Now that we've given everyone the weekend to see either the prologue or trailer for "The Dark Knight Rises" let's spoil the crap out of them.
First up the prologue which ran before IMAX screenings of "Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol." The clip encompasses the first six minutes of the film and features a professor being rescued by the CIA. However, there's a surprise when soldiers who worked for the famed assassin Bane have been captured as well.
Once on the plane, the lead agent tries interrogating the prisoners, but it turns out it was all part of the plan and Bane is actually among the captured men. He needed to make sure the professor didn't say anything.
Bane then proceeds to take over the plane when his much larger plane descends in and hooks up the small CIA plane. This was a fantastic bit of filming that played extremely well in IMAX. The way everyone fell back on the plane as Bane remained in control reminded me of the fight in "Inception." You keep wondering how did they do that?
Finally Bane hooks the professor up to a dead soldier and gives him a blood transfer, presumably giving the professor an injection of Venom.
Bane and the professor are then lifted out of the plane as it crashes.
The prologue ends with a sizzle reel of shots from the movie including the big fight between Batman and Bane. All in all an OK preview, but really nothing new or unexpected.
With all the hype surrounding the IMAX prologue, no one had any idea that a awesome trailer was being released with "Sherlok Holmes."
As you can see the trailer provides more insight into plot and shows more of the cast, though unless I'm mistaken there was no Morgan Freeman. However, the one thing both clips have in common is neither has very much Batman in them. This makes me wonder what surprises Christopher Nolan is trying to keep under wraps.
I guess we'll all have to wait until "The Dark Knight Rises" hits theaters July 20.
Showing posts with label batman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label batman. Show all posts
Monday, December 19, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
Batman fans, calm the heck down
"The Dark Knight Rises" doesn't come out until basically a year from now.
And I think Warner Bros. has been pretty cool giving us some bits of scoop.
First we got a glimpse of the presumed villain of the film Bane, played by Tom Hardy. I know it's just a teaser image, so I'm not going to complain. I even think it looks interesting.
Next we got the teaser trailer for the film:
People are saying it sucks because we don't get a lot of footage. What are they expected? This is a TEASER trailer after all. Plus, anyone remember "The Dark Knight" trailer for 2008?
Compared to this one, we get to see a lot more footage.
And the final bit (so far) is the first look at Anne Hathaway's "Catwoman" character.
Granted the eye gear and head look nothing like the Catwoman from the comics (or anything else for that matter), but we have no clue what context that photo is taken in.
It could be the very start of the film or near the end? We also have no clue if she wears something else in every single other scene she's in.
I think director Christopher Nolan has earned some well-deserved patience and respect. He knows what he's doing. He made two awesome Batman films after the franchise was almost destroyed by one of the worst movies ever made.
How about we wait until the full trailer is released before we make a choice here?
That just means we'll have to wait a good nine months...
And I think Warner Bros. has been pretty cool giving us some bits of scoop.
First we got a glimpse of the presumed villain of the film Bane, played by Tom Hardy. I know it's just a teaser image, so I'm not going to complain. I even think it looks interesting.
Next we got the teaser trailer for the film:
People are saying it sucks because we don't get a lot of footage. What are they expected? This is a TEASER trailer after all. Plus, anyone remember "The Dark Knight" trailer for 2008?
Compared to this one, we get to see a lot more footage.
And the final bit (so far) is the first look at Anne Hathaway's "Catwoman" character.
Granted the eye gear and head look nothing like the Catwoman from the comics (or anything else for that matter), but we have no clue what context that photo is taken in.
It could be the very start of the film or near the end? We also have no clue if she wears something else in every single other scene she's in.
I think director Christopher Nolan has earned some well-deserved patience and respect. He knows what he's doing. He made two awesome Batman films after the franchise was almost destroyed by one of the worst movies ever made.
How about we wait until the full trailer is released before we make a choice here?
That just means we'll have to wait a good nine months...
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Christopher Nolan: You can stop looking
Deadline is reporting that Nolan is meeting with actresses for two roles in "The Dark Knight Rises;" a love interest and a villain.
This news leads one to believe that Catwoman is the villain.
But, as we have talked about here at Inscaped numerous times (at the 21:20 mark), I don't think so.
