|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 21, 2010 9:07:08 GMT -5
"No talent has yet been announced for the latest DAY." Is it me or is that kind of funny in an out of context kind of way? Glad I'm not the only one who noticed. |
|
andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,223 
|
Post by andrew8798 on May 21, 2010 10:30:01 GMT -5
Possible Scream 4 casting news:
|
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on May 21, 2010 10:40:59 GMT -5
"No talent has yet been announced for the latest DAY." Is it me or is that kind of funny in an out of context kind of way? The next words should probably read "... and none ever will be." |
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 21, 2010 20:26:36 GMT -5
Decided to dig out one of my (and a lot of other posters around these parts, too!) old favorites... It's ironic that this movie's subject - fiction blurring with reality - is a topic that Stephen King himself, the author (along with H.P. Lovecraft) whose works inspired Michael De Luca's screenplay, has used as a story device more than once. There's Misery, with a psychotic fan taking her favorite writer and forcing him to draft a satisfying conclusion to a series of romantic novels. There's also The Dark Half (with a film version directed by George Romero), which concerns a crime writer's signature character coming back for revenge against his creator for killing him off. If nothing else, De Luca can't claim that his motivation for writing this movie was that King took himself too seriously, and didn't examine the effects that fiction can have on reality. John Carpenter's In the Mouth of Madness is the very definition of a cult film. It boasted a fairly robust $14 million budget, a top of the line cast headed by Sam "Mr. Amazing" Neill (fresh off the success of a certain 1993 film about theme park technology run amok that you may have heard of), and cutting edge visual and makeup effects. Despite all these things in its favor, it only grossed $9 million in the United States. It was considered a failure upon its February 1995 release. The criticisms leveled against it were of the typical variety in the "heady" horror movie genre - too confusing, lack of focus, spotty narrative structure. Yet, at the end of the decade, In the Mouth of Madness - the final film in Carpenter's "Apocalypse trilogy" (the first two are The Thing and Prince of Darkness) - showed up on its fair share of "Best horror movies of the '90s" lists, had been released on DVD, and now enjoys its status as an unappreciated and overlooked gem in the genre. And for good reason, because this is one friggin' good film. "Well, this is one rotten ending, isn't it?" Those are the words of John Trent (Neill) when we first meet him. He seems to be certifiably insane, locked in a padded cell, and suffering from hallucinations. Soon enough, however, Dr. Wrenn (David Warner, a venerable character actor and a veteran of the genre) shows up to question Trent and get to know the inner workings of his paranoia. As such, the vast majority of In the Mouth of Madness takes place in flashback, with Trent relating his story to the psychiatrist. Trent is a private investigator whose specialty is insurance fraud. He thoroughly enjoys his job (watching him bust some sleazy businessman in the movie's opening chapters is a pretty awesome sight), chain smokes cigarettes, and in typical Sam Neill fashion is just the right mixture of coolness and sophistication. While meeting with his contractor about potential jobs, he is attacked by a man with an axe, who calmly asks "Do you read Sutter Cane?" before being shot to death by police. After this incident, Trent is called to the office of Arcane Publishing, which distributes Cane's novels. The name itself is an obvious allusion to King himself, and the impression is that this Cane is a very popular and important literary figure in this film's fictional world. At Arcane, Trent meets Harglow (Charlton Heston), who wants him to investigate the alleged disappearance of both Cane (played by Jurgen Prochnow when we finally meet him) and the manuscript of his latest novel, which shares its title with the film. Harglow also sends along company representative Linda Styles (Julie Carmen) to keep tabs on the investigation. The case seems to break open after Trent reads some of Cane's novels, which causes him to have some horrific nightmares. The covers of the books seem to form a map which gives the location of Hobb's End, a fictional Castle Rock-style town to appear in many of the stories. The pair of Trent and Styles take to the road in search of the mythic town. At first, it seems as if the whole operation is for nothing as they drive around in nondescript rural country for an indeterminate amount of time. During Linda's turn at the wheel, however, the screen goes black, mysterious figures on bikes zip by on the highway...and suddenly our protagonists find themselves in Hobb's End. In the Mouth of Madness is not a movie that unspools in an easy-to-digest format. When the main characters reach this town that may or may not be fantasy, it becomes less about its story and all about