Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2009 12:59:12 GMT -5
It's almost as if they're trying to sabotage any interest in my musical adaptation of the original  Honestly, this is such an early version, there's got to be test screenings coming, it's likely far from complete. I'd be very surprised if it got a PG-13. And this comes from one of the biggest critics of the trailer, you really can't judge the finished product from things like this at this point in time. Of course some people have judged it already. |
|
|
|
Post by Maidpool w/ Cleaning Action on Nov 2, 2009 13:05:22 GMT -5
Steve I agree with what you said. It's way to early to tell what any finished product will be like.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrwednesdaynight on Nov 2, 2009 13:07:03 GMT -5
I had no plans to see this anyway, so another product of remake-mania running wild, brother, doesn't effect me. However, if I see a trailer where Freddy kills some kid with The Power Glove, they have me sold and I will be there openning night. That's why I go to movies, to see wise cracking villian kill annoying teenagers with useless NES periphals.
|
|
|
|
Post by Drillbit Taylor on Nov 2, 2009 13:39:09 GMT -5
I had no plans to see this anyway, so another product of remake-mania running wild, brother, doesn't effect me. However, if I see a trailer where Freddy kills some kid with The Power Glove, they have me sold and I will be there openning night. That's why I go to movies, to see wise cracking villian kill annoying teenagers with useless NES periphals. But this Freddy is not going to be as comedic, at least from what I have seen. Or at least for the first movie. Its going to be a more twisted one. And will be a full pedo and not just a kiddie killer. |
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Nov 2, 2009 13:41:25 GMT -5
I had no plans to see this anyway, so another product of remake-mania running wild, brother, doesn't effect me. However, if I see a trailer where Freddy kills some kid with The Power Glove, they have me sold and I will be there openning night. That's why I go to movies, to see wise cracking villian kill annoying teenagers with useless NES periphals. But this Freddy is not going to be as comedic, at least from what I have seen. Or at least for the first movie. Its going to be a more twisted one. And will be a full pedo and not just a kiddie killer. I think he's referencing what the sequels did to the character. The series turned ridiculous. |
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Nov 2, 2009 16:02:08 GMT -5
But this Freddy is not going to be as comedic, at least from what I have seen. Or at least for the first movie. So, it's basically the first movie all over again. Which is already on DVD. With a much better director, cast, and crew. So there's really no point in shelling out $8 at a theater. While the original films never came out and said it (unless you count FvJ as "canon"), Freddy always had a very strong pedophile vibe in the first few films. Especially the original. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 2, 2009 16:33:12 GMT -5
I'm glad they're actually going that extra mile with Kruger to make him just hateable. I never liked the fact that outside of the first three films, he wasn't seen as the villain he was supposed to be. In fact, he became far more likable than his victims, which to me is ass backwards horror filmmaking. You're not supposed to root for Leatherface, you're not supposed to WANT the zombies to eat the humans...these guys are the villains for a reason. But as these series wore on, the writers were more concerned with getting the heels over at the expense of the victims. So instead of the wisecracking rebel on a motorcycle who rides in, cracks jokes at the expense of the villain and saves the day, we get the wisecracking Freddy, who's more of a serial killing Henny Youngman (thanks to a good friend for that one) who makes jokes and then kills his impotent, douchebag victims, while the audience cheers.
That's...not how it's supposed to go. Hopefully, they'll take the audience reactions to the unfinished film and tighten things up, harden the rating, and fix the little things that went wrong. I'm not passing judgment on this until I see the finished product.
|
|
|
|
Post by YellowJacketY2J on Nov 2, 2009 18:06:35 GMT -5
But this Freddy is not going to be as comedic, at least from what I have seen. Or at least for the first movie. So, it's basically the first movie all over again. Which is already on DVD. With a much better director, cast, and crew. So there's really no point in shelling out $8 at a theater. While the original films never came out and said it (unless you count FvJ as "canon"), Freddy always had a very strong pedophile vibe in the first few films. Especially the original. Though I agree that there is no need for a Nightmare on Elm Street remake (except for making money), it's not just like the original just because it's going back to its roots. Unless this is a shot-for-shot remake a la Psycho (1998), there's at least a reason to see the remake (if you want to), since there will be a new story or new scenes. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Nov 2, 2009 20:24:21 GMT -5
Spoiler tags in case, but funniest part right here. {Spoiler}and cuts away just before a sexy bathroom butt shot causing a big, "AAaaawwww..." from the audience. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Nov 2, 2009 21:05:50 GMT -5
Gore and violence make good horror movies now. Good to know ratings make everything. I just want a decent movie. Other horror movies have proven that you can do something great with minimal gore. I could give a f*** less about the rating. NOES was never built on minimal gore. We are not talking about Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Psycho here. Would you be happy with a Hills Have Eyes remake that had no gore or very little? Cannibal Holocaust? If you are going to remake a film based on disturbing gore scenes, well, you should include those. Otherwise its fairly pointless beyond the obvious cash in. |
|
Brain Of F'n J
Hank Scorpio
Not that cool enough to have one of these....wait.
We Discodians must stick apart.