Wrapping up the Nolan trilogy, I truly believe that Talia al Ghul is going to be in this next movie.
So let's look at Deadline's reported actresses, wait... let's not.
Because there's only one choice.
And she wants the part.
Stana Katic from "Castle."
At Comic-Con this year (see above) she talked about wanting the role. She's already perfect for the role after doing the voice for Talia in the next "Batman" game.
As Stephanie has pointed out, Katic can pull off the action perfectly.
And if you want to see some amazing acting, check out the "Castle" episode "Sucker Punch."
Forget Natalie Portman and Keira Knightley.
Katic is the only real choice.
This news leads one to believe that Catwoman is the villain.
But, as we have talked about here at Inscaped numerous times (at the 21:20 mark), I don't think so.
Wrapping up the Nolan trilogy, I truly believe that Talia al Ghul is going to be in this next movie.
So let's look at Deadline's reported actresses, wait... let's not.
Because there's only one choice.
And she wants the part.
At Comic-Con this year (see above) she talked about wanting the role. She's already perfect for the role after doing the voice for Talia in the next "Batman" game.
As Stephanie has pointed out, Katic can pull off the action perfectly.
And if you want to see some amazing acting, check out the "Castle" episode "Sucker Punch."
Forget Natalie Portman and Keira Knightley.
Katic is the only real choice.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
New 'Batman' villain roundup part two
With word that the title of the new Batman movie is "The Dark Knight Rises" and the villain won't be the Riddler...
Browsing Wikipedia, I had an impromptu brainstorming session regarding Christopher Nolan's Batman universe.
Some Batman villains could be tweaked just a bit to make them fit into the realistic world. Others require a bit more origin mixing around to fit in, but could work.
So, let's get right into it and go villain by villain and theorize how they'd fit in Nolan's world.
Bane - Gets super strength from a drug called Venom. Makes his muscles grow to monster sizes. Some real drugs like PCP can make users a bit crazy with what seems like unusual strength and feeling no pain. Playing off that would be easy and could make for a scary villain.
Clayface - Radioactive material turned the second Clayface into a monster who could take any form and mostly appeared as a monster made of clay. The first Clayface was actually a normal guy.
He was an actor who went crazy and started killing people. An easy realistic approach could be to have Clayface be a master of disguise. He could be an actor who's family or loved one was killed by something in the first two films and he blames Batman.
Mr. Freeze - Was a scientist who had to live in subzero temperatures. He also used various weapons to freeze people. The only real realistic approach would be to make him some sort of serial killer who uses liquid nitrogen to kill people.
Penguin - This one is an easy fix. Just get a small fat guy who has an umbrella fixation. Just give him an umbrella gun and an umbrella sword. Make him the new mob boss of Gotham.
Browsing Wikipedia, I had an impromptu brainstorming session regarding Christopher Nolan's Batman universe.
Some Batman villains could be tweaked just a bit to make them fit into the realistic world. Others require a bit more origin mixing around to fit in, but could work.
So, let's get right into it and go villain by villain and theorize how they'd fit in Nolan's world.
Bane - Gets super strength from a drug called Venom. Makes his muscles grow to monster sizes. Some real drugs like PCP can make users a bit crazy with what seems like unusual strength and feeling no pain. Playing off that would be easy and could make for a scary villain.
Clayface - Radioactive material turned the second Clayface into a monster who could take any form and mostly appeared as a monster made of clay. The first Clayface was actually a normal guy.
He was an actor who went crazy and started killing people. An easy realistic approach could be to have Clayface be a master of disguise. He could be an actor who's family or loved one was killed by something in the first two films and he blames Batman.
Mr. Freeze - Was a scientist who had to live in subzero temperatures. He also used various weapons to freeze people. The only real realistic approach would be to make him some sort of serial killer who uses liquid nitrogen to kill people.
Penguin - This one is an easy fix. Just get a small fat guy who has an umbrella fixation. Just give him an umbrella gun and an umbrella sword. Make him the new mob boss of Gotham.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
New 'Batman' villain roundup part one
On last week's show we talked about "Inception" actor Tom Hardy being cast in the upcoming sequel to "The Dark Knight."
