"Dark Shadows" movie clips

[David]

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/29/whole-set-of-clips-from-dark-shadows/

[Mason Barge]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 10:53:27 -0400, David <diml...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/29/whole-set-of-clips-from-dark-shadows/

Ew.

Johnny Depp has one schtick and it doesn't work here. This gives me the
creeps, all right. Just not for the reasons it's supposed to.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <j7qqp75u78ubaok7r...@4ax.com>,

I can't remember the last time a film looked this bad.

--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?

[Mason Barge]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 09:28:34 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

>In article <j7qqp75u78ubaok7r...@4ax.com>,
> Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 10:53:27 -0400, David <diml...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/29/whole-set-of-clips-from-dark-shadows/
>>
>> Ew.
>>
>> Johnny Depp has one schtick and it doesn't work here. This gives me the
>> creeps, all right. Just not for the reasons it's supposed to.
>
>I can't remember the last time a film looked this bad.

Oh, hell, there are movies that are a lot worse. The combination of Depp
acting all cutesy and Burton is just so damn irritating.

[Captain Infinity]

Once Upon A Time,
David wrote:

>http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/29/whole-set-of-clips-from-dark-shadows/

In that second clip, what does Carolyn say? "I'm pretty sure he....." ??


**
Captain Infinity

[Lynn McGuire]

On 4/29/2012 9:53 AM, David wrote:
> http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/29/whole-set-of-clips-from-dark-shadows/

I liked them !

Lynn

[Arthur Lipscomb]

Some movies are better suited for Depp and Burton than others. I'd be
far more interested in seeing The Raven if it was a Depp/Burton
collaboration instead of a Cusack/whoever movie.

[Tim]

Captain Infinity <Infi...@captaininfinity.us> wrote in
news:i87rp7h0snc4662mr...@4ax.com:

> Once Upon A Time,
> David wrote:
>
>>http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/29/whole-set-of-clips-from-dark-sha
>>dows/
>
> In that second clip, what does Carolyn say? "I'm pretty sure he....."
> ??

"... called me a hooker."

You know. The other creature of the night.

Tim

>
>
> **
> Captain Infinity
>



--
"That's the problem with goals. They become
the thing you talk about instead of the thing
you do."
~ Cherry Darling

[Diva Magenta]

>Johnny Depp has one schtick and it
> doesn't work here.

Have to disagree with this. I think one of Depp's biggest strengths is
that there really is no "typical" Depp role. He can do dark, he can do
comedy, he can do drama, he can do weird - all equally well. The
closest thing to an identifiable trend is that he's very good at playing
the off-kilter, oddball character, but even those are very different
from each other. I'd say Burton has far more of an obvious niche than
Depp does.

>I'd be far more interested in seeing The
> Raven if it was a Depp/Burton
> collaboration instead of a
> Cusack/whoever movie.

Ooooh yes, I can definitely see that working extremely well with them
collaborating on it!

Diva

--

DivaMagenta @}{~~>~~~>~~~>~~~~~

"Religion is man's futile attempt to reach out to God, trying to earn
His favor. Christianity is the good news that God has reached out in
love to us through His Son, because He knows that our arms are not long
enough..."

http://divamagenta.webbywarehouse.com

[ZZH...@yahoo.com]

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 15:49:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com>
wrote:

Let me put it this way: tomorrow is May 1st, the film opens in 11
days. I'm done with trailers, speculation on the film, and those fans
who are filled with dread about this film. I'll wait until I see the
entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the film.

I've seen enough trailers, reviews, interviews, film clips, etc. over
the years to know they tell you exactly zero, zip, nada about the film
itself. This could be the best movie of the last 50 years and the
trailers, reviews, interviews, film clips, etc. won't reflect that.

The trailers are made by an advertising department that
has no clue how to sell a movie, the studios also have no clue how
to selll a movie, the actors aren't there to sell the movie, they are
their to sell their own egos, the reviewers go in to a movie convinced
they are going to hate the movie, and the film clips have no
relevance to the final product. I guess after all these years
I am baffled at how a studio can be so incompetent at
selling a movie they're spent Millions of dollars to make.

When a movie opens that frirst weekend the object is
to make 85% of the gross that first week. Yet the studios
will go and spend $125 - $500 million on a movie but be
unable to figure out how to sell that movie to recoup their
investment.

And the shareholders/investors/TPTB let the studios
conitnue to imitate the captain of the Titanic as he
heads for the iceberg.

Note that this film is released by Warner Bros. who
never could figure out how to run a TV network, much
less a movie studio.

[Mike S.]

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:37:42 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:

>Let me put it this way: tomorrow is May 1st, the film opens in 11
>days. I'm done with trailers, speculation on the film, and those fans
>who are filled with dread about this film. I'll wait until I see the
>entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the film.

Good. I hope you take the time to review the movie here. Or at least,
tell us if that shit trailer's tone is accurate or not.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <3rktp7tku76tfq2vd...@4ax.com>,

The purpose of a trailer is to make the film look better than it is.

[ZZH...@yahoo.com]

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:42:13 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

Wrong. The purpose of a trailer is to tease the fiilmgoer and
persuade the film goer to plunk down $xx to go see the film
opening week.

Sadly many trailers fail in that respect.

[Mike S.]

On Tue, 01 May 2012 13:45:53 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:

>Wrong. The purpose of a trailer is to tease the fiilmgoer and
>persuade the film goer to plunk down $xx to go see the film
>opening week.