Posts: 6,890
|
Post by Brain Of F'n J on Nov 2, 2009 21:41:53 GMT -5
Everyone thought the new Halloween and Friday 13th would suck too. And they did. Jed Shaffer ~However, the new ANOES looks interesting from the trailer. Just hope they don't "MTV" it up, like they did F13. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 3, 2009 0:00:37 GMT -5
Everyone thought the new Halloween and Friday 13th would suck too. And they did. Jed Shaffer ~However, the new ANOES looks interesting from the trailer. Just hope they don't "MTV" it up, like they did F13. According to that review, that's exactly what they've done, but until I see a final product, I'm reserving the hellfire and damnations. |
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Nov 3, 2009 0:44:44 GMT -5
So.....one guys opinion means the movie is for sure going to suck? No. The fact that it for sure is going to suck means the movie is for sure going to suck. |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Nov 3, 2009 0:56:15 GMT -5
You know, I do gotta wonder what is with the dumbing down of gore and sex in movies "for teens". Old comedies never had this problem. You didn't see Porky's or Animal House skimp on anything, and the same goes for horror movies of the time. Now, I wonder why it's all got to be PG-13 now. I don't see no reason why you gotta avoid booty, like in Jennifer's Body or Fired Up. You can see that on MTV on the few times they play music, with rappers in their videos. why the shock here?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 3, 2009 1:18:32 GMT -5
You know, I do gotta wonder what is with the dumbing down of gore and sex in movies "for teens". Old comedies never had this problem. You didn't see Porky's or Animal House skimp on anything, and the same goes for horror movies of the time. Now, I wonder why it's all got to be PG-13 now. I don't see no reason why you gotta avoid booty, like in Jennifer's Body or Fired Up. You can see that on MTV on the few times they play music, with rappers in their videos. why the shock here? Uncle Creepy from DreadCentral had the same complaint about JENNIFER'S BODY. He was saying that if ANY movie could have stood to have a dose of T&A, it was THAT movie. It's like a huge tease otherwise, you know? And sometimes that's ok, but when the subject matter is as it was in JENNIFER'S BODY, it's like....why the hell NOT have a nude scene? You're tiptoeing around it anyway...why not deliver the goods? |
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Nov 3, 2009 1:48:29 GMT -5
You know, I do gotta wonder what is with the dumbing down of gore and sex in movies "for teens". Old comedies never had this problem. You didn't see Porky's or Animal House skimp on anything, and the same goes for horror movies of the time. Now, I wonder why it's all got to be PG-13 now. I don't see no reason why you gotta avoid booty, like in Jennifer's Body or Fired Up. You can see that on MTV on the few times they play music, with rappers in their videos. why the shock here? Uncle Creepy from DreadCentral had the same complaint about JENNIFER'S BODY. He was saying that if ANY movie could have stood to have a dose of T&A, it was THAT movie. It's like a huge tease otherwise, you know? And sometimes that's ok, but when the subject matter is as it was in JENNIFER'S BODY, it's like....why the hell NOT have a nude scene? You're tiptoeing around it anyway...why not deliver the goods? I think a lot of it has to do with studios basically not trusting their audience enough to have more mature stuff going on in movies. They think that if they don't make it PG-13 and give their audience no credit in terms of the situations that are going on, they're not going to make any return on their investments. Because movies, and the industry in general, have gotten so bloated that anything that doesn't make an instant profit is an immense failure. The whole of Hollywood needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up. But that's speaking to a bigger problem than "there aren't enough horror movies with blood and boobs anymore." |
|
Dirty Hazy
Hank Scorpio
Pictured Above: The Future Mrs. Hazy
Posts: 5,008 
|
Post by Dirty Hazy on Nov 3, 2009 2:07:01 GMT -5
But that's speaking to a bigger problem than "there aren't enough horror movies with blood and boobs anymore." But there's not... hell, {Spoiler}I thought that black girl in Saw 6 was gonna cut her own boobs off, but sadly she didn't even look like she thought about it. I swear, it would've been epic and awesome! |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 3, 2009 2:20:31 GMT -5
But that's speaking to a bigger problem than "there aren't enough horror movies with blood and boobs anymore." But there's not... hell, {Spoiler}I thought that black girl in Saw 6 was gonna cut her own boobs off, but sadly she didn't even look like she thought about it. I swear, it would've been epic and awesome! NO WAY. That's EXACTLY what I thought she was gonna do, too! I mean when she saw what the fat boy was doing with his belly, and how SHE didn't have any fat there....that's what I thought she was gonna go for first, too. |
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 3, 2009 2:57:32 GMT -5
I think a big issue to remember is that, before Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom got the ratings board to change it's mind, the PG-13 rating didn't exist. You were PG or R if you were a horror movie.
PG-13 is a market that has proven to be quite valuable, in that, ideally, when used correctly, it allows a film to come across as accessible to a wider audience, while not alienating adult viewers.
Sadly, we know that's far from being the case in plenty of instances.
So, horror movies want to test those waters, as well, and have for years. PG-13 is more marketable and potentially money-making than R, and studios know it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 3, 2009 4:01:39 GMT -5
I think a big issue to remember is that, before Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom got the ratings board to change it's mind, the PG-13 rating didn't exist. You were PG or R if you were a horror movie. PG-13 is a market that has proven to be quite valuable, in that, ideally, when used correctly, it allows a film to come across as accessible to a wider audience, while not alienating adult viewers. Sadly, we know that's far from being the case in plenty of instances. So, horror movies want to test those waters, as well, and have for years. PG-13 is more marketable and potentially money-making than R, and studios know it. What's even stranger to consider is that JAWS, as bloody and nasty (a kid dies, for crying out loud! How often did THAT happen back then? And in a mainstream movie no less!) as it was, was rated PG. That same exact movie today? R without a doubt. Unless Speilberg were to cut the Kintner scene...which I doubt he would. But then again, considered for today's hardened audiences...JAWS might just be even BLOODIER and nastier (especially concerning dialogue) than it originally was. I could see them peppering in F-bombs and leaving Quint's original, end of the novel speech (the one where he rants for a good page about seeing the shark's dick...I kid you not) in, as well as more of Hooper and Ellen Brody's illicit romance as well. *shrugs* |
|
