Another dumb remake idea . . .

[wlah...@gmail.com]

Hey,

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/will-smith-wild-bunch-reboot-warner-bros-exclusive-91506

[moviePig]

On May 14, 4:19 pm, wlahe...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hey,
>
> http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/will-smith-wild-bunch-reboo...

'Dumb' doesn't begin to do this one justice...

--

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com

[Michael OConnor]

Is this going to be Wild Wild West 2?

[Tom]

On May 14, 3:19 pm, wlahe...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hey,
>
> http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/will-smith-wild-bunch-reboo...

Thus confirming the idea that Hollywood is creatively bankrupt...

Oy.

Tom

[Russell Watson]

On 5/14/2013 6:32 PM, Michael OConnor wrote:
> Is this going to be Wild Wild West 2?
>

No, a remake of "The Wild Bunch".

[nick]

On May 14, 9:21 pm, Russell Watson <russell-wat...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 5/14/2013 6:32 PM, Michael OConnor wrote:> Is this going to be Wild Wild West 2?
>
> No, a remake of "The Wild Bunch".

'A modern remake involving cartels south of the border, the "Wild
Bunch" reboot is expected to follow a disgraced D.E.A. agent who
assembles a team to go after a Mexican drug lord and his fortune.'

I'm already rooting for the Mexican drug lord.

[nick]

On May 14, 4:48 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> On May 14, 4:19 pm, wlahe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Hey,
>
> >http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/will-smith-wild-bunch-reboo...
>
> 'Dumb' doesn't begin to do this one justice...
>

'Dumb' was passing on Django Unchained and doing a nepotism fest with
M. Night Shyamalan instead. A Wild Bunch remake might better be
classified as "Dumber".

[moviePig]

Jesus. I didn't know AFTER EARTH was a Shyamalan joint. Jesus.

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 10:05:27 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:

> Jesus. I didn't know AFTER EARTH was a Shyamalan joint. Jesus.
>

After reading the plot on wiki, I'm gonna need a joint. Or maybe a spliff with a carafe of rum chaser. I'll bet even money that even the trolls around here could write a better plot. It sounds effing dreadful. Has M. Night Shyamalan sunk to the depths of being a hired cap gun?

[nick]

Wow, that wiki entry is priceless: " Will Smith conceived this story
when he was watching the television show I Shouldn't Be Alive with his
brother-in-law Caleeb Pinkett.[4] It was originally not a science
fiction story but about a father and son crashing their car in the
mountains or some remote region, with the son having to go out and get
rescue for his father. Will Smith then decided to change the setting
to 1000 years in the future, which imposed a higher budget."

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

[RichA]

But in the poster, he and his kid both look down and out (like,
downward but outward) so you know they're formidable...

[trotsky]

I'll give you a dollar if you can come up with a comment about a movie
that isn't supposed to be a piece of shit to your warped fucking brain.


--
Never post something on the internet unless you have a point of
reference. You will look like a moron otherwise.

[trotsky]

On 5/14/13 9:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On May 14, 9:49 pm, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 14, 4:48 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:> On May 14, 4:19 pm, wlahe...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>> Hey,
>>
>>>> http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/will-smith-wild-bunch-reboo...
>>
>>> 'Dumb' doesn't begin to do this one justice...
>>
>> 'Dumb' was passing on Django Unchained and doing a nepotism fest with
>> M. Night Shyamalan instead. A Wild Bunch remake might better be
>> classified as "Dumber".
>
> Jesus. I didn't know AFTER EARTH was a Shyamalan joint. Jesus.

mpig, can you and the other assholes compile a list of movies that
osmosis has told you are shitty and confine them to one post?

TIA.

[moviePig]

On May 15, 8:53 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/14/13 9:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> > On May 14, 9:49 pm, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On May 14, 4:48 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:> On May 14, 4:19 pm, wlahe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>>> Hey,
>
> >>>>http://www.thewrap.com/movies/column-post/will-smith-wild-bunch-reboo...
>
> >>> 'Dumb' doesn't begin to do this one justice...
>
> >> 'Dumb' was passing on Django Unchained and doing a nepotism fest with
> >> M. Night Shyamalan instead.  A Wild Bunch remake might better be
> >> classified as "Dumber".
>
> > Jesus.  I didn't know AFTER EARTH was a Shyamalan joint.  Jesus.
>
> mpig, can you and the other assholes compile a list of movies that
> osmosis has told you are shitty and confine them to one post?
>
> TIA.