Yes.... by making the film look better then it really is. That is
exactly what a trailer is for. Its advertising. ALL advertising is
designed to make your product look better then it really is. This
isn't rocket science.

>Sadly many trailers fail in that respect.

They do? Not in my experience. Trailers are very good at making a shit
movie look good. That is pretty easy to do when you can show the best
scenes in two minutes with a good soundtrack playing in the
background.

This is why the DS trailer is so odd to me. It completely failed to
make me more interested in the movie.In fact, it had the exact
opposite effect. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie trailer
that was so effective at pushing me away from a movie I was interested
in.

[ZZH...@yahoo.com]

On Tue, 01 May 2012 14:53:29 -0400, Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 May 2012 13:45:53 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>Wrong. The purpose of a trailer is to tease the fiilmgoer and
>>persuade the film goer to plunk down $xx to go see the film
>>opening week.
>
>Yes.... by making the film look better then it really is.

In that respect every trailer fails big time.

>That is
>exactly what a trailer is for. Its advertising. ALL advertising is
>designed to make your product look better then it really is. This
>isn't rocket science.

And every trailer is bad advertising. I can't think of a trailer
that was done well.

>
>>Sadly many trailers fail in that respect.
>
>They do? Not in my experience. Trailers are very good at making a shit
>movie look good.

Except when you see the movie it's still a crappy movie.

> That is pretty easy to do when you can show the best
>scenes in two minutes with a good soundtrack playing in the
>background.

Except that when you see the movie it's still a crappy movie.
No trailer can overcome that problem.

>This is why the DS trailer is so odd to me. It completely failed to
>make me more interested in the movie.In fact, it had the exact
>opposite effect. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie trailer
>that was so effective at pushing me away from a movie I was interested
>in.

The trailer was probably made by some 18 year old adviertising monkey
who 1. never Dark Shadows in incarnation. 2. wouldn't know a good
vampire movie if he tripped over it on the sidewak. 3. wouldn't know
Jonathan Frid/or other original cast members if they bumped into him
on the street.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <0kj0q7h8u94p8dmkl...@4ax.com>,

I think more likely the trailer is an accurate representation of the
film.

[Mason Barge]

On Tue, 01 May 2012 14:53:29 -0400, Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 May 2012 13:45:53 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>Wrong. The purpose of a trailer is to tease the fiilmgoer and
>>persuade the film goer to plunk down $xx to go see the film
>>opening week.
>
>Yes.... by making the film look better then it really is. That is
>exactly what a trailer is for. Its advertising. ALL advertising is
>designed to make your product look better then it really is. This
>isn't rocket science.

The best example I can think of is Couples Retreat. Looked really really
funny in the trailer, but it was one of those comedy trailers that
contains every single decent joke in the movie.

>>Sadly many trailers fail in that respect.
>
>They do? Not in my experience.

I think they fail miserably sometimes. There are a lot of movies I have
decided not to go to after seeing the trailers, but enjoy when I do go
after a friend or review convinces me to.

>
>This is why the DS trailer is so odd to me. It completely failed to
>make me more interested in the movie.In fact, it had the exact
>opposite effect. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie trailer
>that was so effective at pushing me away from a movie I was interested
>in.

You are neglecting the fact that the trailer still might make the movie

[William December Starr]

In article <nsb0q752vf3h4nqmm...@4ax.com>,

Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> said:

> This is why the DS trailer is so odd to me. It completely failed
> to make me more interested in the movie.In fact, it had the exact
> opposite effect. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie
> trailer that was so effective at pushing me away from a movie I
> was interested in.

"The Spirit" (2008), maybe? I don't think I saw any theatrical
trailers for it, but I remember being amazed at how underwhelming
the tv ads for it were.

-- wds

[Mike S.]

On Tue, 01 May 2012 17:06:01 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:

>And every trailer is bad advertising. I can't think of a trailer
>that was done well.

<<shrug>> Any trailer that made me interested, or more interested
then I previously was done well enough for me.

>Except that when you see the movie it's still a crappy movie.
>No trailer can overcome that problem.

Yes... good trailers just means they get you interested in the movie.
I've seen plenty of good trailers for movies that turned out lousy. I
think we all have.

[Mike S.]

On Tue, 01 May 2012 18:13:38 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>You are neglecting the fact that the trailer still might make the movie
>look better than it is.

The trailer didn't make the movie look good to me.

[Wiseguy]

ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote in news:k680q7ds14ube74ij...@4ax.com:

Many films don't have enough good scenes to fill a trailer.

[Wiseguy]

Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:nsb0q752vf3h4nqmm...@4ax.com:

Because having knowledge and being a fan of the original you have a
preconceived opinion of what the movie should be like.

If you had never heard of the original you might have a different opinion
of the trailer...and the movie.

[EGK]

That pretty much goes without saying. Those who are familiar with the
material and liked it, most likely wanted a more serious adaptation than
this looks like. This looks like Hollywood's typical campy take on the
material

[Mike S.]

On Wed, 02 May 2012 04:51:04 GMT, Wiseguy <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Because having knowledge and being a fan of the original you have a
>preconceived opinion of what the movie should be like.

In this particular case, what it shouldn't be, would be closer to the
truth. But yes, I don't disagree with you.

>If you had never heard of the original you might have a different opinion
>of the trailer...and the movie.