Yeah, I won't call it "Batman 3."
Oops.
During that news Stephanie and I both discussed which villain he might be playing.
I am in the mind that it's down to three characters: Black Mask, Hush or the Riddler. Here's why:
In the realistic world of Christopher Nolan's Batman these are the easiest choices that wouldn't require a giant leap in logic or changing the character much.
Black Mask used to be a childhood friend of Bruce Wayne, who grew to hate his parents for forcing him to be friends with Wayne. He also hated Wayne for "buying out" his company and humiliating him.
He created a mask out of the coffin of his dead father and went on to become a major force in the organized crime world of Gotham City. Sometime later the mask would become permanently attached to him, driving him a bit more crazy.
He also did horrible, horrible things to Catwoman and her family. Like worse than Joker kind of stuff.
Hush was also a childhood friend of Wayne, but with a different outlook. While Wayne lost his parents in a tragic accident he had no control over, Hush lost his father to a tragic accident he caused... on purpose. He later killed his mother when she kept comparing him to Wayne.
Crazy isn't even a good word to describe Hush. He literally wants to be Wayne, while trying to destroy and dismantle his life.
Recently he's even had plastic surgery to look exactly like Wayne in order to destroy the Wayne name from within.
And of course, the Riddler. Everyone knows the Riddler and he'd make a perfect choice.
Any of these three choices would fit perfect in the Nolan-Batman world.
Black Mask fits in with the mob control over Gotham set up in both films, so this is my educated guess for the villain.
Yeah, I won't call it "Batman 3."
Oops.
During that news Stephanie and I both discussed which villain he might be playing.
I am in the mind that it's down to three characters: Black Mask, Hush or the Riddler. Here's why:
In the realistic world of Christopher Nolan's Batman these are the easiest choices that wouldn't require a giant leap in logic or changing the character much.
He created a mask out of the coffin of his dead father and went on to become a major force in the organized crime world of Gotham City. Sometime later the mask would become permanently attached to him, driving him a bit more crazy.
He also did horrible, horrible things to Catwoman and her family. Like worse than Joker kind of stuff.
Hush was also a childhood friend of Wayne, but with a different outlook. While Wayne lost his parents in a tragic accident he had no control over, Hush lost his father to a tragic accident he caused... on purpose. He later killed his mother when she kept comparing him to Wayne.
Crazy isn't even a good word to describe Hush. He literally wants to be Wayne, while trying to destroy and dismantle his life.
Recently he's even had plastic surgery to look exactly like Wayne in order to destroy the Wayne name from within.
And of course, the Riddler. Everyone knows the Riddler and he'd make a perfect choice.
Any of these three choices would fit perfect in the Nolan-Batman world.
Black Mask fits in with the mob control over Gotham set up in both films, so this is my educated guess for the villain.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Another day, another 'Batman' rumor
Unlike the real "Batman" news of the week from Comic-Con, where Gary Oldman indicated that the new film will be shooting next year, today's "Batman" rumor is ugly, scary, stupid, moronic and downright lies.
Apparently (saying that with a grain of salt) Miley Cyrus of "Hannah Montana" "fame" "auditioned" for a role in the new "Batman" film... as Batgirl.
Even though Gordon's children are all... children in the series.
The "newspaper" The Globe says she dressed up in a batsuit and wrote her own dialogue to impress studio execs at Warner Bros.
How many times do these magazines and newspapers need to print lies about the "Batman" sequels before everyone just blows them off right away.
Remember Cher as Catwoman?
Eddie Murphy as The Riddler?
Christopher Nolan is not going to do this. Trust me. No one is going to do this.
Apparently (saying that with a grain of salt) Miley Cyrus of "Hannah Montana" "fame" "auditioned" for a role in the new "Batman" film... as Batgirl.
Even though Gordon's children are all... children in the series.
The "newspaper" The Globe says she dressed up in a batsuit and wrote her own dialogue to impress studio execs at Warner Bros.
How many times do these magazines and newspapers need to print lies about the "Batman" sequels before everyone just blows them off right away.
Remember Cher as Catwoman?
Eddie Murphy as The Riddler?