It's true, we veteran groundskeepers have lost our idealism, and no
longer sing 'Give Crabgrass A Chance'...

[trotsky]

You misspelled "lemmings."

Don't try and bullshit a bullshitter.

[nick]

I won't know if After Earth is any good or not because I have no plans
to watch it. I didn't even bother with The Last Airbender when it hit
DVD. Maybe this is a rope-a-dope on Shyamalan's part. Do a couple of
crappy sci-fi kids' flicks and we'll be more receptive to his Twilight
Zone schtick when he goes back to it.

[moviePig]

With the looming prospect of Shyamalan directing A Will Smith Kid in A
Will Smith Dream, we lemmings are racing to be first over the cliff...

[trotsky]

On 5/15/13 11:59 AM, nick wrote:

> I won't know if After Earth is any good or not because I have no plans
> to watch it. I didn't even bother with The Last Airbender when it hit
> DVD. Maybe this is a rope-a-dope on Shyamalan's part. Do a couple of
> crappy sci-fi kids' flicks and we'll be more receptive to his Twilight
> Zone schtick when he goes back to it.

I thought for a movie aimed a family audience TLA was quite good.
Nothing groundbreaking--at all--but a decent story with great effects.
In fact, if M. Night's career is going to have any legs, movies with
great effects are his best bet. Unless he can somehow get back to
something in the vein of "The Sixth Sense".

[moviePig]

Iirc (and it's been a while), he's actually a pretty good director. I
wonder if nobody brings him strong material, fearing his ego won't let
it remain "unimproved".

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 1:52:46 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:

> With the looming prospect of Shyamalan directing A Will Smith Kid in A
> Will Smith Dream, we lemmings are racing to be first over the cliff...
>

First he calls you an "asshole" and then you respond to the neurotic twit that has some personality deficit where he can't accept the opinions of other people based on his lack of tolerance for "negative" evaluations. In this case, he'll say it's because no one has actually seen the film yet but that's smoke. If you're negative about the film after you have seen it he still goes off citing "Usenet" and the "internet." Apparently he has no real-world experience that entails social interactions and thus believes the expressing of opinions that contain negative aspects only occur in cyberspace because -- one assumes -- these people are anonyshits just like him.

What I find hysterical is that he still hasn't deciphered mPig's ratings system so he's completely unaware that you infer that movies "suck." Fuck the crybaby little anonyshit. I'll never respond to him again because he's just a crippled parrot looking for attention. Him and calvin and some others are utterly worthless little trolls that bring nothing to the table but the same posts over and over and over again. Fuck 'em. We demean ourselves by indulging their pathetic needs.

[trotsky]

Oh, you're doing your Chuck Heston thing again. Weren't we just talking
about the M. Night movie being shit preceded by "The Wild Bunch" remake
being shit?

[trotsky]

On 5/15/13 1:15 PM, wlah...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 1:52:46 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:
>
>> With the looming prospect of Shyamalan directing A Will Smith Kid in A
>> Will Smith Dream, we lemmings are racing to be first over the cliff...
>>
> First he calls you an "asshole" and then you respond to the neurotic twit

You might consider growing a pair of balls and responding to me directly.

[moviePig]

I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'. Yes, the M. Night movie
sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
fact. The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western --
sounds merely inane. (DEA agents in Mexico? Hell, why not Ewoks on
Mars?)

[notbob]

On 2013-05-16, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
> He's made one good movie, which is only watchable once.

Even then, you were pissed at yerself for falling for this
one-trick-pony. Signs served at least one good purpose, as satire
fodder for Scary Movie 3. I refuse to watch any of his other
films.

nb

[trotsky]

On 5/15/13 2:24 PM, moviePig wrote:

> I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'. Yes, the M. Night movie
> sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
> fact. The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western --
> sounds merely inane. (DEA agents in Mexico? Hell, why not Ewoks on
> Mars?)

Okay, and is there are reason why "movies that are likely to be shit"
are a topic of conversation? How in the mother fuck is that more
interesting to talk about then movies you are anticipating seeing?

[Russell Watson]

On 5/16/2013 12:44 AM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <W8-dnTiZIcULVg7M...@mchsi.com>

> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 5/15/13 11:59 AM, nick wrote:
>
>>> I won't know if After Earth is any good or not because I have no plans
>>> to watch it. I didn't even bother with The Last Airbender when it hit
>>> DVD. Maybe this is a rope-a-dope on Shyamalan's part. Do a couple of
>>> crappy sci-fi kids' flicks and we'll be more receptive to his Twilight
>>> Zone schtick when he goes back to it.
>
>
>> I thought for a movie aimed a family audience TLA was quite good.
>

> We didn't. My kids and I are fans of the series, but we all four thought
> the movie stunk.