Probably. Maybe even definitely. But that is neither here nor there. I
have seen the original. My thoughts and opinions can only come from
the perspective of a fan now.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <l2g1q7d0gkbng66oc...@4ax.com>,

I talked to a friend today who's never seen the show, and his reaction
to the trailers was "What the f*ck is this sh*t?"

[Wiseguy]

anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote in
news:anim8rfsk-DA43A...@news.easynews.com:

Judging from his language, he's not that bright.

[Wiseguy]

EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote in
news:uof1q7tu6274uajg1...@4ax.com:

It's been done (1967, 1970, 1991, even 2004)

How many times can you do the same story the same way?

[EGK]

Why do it at all? Hollywood will do it as many times as they think they can
squeeze a dime out of it. If you're right, why call it Dark Shadows? Just
do a campy take on the vampire legends. That's been done over and over too.

[Kishin]

I know quite a few bright people who use language like that. My wife is
a journalism professor at a university, and she curses quite a lot.
Sometimes in inappropriate situations. Intelligence does not correlate
with use of profanity.

--

Kishin

[Marcovaldo]

On Sunday, April 29, 2012 11:37:42 PM UTC-7, (unknown) wrote:
> I'll wait until I see the
> entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the film.

Me too. Aleit with low expectations.

> The trailers are made by an advertising department that

> has no clue how to sell a movie... I guess after all these years

> I am baffled at how a studio can be so incompetent at

> selling a movie ...

Well, somebody must be good at selling a movie. How else to explain the popularity of Adam Sandler?

[anim8rFSK]

In article <jnrima$oh2$2...@dont-email.me>, Kishin <no...@yobizz.ness>
wrote:

Besides which, it's a standard phrase. And, he's right!

[Diva Magenta]

>Well, somebody must be good at selling
> a movie. How else to explain the
> popularity of Adam Sandler?

Heh! I'm not sure it's about selling a movie as much as the fact that
there's actually an audience that enjoys and seeks out movies with that
type of <airquotes> humor </airquotes>

The one exception, for me, was The Wedding Singer. I absolutely adored
that movie, and I couldn't help but wonder who this guy was, this guy
who was so genuinely funny and sweet and warm and likeable and charming.
It certainly wasn't the same obnoxious Adam Sandler I usually loathed
beyond all loathing.

[Mason Barge]

Yes and no. Intelligent people curse rarely and with great effect.

Then you get the opposite extreme, basically your Jersey guido, where
everything in the world is "this shit" and "fuck" belongs in every
sentence.

[Marcovaldo]

On Wednesday, May 2, 2012 10:46:04 AM UTC-7, Diva Magenta wrote:

>
> Heh! I'm not sure it's about selling a movie as much as the fact that
> there's actually an audience that enjoys and seeks out movies with that
> type of <airquotes> humor </airquotes>
>
> The one exception, for me, was The Wedding Singer. I absolutely adored
> that movie, and I couldn't help but wonder who this guy was, this guy
> who was so genuinely funny and sweet and warm and likeable and charming.
> It certainly wasn't the same obnoxious Adam Sandler I usually loathed
> beyond all loathing.

Speaking of trailers, I have trouble sitting through a trailer of an Adam Sandler movie, much less the movie itself. I did see "Just Go with It" and it had its moments, mainly due to Jennifer Anniston and Nicole Kidman, and in spite of Sandler and (ugh) Nick Swardson.

[Dimensional Traveler]

Johnny Depp channeling Keith Richards some more, from what I can tell.

[Captain Infinity]

Once Upon A Time,

anim8rFSK wrote:

>I talked to a friend today who's never seen the show, and his reaction
>to the trailers was "What the f*ck is this sh*t?"

How does he pronounce those asterisks?


**
Captain Infinity

[suzeeq]

With vowels.

[Kishin]

Is he having a vowel movement?

--

Kishin

[Dragon Lady]

"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:anim8rfsk-B1FE1...@news.easynews.com...
> In article <3rktp7tku76tfq2vd...@4ax.com>,

> Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:37:42 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >Let me put it this way: tomorrow is May 1st, the film opens in 11
>> >days. I'm done with trailers, speculation on the film, and those fans

>> >who are filled with dread about this film. I'll wait until I see the

>> >entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the film.
>>

>> Good. I hope you take the time to review the movie here. Or at least,
>> tell us if that shit trailer's tone is accurate or not.
>
> The purpose of a trailer is to make the film look better than it is.

If so, then either the makers of the trailer have spectacularly failed, or
the film is going to be spectacularly bad.

Personally, I'm looking at it as a caricature of the original show, because
it's only resemblence to the original show lies in the names of the
characters and reason for the curse being put on Barnabas.

[Dragon Lady]

"Mike S." <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:lc81q7t6h7gme1o1s...@4ax.com...

He didn't say it made the movie look good. He said it might still make it
look better than it is - which is kind of scary when I think about it....

[Dragon Lady]

"EGK" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:uof1q7tu6274uajg1...@4ax.com...

I agree. This is Dark Shadows done in the style of "The Munsters".

