the "Village")
What we've heard:
-Venom is the main villain (as stated by Sam Raimi at various comic cons)
-Toby won't be back again as Spidey
-The characters cry, a lot
So far the reviews have been similar whether or not the critic likes the film: a lot of villains, a lot of eye candy and a lot of crying.
The one saving grace of the film could be David Koepp's screenplay. He's arguably the most productive and successful screenwriter in Hollywood right now and having to take on 1 superhero, 3 villains and 2 love interests is no small feet.
There's no question this film has been hyped as much, if not more than "300" a few months back and sadly that scares me a bit because I walked away from "300" with that sort of "eh" feeling. Like I needed more.
I'm betting that a live action Venom will be enough to make that "eh" feeling an "ahhhh." Contrary to some, I'm just fine with Topher Grace as Eddie Brock, as I am with Lowell from Wings as Sandman. I'm willing to bet that Sandman is the least seen villain, followed by New Goblin, then Venom. Sam Raimi isn't stupid, he knows the people want Venom, and he knows more Venom equals more box office caaaaaash.
As far as the legitimacy to the film vs. the comic book, there's a few things to question: in the comics, Gwen Stacy was actually Parker's first love interest, not MJ. Comic fans know this, but casuals don't, so Stacy will probably just become a rift between Parker and MJ as well as Parker and Brock. However, in the comics Goblin kills Stacy. I see some foreshadowing here.
So a lot of questions arise in this, the first true summer blockbuster of 2007. More questions than "300", more questions than "Grindhouse" and certainly more questions than "Transformers" and "Rise of the Silver Surfer" (a live action Optimus Prime and a live action Silver Surfer, I could care less about the story).
Reviews so far have been so-so with the third installment of Spidey raking in a 64% on the tomatometer at rottentomatoes.com. But now, for my Spiderman 3 predictions:
Venom will appear more then most anticipate, Aunt May dies, Gwen Stacy is killed by Harry Osbourne (he'll drop her from somewhere high) , Sandman won't be responsible for Uncle Ben's death as previously thought, Spidey kills the New Goblin and that's why he rips off the symbiote suit, and the end will hint at the arrival of Lizardman or Carnage.
But what really matters is I finally get to see Venom tonight. God I'm such a dork.
Going to see the 11:59 pm showing tonight, and my review will follow. Wish me luck.
What we know:
-There are 3 villains: Venom, the New Goblin and Sandman
-the budget is reportedly over $250 million, the most expensive movie ever made cost $286 million (Cleopatra). As of now this puts Spidey 3 at 2nd. Spiderman 2 is currently the 5th most expensive movie ever made
-running time is over 2 and a half hours
-Sandman was somehow involved in the death of Uncle Ben
-Venom kidnaps Mary Jane (this is shown in the trailers)
-Gwen Stacy is in the film and is played by Bryce Dallas Howard (the blind chick in the "Village")
What we've heard:
-Venom is the main villain (as stated by Sam Raimi at various comic cons)
-Toby won't be back again as Spidey
-The characters cry, a lot
So far the reviews have been similar whether or not the critic likes the film: a lot of villains, a lot of eye candy and a lot of crying.
The one saving grace of the film could be David Koepp's screenplay. He's arguably the most productive and successful screenwriter in Hollywood right now and having to take on 1 superhero, 3 villains and 2 love interests is no small feet.
There's no question this film has been hyped as much, if not more than "300" a few months back and sadly that scares me a bit because I walked away from "300" with that sort of "eh" feeling. Like I needed more.
I'm betting that a live action Venom will be enough to make that "eh" feeling an "ahhhh." Contrary to some, I'm just fine with Topher Grace as Eddie Brock, as I am with Lowell from Wings as Sandman. I'm willing to bet that Sandman is the least seen villain, followed by New Goblin, then Venom. Sam Raimi isn't stupid, he knows the people want Venom, and he knows more Venom equals more box office caaaaaash.
As far as the legitimacy to the film vs. the comic book, there's a few things to question: in the comics, Gwen Stacy was actually Parker's first love interest, not MJ. Comic fans know this, but casuals don't, so Stacy will probably just become a rift between Parker and MJ as well as Parker and Brock. However, in the comics Goblin kills Stacy. I see some foreshadowing here.
So a lot of questions arise in this, the first true summer blockbuster of 2007. More questions than "300", more questions than "Grindhouse" and certainly more questions than "Transformers" and "Rise of the Silver Surfer" (a live action Optimus Prime and a live action Silver Surfer, I could care less about the story).
Reviews so far have been so-so with the third installment of Spidey raking in a 64% on the tomatometer at rottentomatoes.com. But now, for my Spiderman 3 predictions:
Venom will appear more then most anticipate, Aunt May dies, Gwen Stacy is killed by Harry Osbourne (he'll drop her from somewhere high) , Sandman won't be responsible for Uncle Ben's death as previously thought, Spidey kills the New Goblin and that's why he rips off the symbiote suit, and the end will hint at the arrival of Lizardman or Carnage.
But what really matters is I finally get to see Venom tonight. God I'm such a dork.
Going to see the 11:59 pm showing tonight, and my review will follow. Wish me luck.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
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...
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...
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