Christopher Nolan is not going to do this. Trust me. No one is going to do this.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Today, I feel really old
There is a Web site that I go to every day, io9.com, which covers fantasy and science fiction. This week it had a huge story about how Tim Burton's "Batman" film turns 20 years old today.
I vividly remember seeing it in theaters.
Yes, I am somewhat dating myself here too.
I can't believe it has been 20 years already. I had the T-shirts, all the toys, even Batman Converse shoes! I remember children at school making fun of me for liking "Batman" so much.
So, 20 years later, does the movie hold up to today?
I think so. It nowhere compares to the Chris Nolan versions, but still is much, much better than the Schumacher films (I'll still go on record and say "Batman and Robin" is one of the worst movies ever made).
What else will make me feel really, really old soon?
I vividly remember seeing it in theaters.
Yes, I am somewhat dating myself here too.
I can't believe it has been 20 years already. I had the T-shirts, all the toys, even Batman Converse shoes! I remember children at school making fun of me for liking "Batman" so much.
So, 20 years later, does the movie hold up to today?
I think so. It nowhere compares to the Chris Nolan versions, but still is much, much better than the Schumacher films (I'll still go on record and say "Batman and Robin" is one of the worst movies ever made).
What else will make me feel really, really old soon?
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Odd observation
While we wait for Thursday to see if "The Dark Knight" gets an Academy Award nomination for Best Picture, I had a thought about the history of the Batman films.
Apparently, villains in those movies all die in the same exact way. Yeah, I have noticed this before, but with all the hype and talk surrounding "The Dark Knight" and its awards chances it really stands out.
Let's take a quick look:
"Batman" (1989) - Joker falls off a REALLY tall building after Batman hooks his leg to a statue.
"Batman Returns" - Penguin dies after falling through the top of the aquarium building. He eventually dies from those injuries. Also, Catwoman's first life is taking by being pushed out a window of a tall building.
"Batman Forever" - Two-Face, about to kill Batman, flips his coin, to which Batman throws a bunch of fake coins in the air, confusing Two-Face, who then falls to his death.
"Batman Begins" - Ra's Al Ghul, fighting with Batman on a rail train, is killed when the train falls off the high tracks and explodes. I do count this because he was in the train when it fell that long distance. Still counts.
"The Dark Knight" - Taking a page from "Batman Forever," Two-Face again is about to kill when he flips his coin and is distracted enough for Batman to knock him off the side of a building. The Joker almost dies from falling off a building before Batman saves him.
So, morale of the story? If you are a Batman enemy... don't fight him near any building or anyplace high up.
Fight him in the desert or something.
Apparently, villains in those movies all die in the same exact way. Yeah, I have noticed this before, but with all the hype and talk surrounding "The Dark Knight" and its awards chances it really stands out.
Let's take a quick look:
"Batman" (1989) - Joker falls off a REALLY tall building after Batman hooks his leg to a statue.
"Batman Returns" - Penguin dies after falling through the top of the aquarium building. He eventually dies from those injuries. Also, Catwoman's first life is taking by being pushed out a window of a tall building.
"Batman Forever" - Two-Face, about to kill Batman, flips his coin, to which Batman throws a bunch of fake coins in the air, confusing Two-Face, who then falls to his death.
"Batman Begins" - Ra's Al Ghul, fighting with Batman on a rail train, is killed when the train falls off the high tracks and explodes. I do count this because he was in the train when it fell that long distance. Still counts.
"The Dark Knight" - Taking a page from "Batman Forever," Two-Face again is about to kill when he flips his coin and is distracted enough for Batman to knock him off the side of a building. The Joker almost dies from falling off a building before Batman saves him.
So, morale of the story? If you are a Batman enemy... don't fight him near any building or anyplace high up.
Fight him in the desert or something.
Friday, January 9, 2009
The "People's" Choice Awards?
So the other night I attempted to watch the People's Choice Awards on CBS. I usually don't bother because most times the things nominated are stupid and the winners are even worse.
Well, this year's show didn't disappoint!
I was really jazzed that "The Dark Knight" won a bunch of awards, it deserves every single one. But, a movie that made $500+ million dollars domestically is pretty popular. Hence, the people's choice. No surprise there.