[anim8rFSK]

In article <jnvlah$ekl$1...@dont-email.me>,

"Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net> wrote:

> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:anim8rfsk-B1FE1...@news.easynews.com...
> > In article <3rktp7tku76tfq2vd...@4ax.com>,
> > Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:37:42 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >Let me put it this way: tomorrow is May 1st, the film opens in 11
> >> >days. I'm done with trailers, speculation on the film, and those fans
> >> >who are filled with dread about this film. I'll wait until I see the
> >> >entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the film.
> >>
> >> Good. I hope you take the time to review the movie here. Or at least,
> >> tell us if that shit trailer's tone is accurate or not.
> >
> > The purpose of a trailer is to make the film look better than it is.
>
> If so, then either the makers of the trailer have spectacularly failed, or
> the film is going to be spectacularly bad.

Or both.

>
> Personally, I'm looking at it as a caricature of the original show, because
> it's only resemblence to the original show lies in the names of the
> characters and reason for the curse being put on Barnabas.

I think it's more of a deliberate insult to fans of the original -
laughing at them, not with them.

[Wiseguy]

anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote in
news:anim8rfsk-5232A...@news.easynews.com:

The movie is made for modern audiences not for those of the age of
original fans of the series.

[Kishin]

The movie may, indeed, be terrible, but I think it's going a bit far to
believe that Burton set out to insult fans. Why would he do that? I
think it more likely he made the movie that he and Depp saw in their
heads, without regards to the fans at all, and perhaps some thought
about what might appeal to modern audiences. Don't forget, we live in an
age when TV shows like "Jersey Shore" are popular, and "Bevis and
Butthead" no longer look so stupid.

--

Kishin

[Kishin]

Wow, you're the first I've head make that comparison. And it's a very
apt one. Bravo! You know they're remaking "The Munsters," don't you?
Bryan Singer is making a nighttime drama series out of it, kind of
turning your point on its head. I love the original series when I was a
kid, and have enjoyed re-runs as an adult. I'm not much more sure about
doing it as a dramedy than I am about doing DS that way. Perhaps the
trend now is to remake old properties but in the exact opposite style.

Coming soon: "Bewitched" as a horror movie. "Old Yeller" as a teen comedy.

--

Kishin

[Mike S.]

On Thu, 3 May 2012 22:21:33 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>He didn't say it made the movie look good. He said it might still make it
>look better than it is - which is kind of scary when I think about it....

That is scary but I doubt the trailer did that. The trailer was awful.
Really bad. My opinion of the movie has nowhere to go but up. I would
be very surprised if my reaction to the movie was worse then the
trailer.

[Mike S.]

On Thu, 3 May 2012 22:22:40 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>I agree. This is Dark Shadows done in the style of "The Munsters".

I always thought of it as Dark Shadows done in the style of another
Tim Burton film, BeetleJuice, but I like your comparison better.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <bvm7q71o9drd34bne...@4ax.com>,

Prepare to be badly surprised.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <jo0jdo$3ub$1...@dont-email.me>, Kishin <no...@yobizz.ness>
wrote:

> Coming soon: "Bewitched" as a horror movie.

The Will Ferret version pretty much qualifies; Samantha just murdered
(horribly) anybody she didn't like, and it certainly wasn't a comedy.

[Marcovaldo]

On Friday, May 4, 2012 5:48:12 AM UTC-7, Kishin wrote:
Don't forget, we live in an
> age when TV shows like "Jersey Shore" are popular, and "Bevis and
> Butthead" no longer look so stupid.

(Sigh) sad but true.

[Kishin]

anim8rFSK wrote:
> In article<jo0jdo$3ub$1...@dont-email.me>, Kishin<no...@yobizz.ness>
> wrote:
>
>> Coming soon: "Bewitched" as a horror movie.
>
> The Will Ferret version pretty much qualifies; Samantha just murdered
> (horribly) anybody she didn't like, and it certainly wasn't a comedy.

Seriously? I've never seen it. Maybe I need to. I loved the original
show, but this sounded like it bore little relation, so I never bothered.

--

Kishin

[Marcovaldo]

On Friday, May 4, 2012 5:52:07 AM UTC-7, Kishin wrote:

>
> Wow, you're the first I've head make that comparison. And it's a very
> apt one. Bravo! You know they're remaking "The Munsters," don't you?
> Bryan Singer is making a nighttime drama series out of it

!!!!!!! Seriously?????

I liked the TV show. Fred Gwynne and Al Lewis were hoots.

[Diva Magenta]

>I think it's more of a deliberate insult to
> fans of the original - laughing at them,
> not with them.


>The movie may, indeed, be terrible, but I
> think it's going a bit far to believe that
> Burton set out to insult fans. Why would
> he do that?

He wouldn't, because since he and Depp are both openly avowed fans, they
would ultimately be insulting themselves.

Whether or not their vision for the film pleases everyone, it was most
certainly not meant to degrade or make mockery of the original. There
may be some affectionate ribbing, but we've all done that, right here in
this newsgroup - laughing over flubbed lines, cheesy "special effects,"
or certain storylines (*cough* leviathans *cough*).

But that doesn't lessen our love for the show one bit. If anything, it
endears it to us even more, warts and all. And I'd wager that's just
how Depp and Burton feel as well.

[Diva Magenta]

>Coming soon: "Bewitched" as a horror
> movie. "Old Yeller" as a teen comedy.

Well... just remember that "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" started off as a
movie comedy, a far cry from the dark, serious, angst-ridden TV series
that followed.