>
>> Nothing groundbreaking--at all--but a decent story with great effects.
>> In fact, if M. Night's career is going to have any legs, movies with
>> great effects are his best bet. Unless he can somehow get back to
>> something in the vein of "The Sixth Sense".
>

> He's made one good movie, which is only watchable once.
>

Which one do you mean? I thought "The Sixth Sense" was pretty good for
one time out, but I like "Unbreakable" as a unique take on the superhero
genre and find it to hold up over multiple occasional viewings.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <kn307t$g8q$1...@dont-email.me>,

Wasn't the thing about TSS that you wanted to watch it *twice*, once
cold, and once informed by the first viewing?
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[moviePig]

On May 16, 11:23 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/15/13 2:24 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> > I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'.  Yes, the M. Night movie
> > sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
> > fact.  The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western --
> > sounds merely inane.  (DEA agents in Mexico?  Hell, why not Ewoks on
> > Mars?)
>
> Okay, and is there are reason why "movies that are likely to be shit"
> are a topic of conversation?  How in the mother fuck is that more
> interesting to talk about then movies you are anticipating seeing?

It's about the pulse of the industry. It's "shooting the shit" (in
more ways than one). E.g., for movie fans it beats the hail out of
talking about the weather (underground). Meanwhile, as you know, I'd
largely rather *not* talk about movies I'm planning to see. Moreover,
from all this "lemming chatter" about AFTER EARTH, I've learned that
1) Shyamalan's directing... 2) a sequel's in the works... and 3) no
one seems to have perspective that alters my initial bias. And did I
mention it's always interesting to shoot the shit? (Don't mistake the
bad-mouthing here for any sort of principled conspiracy. Not one of
the naysayers will stay home if AE gets good press ...and I personally
would delight to come here and eat crow on its behalf, as I've done in
the past.)

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, May 16, 2013 5:05:45 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:

> It's about the pulse of the industry.

It's way more than that. It's a tradition to look at upcoming Hollywood movies and make fun of them because taking them seriously can only lead to razor blades or medication. Here's an example: Martin Scorsese hasn't made a movie that held my interest for decades. Even so, when he announces a project, I hope for the best and because of his track record he's earned the respect. When M. Night Shyamalan announces a project -- especially with the pedigree that's attached to this one -- I can't hope for the best because his movies suck and he's earned the derision he gets. Anyone who thinks The Last Airbender was a "good" movie is someone I can't take seriously. It was fucking terrible. M. Night Shyamalan has had a terrible streak of stinkers so making fun of his film -- sight unseen -- is almost a natural reaction. And, again, you're dealing with a person is so totally sick and isolated from the world that he doesn't get the very human aspect of making fun of Hollywood these days. I mean, how can you not?

[Russell Watson]

That may have been true of theatrical viewings, but I saw it first on
home video and watched the accompanying featurette/commentary that
showed all the clues so I never felt compelled to watch the actual movie
more than once.

[Michael OConnor]

> > On 5/14/2013 6:32 PM, Michael OConnor wrote:> Is this going to be Wild Wild West 2?
>
> > No, a remake of "The Wild Bunch".
>
> 'A modern remake involving cartels south of the border, the "Wild
> Bunch" reboot is expected to follow a disgraced D.E.A. agent who
> assembles a team to go after a Mexican drug lord and his fortune.'
>
> I'm already rooting for the Mexican drug lord.

The Wild Bunch was set in approximately 1915, and one of the most
interesting themes of the movie was that Pike and his crew knew they
were on the very tail end of the days of the wild west. They
understood that technology and increased civilization and Organized
Justice (federal law enforcement as opposed to a local Sheriff who was
not part of a larger system) was quickly coming to every corner of the
western US. These bandits spent their lives robbing banks and taking
whatever they wanted as there was little or no justice to stop them,
and their way of life was quickly being squeezed out, and were looking
to make one last big score, and at the last minute decided to go out
in a blaze of glory. This would be lost in a modern remake, and the
final result of a remake will in no way resemble the original.

[moviePig]

Well, it'll have the same name. And I'm gonna go out on limb and
guess that it'll have lots of cinemalicious gun-violence...