That line of thinking went right out the window for "Favorite Leading Lady" which, by the way, I don't know the difference between "Favorite Leading Lady" and "Favorite Female Movie Star." Sounds like the same thing to me. Other than the fact that there were different people nominated in the two categories. "Ah ha! Instead of getting three famous people to show up to our awards, we can get six!"
So "Favorite Female Movie Star" had Angelina Jolie, Reese Witherspoon and Cate Blanchett.
The "Favorite Leading Lady" category had Anne Hathaway for "Rachel Getting Married," Kate Hudson for "My Best Friend's Girl" and Queen Latifah for "The Secret Life of Bees."
Really?
REALLY?
Never mind that Latifah was hosting the awards show, which made the nomination a little dubious, but only one of those movies was a"hit" in the general sense.
"Rachel Getting Married" has made a little more than $10 million, "My Best Friend's Girl" made $19 million and "The Secret Life of Bees" made $37+ million (budget was $11).
I can KIND OF see Hathaway, but maybe for "Get Smart" which made $130+ million!
Hudson won, shocking considering the Rotten Tomatoes rating for "My Best Friend's Girl" was 16% (ouch.)
So either no one really voted or the people would have voted for Hudson even if she starred in "Crap: The Musical!"
Well, this year's show didn't disappoint!
I was really jazzed that "The Dark Knight" won a bunch of awards, it deserves every single one. But, a movie that made $500+ million dollars domestically is pretty popular. Hence, the people's choice. No surprise there.
That line of thinking went right out the window for "Favorite Leading Lady" which, by the way, I don't know the difference between "Favorite Leading Lady" and "Favorite Female Movie Star." Sounds like the same thing to me. Other than the fact that there were different people nominated in the two categories. "Ah ha! Instead of getting three famous people to show up to our awards, we can get six!"
So "Favorite Female Movie Star" had Angelina Jolie, Reese Witherspoon and Cate Blanchett.
The "Favorite Leading Lady" category had Anne Hathaway for "Rachel Getting Married," Kate Hudson for "My Best Friend's Girl" and Queen Latifah for "The Secret Life of Bees."
Really?
REALLY?
Never mind that Latifah was hosting the awards show, which made the nomination a little dubious, but only one of those movies was a"hit" in the general sense.
"Rachel Getting Married" has made a little more than $10 million, "My Best Friend's Girl" made $19 million and "The Secret Life of Bees" made $37+ million (budget was $11).
I can KIND OF see Hathaway, but maybe for "Get Smart" which made $130+ million!
Hudson won, shocking considering the Rotten Tomatoes rating for "My Best Friend's Girl" was 16% (ouch.)
So either no one really voted or the people would have voted for Hudson even if she starred in "Crap: The Musical!"
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Yay! and Nay!
Just a bit ago Heath Ledger won Best Supporting Actor at the Critics Choice Awards! Woot!
But, then "Slumdog Millionaire" won Best Picture. Boo!
But, then "Slumdog Millionaire" won Best Picture. Boo!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Writer's Guild nominations surprise
Just a few minutes ago the Writer's Guild of America unveiled the nominations for its Writer's Guild Awards and there are some surprises, both good and bad, in the list of nominees:
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
- "Burn After Reading," Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
- "Milk," Written by Dustin Lance Black
- "Vicky Cristina Barcelona," Written by Woody Allen
- "The Visitor," Written by Tom McCarthy
- "The Wrestler," Written by Robert Siegel
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
- "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," Screenplay by Eric Roth; Screen Story by Eric Roth and Robin Swicord; Based on the Short Story by F. Scott Fitzgerald.
- "The Dark Knight," Screenplay by Jonathan Nolan and Christopher Nolan; Story by Christopher Nolan & David S. Goyer; Based on Characters Appearing in Comic Books Published by DC Comics.
- "Doubt," Screenplay by John Patrick Shanley, Based on his Stage Play.
- "Frost/Nixon," Screenplay by Peter Morgan, Based on his Stage Play.
- "Slumdog Millionaire," Screenplay by Simon Beaufoy, Based on the Novel Q and A by Vikas Swarup.