[Mason Barge]

On Fri, 04 May 2012 09:47:38 -0400, Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 3 May 2012 22:21:33 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
>wrote:
>
>>He didn't say it made the movie look good. He said it might still make it
>>look better than it is - which is kind of scary when I think about it....
>
>That is scary but I doubt the trailer did that. The trailer was awful.
>Really bad. My opinion of the movie has nowhere to go but up.

Wanna' bet?

[Mason Barge]

On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:03:41 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

>In article <l2g1q7d0gkbng66oc...@4ax.com>,

> Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 02 May 2012 04:51:04 GMT, Wiseguy <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Because having knowledge and being a fan of the original you have a
>> >preconceived opinion of what the movie should be like.
>>

>> In this particular case, what it shouldn't be, would be closer to the
>> truth. But yes, I don't disagree with you.
>>

>> >If you had never heard of the original you might have a different opinion
>> >of the trailer...and the movie.
>>

>> Probably. Maybe even definitely. But that is neither here nor there. I
>> have seen the original. My thoughts and opinions can only come from
>> the perspective of a fan now.
>

>I talked to a friend today who's never seen the show, and his reaction
>to the trailers was "What the f*ck is this sh*t?"

I was talking to a friend and his reaction was almost the same, only I
think he said "What the *uck is this s*it?"

[Mason Barge]

On Wed, 02 May 2012 04:51:04 GMT, Wiseguy <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote in
>news:nsb0q752vf3h4nqmm...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Tue, 01 May 2012 13:45:53 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>Wrong. The purpose of a trailer is to tease the fiilmgoer and
>>>persuade the film goer to plunk down $xx to go see the film
>>>opening week.
>>
>> Yes.... by making the film look better then it really is. That is
>> exactly what a trailer is for. Its advertising. ALL advertising is
>> designed to make your product look better then it really is. This
>> isn't rocket science.
>>
>>>Sadly many trailers fail in that respect.
>>
>> They do? Not in my experience. Trailers are very good at making a shit
>> movie look good. That is pretty easy to do when you can show the best
>> scenes in two minutes with a good soundtrack playing in the
>> background.
>>
>> This is why the DS trailer is so odd to me. It completely failed to
>> make me more interested in the movie.In fact, it had the exact
>> opposite effect. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie trailer
>> that was so effective at pushing me away from a movie I was interested
>> in.
>

>Because having knowledge and being a fan of the original you have a
>preconceived opinion of what the movie should be like.
>

>If you had never heard of the original you might have a different opinion
>of the trailer...and the movie.

Okay, maybe so and maybe not. But I never watched the original, and the
trailer for the movie makes me need to go potty.

[Mason Barge]

Huh, I was just going to mention BeetleJuice, as well, and I didn't even
remember it was a Burton effort. I think it's all the people sitting at
the dinner table.

DAAAAAAAAAAY-O!

[A1...@gmail.com]

You do realize there was a Bewitched movie a few years back?
And there was a Munsters TV series (in the 90s?)

[N...@gmail.com]

On Fri, 4 May 2012 10:06:37 -0700, DivaM...@webtv.net (Diva
Magenta) wrote:

>>Coming soon: "Bewitched" as a horror
>> movie. "Old Yeller" as a teen comedy.
>
>Well... just remember that "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" started off as a
>movie comedy, a far cry from the dark, serious, angst-ridden TV series
>that followed.

And to be fair Joss Whedon was not happy with what the studio did to
the orignal. His vision was for the movie to be like the series.

>
>
>Diva

[anim8rFSK]

In article <jo11u1$uf6$1...@dont-email.me>, Kishin <no...@yobizz.ness>
wrote:

It's one of the least funny movies I've ever seen. Sam has a crush on
Will Ferret, and his old girlfriend comes to visit the movie set, so she
twitches and drops an enormous lighting grid on the GF, killing her
dead. Then somebody talks her into undoing it, so she twitches again,
and they put REWIND across the reversed footage and ... dear God it's
awful.

Yes, it bears no relation to the original. It's about making a movie
based on the old TV show, and a real witch is cast, and wackiness ...
well, attempted wackiness ... ensues.

[Kishin]

http://tvline.com/2012/02/02/nbc-mockingbird-lane-pilot/

--

Kishin

[Kishin]

"The Munsters Today" is what you're referencing, I believe. But it was
still a comedy. And I thought the movie version of "Bewitched" was a
comedy, as it was apparently supposed to be.

--

Kishin

[Diva Magenta]

>And to be fair Joss Whedon was not
> happy with what the studio did to the
> orignal.   His vision was for the movie to
> be like the series.

I remember enjoying the movie quite a bit. It had a great dark sense of
humor about the figurative - and literal - horrors of high school life,
not unlike Heathers, albeit not quite *that* dark.:) It was fun. Saw
the series a few times, it was good, but never got into it that much.

[Marcovaldo]

Thanks. Since it will be on a major broadcast network, it will probably last about 4 weeks.

I really liked Pushing Daisies, but I was clearly in the minority.

[ZZH...@yahoo.com]

On Fri, 4 May 2012 14:33:18 -0700, DivaM...@webtv.net (Diva
Magenta) wrote:

>>And to be fair Joss Whedon was not
>> happy with what the studio did to the
>> orignal.   His vision was for the movie to
>> be like the series.
>
>I remember enjoying the movie quite a bit. It had a great dark sense of
>humor about the figurative - and literal - horrors of high school life,
>not unlike Heathers, albeit not quite *that* dark.:) It was fun. Saw
>the series a few times, it was good, but never got into it that much.
>
>Diva
>

I loved the series, eseciially Once More With Feeling (the uncut
musical episode.)