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, May 16, 2013 5:49:51 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:
>
> Well, it'll have the same name. And I'm gonna go out on limb and
> guess that it'll have lots of cinemalicious gun-violence...
>

And utterly out-of-place quotes from the original . . .

[nick]

I'm not a film critic or working in any academic capacity so I don't
have any duty to go in without prejudice. If I think After Earth
looks horrible, then I'll say it looks horrible. If I see it and it
turns out to be good, I'll say it was better than I thought it was
going to be. I won't lose any sleep on it either way. The Great
Gatsby turned out to be better than I'd expected it to be. Not great
by any measure but I've spent the last day thinking it. We're not
allowed to have an opinion on a movie unless we've seen it? I still
can't figure that one out. Life's too short to watch Scary MoVie in
the anticipation that it might be better than people say it is.

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:35:22 PM UTC-4, nick wrote:

> I'm not a film critic or working in any academic capacity so I don't
> have any duty to go in without prejudice.

Nobody ever goes into seeing a film cold. From the studio logo to the typeface of the title or the attitude of the opening scene the viewer is making -- unconsciously or not -- judgments. If it's a star-studded cast there is one set of expectations and if it's from a bunch of nobodies, there's another set. Sometimes the expectations are built in. The other day I began watching another remake of Rashomon. This time it's a Thai version that has the US title "Outrage" to link it to -- one presumes -- the US remake of Rashomon starring Paul Newman -- and I was expecting -- based on good information, ie, having seen a good number of Thai films -- that it would be an over-top-blood fest. It isn't. It's a studied Buddhist view of Rashomon and when I got to the point of realizing that, I had to stop the film and put off seeing it because I needed to get my expectations in a different place. That is a rare experience.

[Russell Watson]

It's the last big score before the drones are unleashed. The original
was Maxim guns and Colt 1911s. Same premise. :-P

[U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)]

The May 17 - 2013 Edition Of weezer919.com Has Just Been
Published ...... http://weezer919.com/ ......

Please Read This Website ......

Please Email This Website To Your Friends ......

If You Know How To Build Websites ......

Please Feel Free To Copy This Website And Call It Your Own ...... You
Have My Permission ......

----------------------------------------------

All I Want Is A Voice

----------------------------------------------

All I Want Is To Be Able To Fight For All The People Out There Who
Cannot Fight For Themselves

[trotsky]

On 5/16/13 4:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On May 16, 11:23 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 5/15/13 2:24 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'. Yes, the M. Night movie
>>> sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
>>> fact. The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western --
>>> sounds merely inane. (DEA agents in Mexico? Hell, why not Ewoks on
>>> Mars?)
>>
>> Okay, and is there are reason why "movies that are likely to be shit"
>> are a topic of conversation? How in the mother fuck is that more
>> interesting to talk about then movies you are anticipating seeing?
>
> It's about the pulse of the industry. It's "shooting the shit" (in
> more ways than one).

You just pegged the B.S. meter. I'm going to see Star Trek today--that
looks to be really good. And I'm paying extra to see it in a Dolby
Atmos theater.

[trotsky]

On 5/16/13 4:23 PM, wlah...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, May 16, 2013 5:05:45 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:
>
>> It's about the pulse of the industry.
>
> It's way more than that. It's a tradition to look at upcoming Hollywood movies and make fun of them because taking them seriously can only lead to razor blades or medication.

This definitely sounds like the voice of experience.

[nick]

On May 17, 6:14 am, Lewis <g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <kn307t$g8...@dont-email.me>

>   Russell Watson <russell-wat...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 5/16/2013 12:44 AM, Lewis wrote:

> >> In message <W8-dnTiZIcULVg7MnZ2dnUVZ_jKdn...@mchsi.com>

> >>    trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> >>> On 5/15/13 11:59 AM, nick wrote:
>
> >>>> I won't know if After Earth is any good or not because I have no plans
> >>>> to watch it.  I didn't even bother with The Last Airbender when it hit
> >>>> DVD.  Maybe this is a rope-a-dope on Shyamalan's part.  Do a couple of
> >>>> crappy sci-fi kids' flicks and we'll be more receptive to his Twilight
> >>>> Zone schtick when he goes back to it.
>
> >>> I thought for a movie aimed a family audience TLA was quite good.
>
> >> We didn't. My kids and I are fans of the series, but we all four thought
> >> the movie stunk.
>
> >>> Nothing groundbreaking--at all--but a decent story with great effects.
> >>> In fact, if M. Night's career is going to have any legs, movies with
> >>> great effects are his best bet.  Unless he can somehow get back to
> >>> something in the vein of "The Sixth Sense".
>
> >> He's made one good movie, which is only watchable once.
>
> > Which one do you mean? I thought "The Sixth Sense" was pretty good for
> > one time out,
>

> Yes.