So, that sure is a wide variety of films there. The best one, of course, being "The Dark Knight" which really needed a WGA nod to help it's chances of getting an Oscar nomination for Best Picture. It missed out on the Screen Actor's Guild equivilant of Best Picture, but scored a Producer's Guild nomination for Best Picture. The clincher will be the Director's Guild nominations, announced tomorrow. If Christopher Nolan is nominated then "The Dark Knight" has a really great chance of getting a Best Picture nomination at the Academy Awards. Just think about that for a second, a comic book movie nominated for Best Picture.
Bad surprises; I fully expected to see "In Bruges" get an Original Screenplay nod. The script was the best part of the film. Maybe the Guild didn't like the "One F-word every 1.18 minutes" ratio. Well, f-that.
I was happy with the nominations for "The Wrestler" and "The Visitor," which I saw last night and it was good.
In Adapted Screenplay, "Doubt" scored a nomination and maybe shouldn't have. That was my main problem with the movie was the script. Well, that and the funky camera angles. "Slumdog Millionaire" is riding a wave of hype all the way to the bank and that doesn't make me happy. Watch the next episode of Viewpoints On... for my feelings on the film. Just a hint, it's not in my top ten (or 15) of 2008.
So, I have seen five out of the 10 nominees. That is pretty good for me. That number will go up by one, hopefully, if "Frost/Nixon" ever gets released around here.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Visual Effects finalists
So, the Oscars just announced the seven finalists for the "Best Visual Effects" award. Yeah it's a little odd the way they do it, but it's good to see their way of thinking.
“Australia”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Hellboy II: The Golden Army”
“Iron Man”
“Journey to the Center of the Earth”
“The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”
This list will be narrowed down to the final three official nominations when the entire list is announced on Jan. 22.
A few thoughts:
I have seen four films on that list; “The Dark Knight,” “Hellboy II: The Golden Army,” “Iron Man” and “Journey to the Center of the Earth.”
“The Dark Knight” should be on there, I bet it will make it to the final three.
“Hellboy II: The Golden Army” has really great costume and creature designs, but when it comes to the CGI-fight scenes they look CGI. That is a bad thing in my book.
“Iron Man” is a strong candidate. I watched some behind the scenes footage from the film and there were parts of the movie, like Robert Downey Jr. just standing around in parts of the armor which I thought were not CGI, but a really good costume design person, but turned out to be total CGI. I was really impressed. The only downside is the scene where he really uses the armor for the first time against the terrorists. That scene didn't have the greatest CGI, the filmmakers probably didn't send in that scene to be judged. Smart move.
“Journey to the Center of the Earth” is the weakest of the four, in my opinion. There were some clever moments, but mostly everything was overly colorful and bright. My eight-year-old niece loved the movie, I was just somewhat impressed.
One major omission is "Cloverfield" which I thought had the best CGI this year. My whole arguement is that normally is has to be hard to make good special effects on normal movie cameras. How harder is it to make great effects on handheld cameras?
Other films taken off the original 15 movie shortlist; “Quantum of Solace” (Which had good CGI),
“The Spiderwick Chronicles,” “The Incredible Hulk,”
“Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" (The CG gophers killed it I bet), “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” “Hancock” and “The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian.”
“Australia”
“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
“The Dark Knight”
“Hellboy II: The Golden Army”
“Iron Man”
“Journey to the Center of the Earth”
“The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor”
This list will be narrowed down to the final three official nominations when the entire list is announced on Jan. 22.
A few thoughts:
I have seen four films on that list; “The Dark Knight,” “Hellboy II: The Golden Army,” “Iron Man” and “Journey to the Center of the Earth.”
“The Dark Knight” should be on there, I bet it will make it to the final three.
“Hellboy II: The Golden Army” has really great costume and creature designs, but when it comes to the CGI-fight scenes they look CGI. That is a bad thing in my book.
“Iron Man” is a strong candidate. I watched some behind the scenes footage from the film and there were parts of the movie, like Robert Downey Jr. just standing around in parts of the armor which I thought were not CGI, but a really good costume design person, but turned out to be total CGI. I was really impressed. The only downside is the scene where he really uses the armor for the first time against the terrorists. That scene didn't have the greatest CGI, the filmmakers probably didn't send in that scene to be judged. Smart move.