[A1...@gmail.com]

Of course when it comes to comedy both missed the mark by a thousand
miles. I don't laugh once at either.

[Kishin]

Me, as well, though the movie didn't do much for me. The episode where
Buffy's mother

SPOILER FOR BUFFY!












dies is one of the finest hours of TV I have ever seen.

--

Kishin

[Dragon Lady]

"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message

news:anim8rfsk-5232A...@news.easynews.com...

> In article <jnvlah$ekl$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:anim8rfsk-B1FE1...@news.easynews.com...
>> > In article <3rktp7tku76tfq2vd...@4ax.com>,

>> > Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:37:42 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Let me put it this way: tomorrow is May 1st, the film opens in 11
>> >> >days. I'm done with trailers, speculation on the film, and those
>> >> >fans
>> >> >who are filled with dread about this film. I'll wait until I see the
>> >> >entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the film.
>> >>
>> >> Good. I hope you take the time to review the movie here. Or at least,
>> >> tell us if that shit trailer's tone is accurate or not.
>> >
>> > The purpose of a trailer is to make the film look better than it is.
>>
>> If so, then either the makers of the trailer have spectacularly failed,
>> or
>> the film is going to be spectacularly bad.
>
> Or both.
>>
>> Personally, I'm looking at it as a caricature of the original show,
>> because
>> it's only resemblence to the original show lies in the names of the
>> characters and reason for the curse being put on Barnabas.
>

> I think it's more of a deliberate insult to fans of the original -
> laughing at them, not with them.

Entirely possible. But I don't really care. It's not a movie I'll go see
in the theater, and if I see it at all, I'll get it from the library, which
means they won't see a cent of my money. I don't have money to waste on
good films, why would I waste any on one I'm not even sure I'll like?

[Dragon Lady]

"Wiseguy" <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:XnsA0494DCFAE99...@69.16.185.252...
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote in
> news:anim8rfsk-5232A...@news.easynews.com:

>
>> In article <jnvlah$ekl$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>> news:anim8rfsk-B1FE1...@news.easynews.com...
>>> > In article <3rktp7tku76tfq2vd...@4ax.com>,
>>> > Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:37:42 -0400, ZZH...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >Let me put it this way: tomorrow is May 1st, the film opens in 11
>>> >> >days. I'm done with trailers, speculation on the film, and those
>>> >> >fans who are filled with dread about this film. I'll wait until
>>> >> >I see the entire film in 11 days to decide what I think of the
>>> >> >film.
>>> >>
>>> >> Good. I hope you take the time to review the movie here. Or at
>>> >> least, tell us if that shit trailer's tone is accurate or not.
>>> >
>>> > The purpose of a trailer is to make the film look better than it
>>> > is.
>>>
>>> If so, then either the makers of the trailer have spectacularly
>>> failed, or the film is going to be spectacularly bad.
>>
>> Or both.
>>>
>>> Personally, I'm looking at it as a caricature of the original show,
>>> because it's only resemblence to the original show lies in the names
>>> of the characters and reason for the curse being put on Barnabas.
>>
>> I think it's more of a deliberate insult to fans of the original -
>> laughing at them, not with them.
>>
>

> The movie is made for modern audiences not for those of the age of
> original fans of the series.

Which still doesn't explain the clown makeup.

[Dragon Lady]

"Kishin" <no...@yobizz.ness> wrote in message
news:jo0j6d$2b9$1...@dont-email.me...

> The movie may, indeed, be terrible, but I think it's going a bit far to

> believe that Burton set out to insult fans. Why would he do that? I think
> it more likely he made the movie that he and Depp saw in their heads,
> without regards to the fans at all, and perhaps some thought about what
> might appeal to modern audiences. Don't forget, we live in an age when TV

> shows like "Jersey Shore" are popular, and "Bevis and Butthead" no longer
> look so stupid.

Oh, please. Do you know what I hate about these modern so-called cartoons?
They aren't funny, and the characters, if they were real people, would be
too stupid to live! Every one of them qualifies for the Darwin awards!

[Dragon Lady]

"Kishin" <no...@yobizz.ness> wrote in message

news:jo0jdo$3ub$1...@dont-email.me...

> Dragon Lady wrote:
>>> That pretty much goes without saying. Those who are familiar with the
>>> material and liked it, most likely wanted a more serious adaptation than
>>> this looks like. This looks like Hollywood's typical campy take on the
>>> material
>>
>> I agree. This is Dark Shadows done in the style of "The Munsters".
>
> Wow, you're the first I've head make that comparison. And it's a very apt
> one. Bravo! You know they're remaking "The Munsters," don't you? Bryan
> Singer is making a nighttime drama series out of it, kind of turning your
> point on its head. I love the original series when I was a kid, and have
> enjoyed re-runs as an adult. I'm not much more sure about doing it as a
> dramedy than I am about doing DS that way. Perhaps the trend now is to
> remake old properties but in the exact opposite style.

Yeah, I'd heard they were remaking "The Munsters". Don't know how it'll
work as a dramedy as opposed to a comedy, but a lot will depend on the
writing. I suspect you're right about the current trend, which is a shame,
as it means the old fans of said series are bound to be disappointed.

