polyhedral-paranoia said: p.s. i love that there is someone on tumblr that can talk movies. thoughts on john carter? my buddy caught the uni screening and saw it in the full imax 3d presentation. he loved the ever loving crap out of it.
Thanks! Although you should know that there are BAZILLIONS of folks on Tumblr who are movie-smart in terms of production, marketing, writing, directing, the whole magilla.
Not sure about JC. I have no connection to the source material and the marketing has been lackluster. I have an overall problem with Epic! Movies! that have been CGI’d to the point where there’s no weight or drama to the battle scenes. When it’s all so obviously fake, it’s hard for me to care as much because my brain tells me that none of those pixels are actually in danger, ever.
polyhedral-paranoia said: i didnt read the synoposis, i try to remain somewaht spoiler free once production is confirmed (unless it's Prometheus then i read everything). i basically throw my trust in with the talent, and that usually starts with the production team. POTC1 is a masterpiece and i cant fault the films other two pieces due to the rushed script from orci and kurtzman (who redeemed themselves with the brilliant Star Trek reboot for me). I think Oscar Award Winning Director Gore Verbinski is gonna surprise u
polyhedral-paranoia said: i'm 100% sure you've read all the stuff that Gore is planning for this Lone Ranger, surely you can crap on a flick due to a boring pub photo? sure he might have gone off the "reservation" a bit on the pirates trilogy, but they all look so luscious, and i think he more than made up for "At World's End" with "Rango". Certainly the WACKY gif belongs on the "Dark Shadows" stuff, but that would be a badge of honor considering the source material.
It’s pretty hard not to draw comparisons between the worst indulgences of POTC (laziness, excessiveness, dull jokes instead of character, convoluted plotting, over-reliance on spectacle) and how this looks and sounds so far.
Yes, I’m basing it on the picture and synopsis - “infused with action and humor”, “brought to life through new eyes”, “epic surprises and humorous fiction” - all of that is studio-speak for wacky, wink-wink adventures. They want POTC fans to SEE the picture, READ the synopsis and FEEL comfortable and secure that they’ll get more of the same. The concept and legend of the Lone Ranger is incapable of luring any kind of an audience on its own; they HAVE to link it to POTC to build buzz.
And that’s fine. But it feels drab to me, uninspired. Forced. Re-treaded. Hope I’m wrong.
polyhedral-paranoia said: i need to see a Les Grossman movie, his motivations aren't nearly as important as his dance movies and his thesaurus of vulgarities. That said, I liked the 2011 prequel to The Thing, so what the hell do i know. KEEP DRINKING BOOTY SWEAT
Les Grossman is a clever character, well and surprisingly played, in a larger body of work that had other laughs, characters, and decent bits. You’re right that many will happily spend 90 more minutes with his character and have a delightful time - but I constantly question Hollywood’s motivations to recycle bits that don’t really warrant the treatment.
If one writer/director/actor can innovate the use of Tom Cruise’s abilities, why can’t someone else do it again, in a new way? Why not expend some energy and creativity and simply come up with something new?
The answer is usually money - it’s cheaper and quicker to reuse something that works than take a chance on something that’s never been done. But that’s why so much of what gets produced and reproduced is crap.
There are notable exceptions, of course. But there are far too many re-treaded movies out there that suffer from a lack of effort and thought.