the experience and atmosphere. There are other movies that have attempted this and failed miserably. This film does not fail in the slightest. There is a central conflict of sorts between the two characters, with Trent the realist believing the whole operation to be some sort of intricate publicity stunt for the upcoming novel, while Styles, who has read the manuscript, believes Hobb's End to be Cane's actual town come to life. And that's not to say that this movie isn't without its creepy moments; until we get some semblance as to just WHAT the hell is going on within Hobb's End, we get some very Stephen King-style scenes played out before the two investigators. There's a seemingly warm hotel owner (Frances Bay, aces in this and in pretty much everything else I've seen her in) in the process of murdering the f*** out of her husband, an angry mob gathered outside a mysterious black church, and mysterious Village of the Damned-esque children imploring Linda that they can "see" her. Eventually, after enough crazy s*** goes down, Cane himself shows his face, and reveals himself for what he is - the product of the public's perception of his novels, along with the terrifying reality of the effect that this belief will have on the rest of humanity. There's a lot to admire about In the Mouth of Madness. Credit must be given to its writer, Michael De Luca, who creates more than a few scenes that get under your skin while also resisting the temptation to go for an easy, concise ending (don't get me wrong - I really like those, but it would have felt HORRIBLY out of place to have some "everything makes sense now" moment in this film). Carpenter is also at the top of his game, making his best movie since his remake of The Thing. He frames the small town that contains most of the film's plot and grants it an almost inhuman presence, also deftly handling some of the more complicated special effects sequences. The single greatest thing about this film, however, is Neill. I've come to admire the guy greatly due to his unparalleled professionalism coupled with his acting ability; while other actors thumb their noses at horror films, Neill has embraced them, seeing these characters as opportunities to test himself in ways that no other genre can grant. He's a character actor through and through and almost without equal, capable of completely vanishing within these fictional people at the drop of a hat. This movie calls for him to run the gamut from smug and cool to completely bats*** crazy, and never for one moment does any of it feel artificial. Without hyperbole, this is one of the best horror movie performances of all time. In fact, I'll go even further and grant it presence in the top three, along with Jack Nicholson's intense portrayal of Torrance in The Shining and Anthony Perkins' immortal turn in Psycho. In short, ol' Sam has been in a lot of horror films, and has played everything from the Antichrist himself to a vampire overlord, but this remains the best he has EVER been in the great, grand world of horror films. There's not really a whole lot I can say about this film that the majority of you don't already know, and since this film has been mentioned many times in passing throughout these threads, it's a safe bet that many of you have seen it. If you haven't, well...what the hell are you waiting for? It'll cost you all of five bucks on Amazon, and after seeing this masterpiece you will NEVER look at a Stephen King novel the same way again. Easy **** out of ****. Joe Bob says check this one out. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 21, 2010 23:07:06 GMT -5
^ Could NOT agree more, TR. In the Mouth of Madness gets an easy ***** out of five from me, too. It's one of my favorite movies, and as you stated, it gets that honor due to the amazing performance of Neill. This guy...you know, some actors, they go for the easy roles (see Robert Downey Jr's diatribe in Tropic Thunder for a great, accurate rant on this) and the moment they play a retarded person, or a person dying slowly from a terminal disease, they net Oscars. Neill...he doesn't DO that....I don't think he's ever really gone for an EASY role in his life. He might make it LOOK easy, but his disappearing act is one that very few actors can really do as WELL as he does. Sam Neill really IS "the man", and as far as horror goes, whether it's this film, or Daybreakers, or Event Horizon, Neill appearing in it is a goddamn GOLD SEAL of quality as far as I'm concerned. At the very least, you know HE's bringing the goods.
That being said, a question for you or whomeever can answer it: Have you seen Takashi Miike's MPD: PSYCHO and if so, what in the blue blasted HELL is going on in that movie?!?!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2010 23:19:47 GMT -5
Damn, I really need to check out Daybreakers. Everybody around me are always talking about it.
EDIT: Couple programming notes for you.
AMC has another showing of the zombie 80's classic, The Return of the Living Dead on at 3:45 AM EST. You don't need to care that Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot remake of Psycho is on right now. 'Eff that movie.