>
> Coming soon: "Bewitched" as a horror movie. "Old Yeller" as a teen comedy.

God, I hope not!

[Dragon Lady]

"Mike S." <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:bvm7q71o9drd34bne...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 3 May 2012 22:21:33 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>He didn't say it made the movie look good. He said it might still make it
>>look better than it is - which is kind of scary when I think about it....
>
> That is scary but I doubt the trailer did that. The trailer was awful.

> Really bad. My opinion of the movie has nowhere to go but up. I would
> be very surprised if my reaction to the movie was worse then the
> trailer.

Heh, you make a good point, but I still won't see it in the theater. I'm
not sure even good reviews could change my mind at this point.

[Dragon Lady]

"Mike S." <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:1mn7q79193uoq5rsf...@4ax.com...

> On Thu, 3 May 2012 22:22:40 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>I agree. This is Dark Shadows done in the style of "The Munsters".
>

> I always thought of it as Dark Shadows done in the style of another
> Tim Burton film, BeetleJuice, but I like your comparison better.

It does seem to have some things in common with BeetleJuice, doesn't it? I
hadn't even thought about that - haven't seen that movie in years. It still
makes me think more of "The Munsters" though. I think it's the pancake
makeup they put on Barnabas.

[Wiseguy]

"Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net> wrote in news:jo73vo$nll$1@dont-
email.me:

Probably because I wasn't referring to makeup.

[Dragon Lady]

"Wiseguy" <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:XnsA04BC8635E88...@69.16.185.252...

So?

[Wiseguy]

"Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net> wrote in news:jo77ec$7b9$1@dont-

You're the one who brought up the makeup.

[Kishin]

Depp (especially when combined with Burton) is known for his extreme
makeups. Have you seen his Tonto? Mad Hatter? Willy Wonka? Edward
Scissorhands? Capt. Jack Sparrow?

--

Kishin

[Mike S.]

On Sun, 6 May 2012 18:19:36 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
wrote:

>It does seem to have some things in common with BeetleJuice, doesn't it? I
>hadn't even thought about that - haven't seen that movie in years. It still
>makes me think more of "The Munsters" though. I think it's the pancake
>makeup they put on Barnabas.

Heh, the makeup was one of the reasons I thought of BeetleJuice. Check
this out. -->

http://screencrush.com/dont-worry-that-beetlejuice-remake-is-really-a-sequel/

and then this -->

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/309282/20120305/johnny-depp-barnabas-collins-dark-shadows-photos.htm

Apparently, a white face and black around the eyes is what *all*
living dead should look like according to Tim Burton.

[Your Name]

In article <n8neq757mi1t0h56i...@4ax.com>, Mike S.

<Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> Apparently, a white face and black around the eyes is what *all*
> living dead should look like according to Tim Burton.

That also explains his attraction to his wife. ;-)

[anim8rFSK]

In article <n8neq757mi1t0h56i...@4ax.com>,
Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:

Have you see Depp as Tonto in The Lone Ranger?

http://latimesherocomplex.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/lone-ranger-johnny-
depp-armie-hammer.jpg

That stupid Kabuki whiteface might be more Depp's idea than Burton's.

Either way, there are two movies I wouldn't watch with your eyes.

[Mike S.]

On Mon, 07 May 2012 01:30:57 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

>Have you see Depp as Tonto in The Lone Ranger?
>
>http://latimesherocomplex.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/lone-ranger-johnny-
>depp-armie-hammer.jpg
>
>That stupid Kabuki whiteface might be more Depp's idea than Burton's.
>
>Either way, there are two movies I wouldn't watch with your eyes.

Haha.. I had not seen that until just now. Thanks for sharing.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <srjfq7honv9bnnemq...@4ax.com>,

Sure. ;)

Whatever happened to the P.C. crowed screaming when a white man played a
'person of color' anyway?

[Dragon Lady]

"Wiseguy" <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:XnsA04BE8BC219A...@69.16.185.252...

So?

[Dragon Lady]

"Kishin" <no...@yobizz.ness> wrote in message

news:jo7k5c$phc$1...@dont-email.me...

I don't recall Capt. Jack Sparrow wearing so much makeup he looked
ridiculous. Edward Scissorhands was supposed to look that way - the part
called for it. The others I've never seen. Besides, I seriously doubt that
Depp does his own makeup. :P

[Dragon Lady]

"Mike S." <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote in message

news:n8neq757mi1t0h56i...@4ax.com...

Then he's an idiot. The only "living dead" who look like skulls are animated
skeletons. The man needs to get a clue, though I'm not sure he'd know one
if it hit him in the skull. :P

[Dragon Lady]

"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message

news:anim8rfsk-B81C1...@news.easynews.com...

> In article <n8neq757mi1t0h56i...@4ax.com>,
> Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 6 May 2012 18:19:36 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >It does seem to have some things in common with BeetleJuice, doesn't it?
>> >I
>> >hadn't even thought about that - haven't seen that movie in years. It
>> >still
>> >makes me think more of "The Munsters" though. I think it's the pancake
>> >makeup they put on Barnabas.
>>
>> Heh, the makeup was one of the reasons I thought of BeetleJuice. Check
>> this out. -->
>>
>> http://screencrush.com/dont-worry-that-beetlejuice-remake-is-really-a-sequel/
>>
>> and then this -->
>>
>> http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/309282/20120305/johnny-depp-barnabas-collins-d
>> ark-shadows-photos.htm
>>
>> Apparently, a white face and black around the eyes is what *all*
>> living dead should look like according to Tim Burton.
>
> Have you see Depp as Tonto in The Lone Ranger?
>
> http://latimesherocomplex.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/lone-ranger-johnny-
> depp-armie-hammer.jpg

Oh my God! What tribe wears bats on thier heads????