“Journey to the Center of the Earth” is the weakest of the four, in my opinion. There were some clever moments, but mostly everything was overly colorful and bright. My eight-year-old niece loved the movie, I was just somewhat impressed.
One major omission is "Cloverfield" which I thought had the best CGI this year. My whole arguement is that normally is has to be hard to make good special effects on normal movie cameras. How harder is it to make great effects on handheld cameras?
Other films taken off the original 15 movie shortlist; “Quantum of Solace” (Which had good CGI),
“The Spiderwick Chronicles,” “The Incredible Hulk,”
“Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" (The CG gophers killed it I bet), “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” “Hancock” and “The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian.”
Friday, February 8, 2008
Monday, July 2, 2007
Worst director ever or unlucky?
“Batman and Robin” may be one of the worst movies ever made.
That is a bold statement, but I know I am not alone in thinking that.
And who should take the blame for it being a horrible movie? The director of course and his name is Joel Schumacher. From the over the top cartoony look of the film, the “makes my brain bleed” one-liners and the “what where they thinking?” costumes including the now infamous nipples on the bat-suit.
The entire film was a giant disaster and it bombed at the box office, effectively stopping any further Batman films for another ten years. I may have even cried leaving the theater...
I remember reading an issue of Entertainment Weekly when the Brad Pitt movie “The Mexican” was coming out and they interviewed the cast, including Julia Roberts and James Gandolfini. The reporter asked each actor which was the film they did that they disliked the most. Both Roberts and Gandolfini picked Schumacher films, “Dying Young” and “8MM.”
Schumacher has also directed such “memorable” films as “D.C. Cab,” “Bad Company” and “The Incredible Shrinking Woman.”
Note: None of those films won Academy Awards...
So just by looking at the films already mentioned you would think “This guy is the worst director ever?” But, his other films tell a different story.
I think that “Batman and Robin” is one of the worst movies ever made, but to the shock of everyone one of my favorite movies of all time, “A Time to Kill” is also a Schumacher film.
And that is not his only good film. I also liked “Phone Booth,” “The Lost Boys,” “Flatliners” and “Falling Down.”
Hell, he even directed “St. Elmo’s Fire!”
So what does that say? We know he CAN make good films, but the evidence is also there that when he fails to hit the mark, he really misses. It is the inconsistency that gets me. At least Uwe Boll is consistent enough to make all of his films horrible... I even think that is his gimmick now.
http://imdb.com/name/nm0001708/
That is a bold statement, but I know I am not alone in thinking that.
And who should take the blame for it being a horrible movie? The director of course and his name is Joel Schumacher. From the over the top cartoony look of the film, the “makes my brain bleed” one-liners and the “what where they thinking?” costumes including the now infamous nipples on the bat-suit.
The entire film was a giant disaster and it bombed at the box office, effectively stopping any further Batman films for another ten years. I may have even cried leaving the theater...
I remember reading an issue of Entertainment Weekly when the Brad Pitt movie “The Mexican” was coming out and they interviewed the cast, including Julia Roberts and James Gandolfini. The reporter asked each actor which was the film they did that they disliked the most. Both Roberts and Gandolfini picked Schumacher films, “Dying Young” and “8MM.”
Schumacher has also directed such “memorable” films as “D.C. Cab,” “Bad Company” and “The Incredible Shrinking Woman.”
Note: None of those films won Academy Awards...
So just by looking at the films already mentioned you would think “This guy is the worst director ever?” But, his other films tell a different story.
I think that “Batman and Robin” is one of the worst movies ever made, but to the shock of everyone one of my favorite movies of all time, “A Time to Kill” is also a Schumacher film.
And that is not his only good film. I also liked “Phone Booth,” “The Lost Boys,” “Flatliners” and “Falling Down.”
Hell, he even directed “St. Elmo’s Fire!”
So what does that say? We know he CAN make good films, but the evidence is also there that when he fails to hit the mark, he really misses. It is the inconsistency that gets me. At least Uwe Boll is consistent enough to make all of his films horrible... I even think that is his gimmick now.
http://imdb.com/name/nm0001708/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)