And for those of you that can sprounge the extra money for pay cable, Cinemax will be premiering Sam Raimi's modern day classic, Drag Me To Hell tomorrow at 10 PM EST. (or if you have On Demand, like me...Cinemax On Demand has it up early, as with all their premieres) Yes, i'll call it a modern day classic. This movie is so much fun and actually is freakin' scary. Every horror writer/director/whatever, take notes from Raimi on how to do jump scares and overall horror the right way.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 22, 2010 7:18:00 GMT -5
^ Could NOT agree more, TR. In the Mouth of Madness gets an easy ***** out of five from me, too. It's one of my favorite movies, and as you stated, it gets that honor due to the amazing performance of Neill. This guy...you know, some actors, they go for the easy roles (see Robert Downey Jr's diatribe in Tropic Thunder for a great, accurate rant on this) and the moment they play a retarded person, or a person dying slowly from a terminal disease, they net Oscars. Neill...he doesn't DO that....I don't think he's ever really gone for an EASY role in his life. He might make it LOOK easy, but his disappearing act is one that very few actors can really do as WELL as he does. Sam Neill really IS "the man", and as far as horror goes, whether it's this film, or Daybreakers, or Event Horizon, Neill appearing in it is a goddamn GOLD SEAL of quality as far as I'm concerned. At the very least, you know HE's bringing the goods. That being said, a question for you or whomeever can answer it: Have you seen Takashi Miike's MPD: PSYCHO and if so, what in the blue blasted HELL is going on in that movie?!?! Which just makes me all the sadder that Happy Town has already gone down the tubes. Truth be told, the show is kind of hit-and-miss - it's essentially a poor man's Twin Peaks - but Neill makes it must-see TV. How can you not like a guy who says this to the hot-young-thing star of the show, after she tells him that he has all the girls in the boarding house he lives at swooning over him: "Well, it's the curse of being eternally dashing." MPD Psycho - it's been a few years since I've seen it, so my recollection is VERY spotty. I remember liking all of the episodes a great deal, however. Bar codes tattooed onto eyeballs? Babies being ripped from the womb? There is NO line that Miike won't cross. And for those of you that can sprounge the extra money for pay cable, Cinemax will be premiering Sam Raimi's modern day classic, Drag Me To Hell tomorrow at 10 PM EST. (or if you have On Demand, like me...Cinemax On Demand has it up early, as with all their premieres) Yes, i'll call it a modern day classic. This movie is so much fun and actually is freakin' scary. Every horror writer/director/whatever, take notes from Raimi on how to do jump scares and overall horror the right way. is indeed a quality film. And this is coming from somebody who didn't expect to like it AT ALL. My thoughts on the Evil Dead series are pretty well-known around here.  |
|
|
|
Post by YellowJacketY2J on May 22, 2010 14:41:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 22, 2010 16:36:46 GMT -5
Great review, and I think yours is more in line with the general consensus than mine was, in terms of what you liked and disliked about the film. It is true that the zombies aren't really played as a menace this time around, but rather an annoyance...however, I really liked that {Spoiler}in the final showdown, they played a decent role in that both sides were trying to kill each other, yet ALSO had to contend with the zombies to boot. Made things a bit more exciting, in my book. I dunno....like I said, I watched this with a group of friends, and we had a great time alternately marking out over some of the kills, and mocking the bad, cheesy dialogue. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 22, 2010 22:59:44 GMT -5
Dread Central's latest edition of it's Dinner For Fiends podcast, titled "A Nightmare on Poop St." brought something interesting to my attention the other day in regards to the NOES remake:
The Platinum Dunes remake had a budget that was equivalent to the first SIX original NOES installments COMBINED.
Ponder that for a minute.
Done? Now tell me if you saw a cent of that on the screen, because I sure didn't. This just chaps my ass even more learning that because as bad as the sequels were, as horrible as they seemed back then, every last ONE of those (save maybe for Part 2) at least utilized the tools at their disposal to make the most out of their micro-budgets.
In case you were wondering, I did the math and the DFF Factoid is true. IMDB lists NOES 2K10 as having a budget of $35 million. The breakdown of the original film and it's sequels is as follows:
NOES 84: $1.8 million
Part 2: $3 million
Part 3: $5 million
Part 4: $13 million
Part 5: $6 million
Part 6: $5 million.
That totals out to $33.8 million dollars. For that price tag, which is still two million less than the remake cost, we got 6 NOES films of varying quality, but films where every cent of their budget was up on the screen nonetheless. In the remake, it didn't even seem like they even TRIED to breathe life into Elm St., it's residents, Freddy, the Dream World.....anything. Given twenty years and the latest cutting edge technology...with a budget of the first SIX f*****g films combined, the best Platinum Dunes could give us was....Silent Hill? Seriously? I mean, NONE of the dream sequences had any sort of vividness or creativity to them at all! They did NOTHING with the tools at their disposal. If anything, this remake should have made the original look like the 1934 KING KONG in comparison. Things are possible today that would make the 84 original look absolutely ARCHAIC....and they didn't use a ONE of them. Instead, the 84 original comes off looking so vastly superior to THIS one that it makes you question who ought to be remaking who!