>
> That stupid Kabuki whiteface might be more Depp's idea than Burton's.
>
> Either way, there are two movies I wouldn't watch with your eyes.

You really think Depp dictates his own makeup? After all, Burton is known
for extreme makeup too, and their are distinct similarities to some of his
other stuff.

[Dragon Lady]

"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message

news:anim8rfsk-8EFB7...@news.easynews.com...

Could they have gotten any self-respecting "person of color" to dress up
like that?

[7...@gmail.com]

On Mon, 07 May 2012 01:40:45 -0400, Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Apparently, a white face and black around the eyes is what *all*
>living dead should look like according to Tim Burton.

Never mind that for the many years Barnabas was in the coffin he was
dead.

[Mason Barge]

On Fri, 04 May 2012 09:47:38 -0400, Mike S. <Mi...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 3 May 2012 22:21:33 -0600, "Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net>
>wrote:
>

>>He didn't say it made the movie look good. He said it might still make it
>>look better than it is - which is kind of scary when I think about it....
>
>That is scary but I doubt the trailer did that. The trailer was awful.
>Really bad. My opinion of the movie has nowhere to go but up. I would
>be very surprised if my reaction to the movie was worse then the
>trailer.

Do you drink urine because it tastes better than feces?

[Dano]

"Mason Barge" wrote in message
news:ce6gq7t3dcjrhe8ks...@4ax.com...

====================================

Well in fairness...you need SOMETHING to wash it down with I suppose.

Kind of like the relation of Jersey Shores to Dance Moms right?

[Diva Magenta]

>Apparently, a white face and black
> around the eyes is what *all* living dead
> should look like according to Tim
> Burton.


>That also explains his attraction to his
> wife.   ;-)

LOL!

If and when he does finally do that Beetlejuice sequel (fingers
crossed!), I can totally picture Burton casting HBC as the mother of
Lydia, Winona Ryder's character (Delia was her stepmother). The look,
the hair, the goth vibe - what a perfect fit that would be! HBC is
only about 5 years older than Ryder, but she can play older well, and
Ryder always seems to look young. .I don't recall if it was mentioned
whether Charles, Lydia's father, was widowed or divorced. But hey,
alive or ghost, either way would work in a movie like this! :)

And they need a scene where Adam is sitting in the otherworld waiting
room for an appointment, and gets in trouble for not hearing his name
being called because he's absorbed in playing Dead Friends With Words on
his phone <g>

Diva

--

DivaMagenta @}{~~>~~~>~~~>~~~~~

"Religion is man's futile attempt to reach out to God, trying to earn
His favor. Christianity is the good news that God has reached out in
love to us through His Son, because He knows that our arms are not long
enough..."

http://divamagenta.webbywarehouse.com

[Mike S.]

On Mon, 07 May 2012 14:52:15 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Do you drink urine because it tastes better than feces?

Look. Dark Shadows will probably not get this kind of attention again
in my lifetime or yours.. It wouldn't be the first time I sat through
a bad movie. It *would* be the first time I paid to see a bad movie in
the theater though. So its just wait and see at this point for me. If
the movie is as bad as that trailer made it look to be, then I will
watch it for free in six to twelve months instead. <<shrug>>

[Kishin]

I'd rather a more full-blooded native American, myself, but Depp does
have some native roots:

'Depp has surmised that he is part Native American, saying in 2011, "I
guess I have some Native American [in me] somewhere down the line. My
great-grandmother was quite a bit of Native American, she grew up
Cherokee or maybe Creek Indian. Makes sense in terms of coming from
Kentucky, which is rife with Cherokee and Creek."'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Depp

--

Kishin

[Mason Barge]

What absolute horseshit. There was a period when being part Native
American was a huge rage in Hollywood, and all kinds of people starting
claiming vague roots of some sort.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <jo8vup$3b6$1...@dont-email.me>,

All sorts of claims are being made that that's 'authentic' - I don't
care if it's authentic or not, it just looks stupid.

>
> >
> > That stupid Kabuki whiteface might be more Depp's idea than Burton's.
> >
> > Either way, there are two movies I wouldn't watch with your eyes.
>
> You really think Depp dictates his own makeup? After all, Burton is known
> for extreme makeup too, and their are distinct similarities to some of his
> other stuff.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <pjkgq7to30q3av58k...@4ax.com>,

He sounds like Ward Churchill.

[Dragon Lady]

"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote in message

news:anim8rfsk-7B407...@news.easynews.com...

I agree. And I'd really be interested in finding out what tribe wore dead
animals (complete dead animals by the looks of it) on their heads. Yeach!

[Wiseguy]

"Dragon Lady" <sgt...@comcast.net> wrote in news:jo8vd6$vca$1@dont-

You're really impressing me with your intelligent communication skills.

[Dragon Lady]

"Wiseguy" <epw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:XnsA04DC745B343...@69.16.185.252...

You're assuming I'm trying to communicate something. But I already did
that, and it didn't work, so why waste my time?