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 22, 2010 23:08:47 GMT -5
Dread Central's latest edition of it's Dinner For Fiends podcast, titled "A Nightmare on Poop St." brought something interesting to my attention the other day in regards to the NOES remake: The Platinum Dunes remake had a budget that was equivalent to the first SIX original NOES installments COMBINED. Ponder that for a minute. Done? Now tell me if you saw a cent of that on the screen, because I sure didn't. This just chaps my ass even more learning that because as bad as the sequels were, as horrible as they seemed back then, every last ONE of those (save maybe for Part 2) at least utilized the tools at their disposal to make the most out of their micro-budgets. In case you were wondering, I did the math and the DFF Factoid is true. IMDB lists NOES 2K10 as having a budget of $35 million. The breakdown of the original film and it's sequels is as follows: NOES 84: $1.8 million Part 2: $3 million Part 3: $5 million Part 4: $13 million Part 5: $6 million Part 6: $5 million. That totals out to $33.8 million dollars. For that price tag, which is still two million less than the remake cost, we got 6 NOES films of varying quality, but films where every cent of their budget was up on the screen nonetheless. In the remake, it didn't even seem like they even TRIED to breathe life into Elm St., it's residents, Freddy, the Dream World.....anything. Given twenty years and the latest cutting edge technology...with a budget of the first SIX f*****g films combined, the best Platinum Dunes could give us was.... Silent Hill? Seriously? I mean, NONE of the dream sequences had any sort of vividness or creativity to them at all! They did NOTHING with the tools at their disposal. If anything, this remake should have made the original look like the 1934 KING KONG in comparison. Things are possible today that would make the 84 original look absolutely ARCHAIC....and they didn't use a ONE of them. Instead, the 84 original comes off looking so vastly superior to THIS one that it makes you question who ought to be remaking who! Wow. I actually had NO CLUE that the budget was that high...judging by what was on the screen, I figured it was somewhere in the $15-$20 million range, but $35 million? For Christ's sakes... Freddy vs. Jason had a budget of about $25 million, and that movie looked WAY more epic than NOES 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 22, 2010 23:18:02 GMT -5
In case you were wondering, I did the math and the DFF Factoid is true. IMDB lists NOES 2K10 as having a budget of $35 million. The breakdown of the original film and it's sequels is as follows: NOES 84: $1.8 million Part 2: $3 million Part 3: $5 million Part 4: $13 million Part 5: $6 million Part 6: $5 million. That totals out to $33.8 million dollars. For that price tag, which is still two million less than the remake cost, we got 6 NOES films of varying quality, but films where every cent of their budget was up on the screen nonetheless. In the remake, it didn't even seem like they even TRIED to breathe life into Elm St., it's residents, Freddy, the Dream World.....anything. Given twenty years and the latest cutting edge technology...with a budget of the first SIX f*****g films combined, the best Platinum Dunes could give us was.... Silent Hill? Seriously? I mean, NONE of the dream sequences had any sort of vividness or creativity to them at all! They did NOTHING with the tools at their disposal. If anything, this remake should have made the original look like the 1934 KING KONG in comparison. Things are possible today that would make the 84 original look absolutely ARCHAIC....and they didn't use a ONE of them. Instead, the 84 original comes off looking so vastly superior to THIS one that it makes you question who ought to be remaking who! Although those numbers should probably be adjusted for inflation, point taken. I don't know where that budget went, because it clearly didn't go towards casting, and it certainly didn't go towards any CGI (with the worst offender being where Freddy comes through the bedroom wall - ouch!) |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on May 23, 2010 2:24:53 GMT -5
Even adjusted for inflation, it's still at least the first three movies....all of which (even Part 2) featured better material, and a more coherent narrative, not to mention better acting, and full use of the budget.
Bottom line is: For 1.8 million dollars in 1984, Wes Craven gave us a masterpiece....and for $35 million in 2010, Platinum Dunes couldn't even give us a COHERENT, COMPETENT MOVIE. Their hack director sucked, their actors sucked (I won't even CALL Rooney Mara's character "Nancy" as she was a disgrace to that role) and their story as they told it SUCKED, big time IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 23, 2010 4:33:39 GMT -5
For anyone who may have been curious, here are the budgets for the first 6 Elm Street films, inflation adjusted for 2010:
1: 3,776,864.29
2: 6,078,317.84
3: 9,595,466.55
4: 23,957,032.97
5: 10,548,822.58
6: 8,003,267.25
The grand total is just a hair under $62 million in 2010, but still, point taken - I doubt they would've improved upon the final result even with a $62 million budget.
As a matter of fact, when I have more time on my hands, I should try the same thing for the other PD reboots (Friday the 13th, TCM, Amityville, and so on). I'd be quite curious to see how those turned out...
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 23, 2010 8:31:34 GMT -5
Here's something that I just realized: there's one simple switch they could have made in the script that would have made the movie INFINITELY better, at least to this observer. {Spoiler}When I was in the theater watching the story unfold, the two characters that I liked the most - BY FAR - were TinaChris and Jesse. And while I disagree with most about Rooney Mara's ability as an actor, I am in DEFINITE agreement that this film's iteration of Nancy just sucked to high heaven. So here's what I'm thinking - just imagine if Strick's screenplay had thrown the ultimate curve ball to us, and had NANCY as the first victim, gutted and thrown about in her room within the film's first third, and leaving the former couple TinaChris and Jesse as the main protagonists left to wrap up the story. While I'm not going to say that it would be anywhere NEAR as effective, it would give the movie a little interesting romantic tension dynamic like the main characters of Ringu/The Ring, and, IMO, we'd have the most interesting characters to spend the vast majority of the film with. I don't think that making that switch would make the movie as good as the series at its best, but it probably would have bumped the movie up to a very solid *** out of **** from me, possibly more. As for those budget figures on the first six NOES movies, I wonder what their rationale was in dropping the budget after Part 4. After all, Dream Master was the most successful movie in the franchise. You'd think they would have given the following film MORE ammunition, not less. |
|
|
|
Post by mysterydriver on May 23, 2010 8:56:19 GMT -5
Little late to the thread, but amazing write-up on In the Mouth of Madness TR. Such an awesome movie with great talent on both sides of the camera. Neill was truly impressive in it. ~~~ I find it amusing how big a budget NOES 4 had considering that is where the series took a major comedic turn. Sure, the 3rd one was starting to lather on the jokes, but 4 is where it really took off. Oh, and I assume half the budget for NOES 2 was for the exploding bird. ~~~ On another note, I've been trying to watch Legion for about four days now. I start watching, something interrupts, and I just find other things to do instead of restarting it. Perhaps the... {Spoiler}...Cop getting possessed scene with head shaking CGI at the beginning followed by what sounds like the same possessed voice that has been used for decades... ...just has me at a blah feeling within 10 minutes of the movie. I'm sure I'll make it eventually. |
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on May 23, 2010 9:31:01 GMT -5
I actually had NO CLUE that the budget was that high...judging by what was on the screen, I figured it was somewhere in the $15-$20 million range, but $35 million? For Christ's sakes... Freddy vs. Jason had a budget of about $25 million, and that movie looked WAY more epic than NOES 2010. FvJ was filmed in locations in Canada, while NoES '10 was filmed in the USA. Right there is the reason why one is 10million cheaper, and generally why every other tv show/movie is filmed in Vancouver. |
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 23, 2010 9:34:11 GMT -5
Oh, and I assume half the budget for NOES 2 was for the exploding bird. That exploding bird is the most amusing thing about Freddy's Revenge. ;D Well, that and Jesse's dance while cleaning his room. That's...an interesting scene to watch in the company of others. As for Legion...f***, four days is about how long it takes me to watch ANY movie nowadays. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2010 13:37:43 GMT -5
Hell, at most it'll take me a couple days to finish a movie and that's most likely because I get extremely tired and don't want to wake up to a noisy DVD/Blu-Ray menu. F*** the bastards who decided to make DVD menus animated.  |
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 23, 2010 13:40:24 GMT -5
Hell, at most it'll take me a couple days to finish a movie and that's most likely because I get extremely tired and don't want to wake up to a noisy DVD/Blu-Ray menu. F*** the bastards who decided to make DVD menus animated. My daily routine: (1) Work from midnight until 8:00 a.m. (2) Surf the net for a couple hours (3) Eat approximately ten bucks' worth of fast food (4) Throw in horror DVD, feel eyes getting heavy after about 15 minutes. Repeat five days a week. As for that menu screen, I too thought that was an annoyance, but most players have the option to put it on "Title" repeat, which is what I do now. At least the same movie playing over and over while I sleep is better than that goddamn loud animated menu. |
|