>
> > but I like "Unbreakable" as a unique take on the superhero
> > genre and find it to hold up over multiple occasional viewings.
>

> I didn't think Unbreakable was any good, but I agree it was interesting.
>
I didn't see the "twist ending" coming. I didn't expect the ending to
The Sixth Sense either, but when it happened I thought, "oh, the old
Carnival of Souls bit" and expected something after that, but there
wasn't. Shyamalan's not a bad director as far as having the basic
skills but I can't think of another director who deteriorated into
self-parody so quickly, with each release worse than the one before
it. There's nothing in the plot summary or the trailer to suggest
After Earth is going to stop the downward spiral.

[moviePig]

On May 17, 7:20 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/16/13 4:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> > On May 16, 11:23 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/15/13 2:24 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> >>> I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'.  Yes, the M. Night movie
> >>> sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
> >>> fact.  The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western --
> >>> sounds merely inane.  (DEA agents in Mexico?  Hell, why not Ewoks on
> >>> Mars?)
>
> >> Okay, and is there are reason why "movies that are likely to be shit"
> >> are a topic of conversation?  How in the mother fuck is that more
> >> interesting to talk about then movies you are anticipating seeing?
>
> > It's about the pulse of the industry.  It's "shooting the shit" (in
> > more ways than one).
>
> You just pegged the B.S. meter.  I'm going to see Star Trek today--that
> looks to be really good.  And I'm paying extra to see it in a Dolby
> Atmos theater.

I am too. And I would too. But what that has to do with a 'B.S.
meter' is darkness...

[trotsky]

On 5/17/13 6:31 AM, nick wrote:

> I didn't see the "twist ending" coming. I didn't expect the ending to
> The Sixth Sense either, but when it happened I thought, "oh, the old
> Carnival of Souls bit" and expected something after that, but there
> wasn't. Shyamalan's not a bad director as far as having the basic
> skills but I can't think of another director who deteriorated into
> self-parody so quickly, with each release worse than the one before
> it. There's nothing in the plot summary or the trailer to suggest
> After Earth is going to stop the downward spiral.

Interesting. How many times has a Will Smith movie been reviewed badly?

[trotsky]

We're into the summer movie season. These are purported to be the
biggest and best movies the studios have to offer. How this jives with
the "pulse of the industry" is the bullshit part.

[nick]

On May 17, 8:35 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/13 6:31 AM, nick wrote:
>
> > I didn't see the "twist ending" coming.  I didn't expect the ending to
> > The Sixth Sense either, but when it happened I thought, "oh, the old
> > Carnival of Souls bit" and expected something after that, but there
> > wasn't.   Shyamalan's not a bad director as far as having the basic
> > skills but I can't think of another director who deteriorated into
> > self-parody so quickly, with each release worse than the one before
> > it.   There's nothing in the plot summary or the trailer to suggest
> > After Earth is going to stop the downward spiral.
>
> Interesting.  How many times has a Will Smith movie been reviewed badly?
>

People who avoided Wild Wild West sight unseen made the right call.

[trotsky]

Good point. One movie 14 years ago. Meanwhile, if we look here:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=willsmith.htm

Will Smith movies have grossed 2.7 billion dollars. That's a lot.
That's what Hollywood calls a "bankable" star. So, here are some
salient points:

a) One movie 14 years ago is disingenuous.
b) I guess I didn't expect credit for an *extremely* valid point.
c) Adults don't even look to be the target audience for the movie.
d) Is anyone else on this group mentally capable of discussing the facts?

This whole thing is particularly irritating because I'm so disgusted
with seeing how far removed the media is about discussing the Obama
administration. I thought with Bush gone the whole country acting like
they'd been lobotomized would discontinue, but no! At this point I'm
wondering if reasoned, intellectual discussions are hopeless.

[moviePig]

(Well, they're the biggest and best *summer* movies...) E.g., one
"pulse" that's implicit in any ramc-f prognostication/derision is how
they stack up against previous summers -- or at least our memories of
them. And, remaking THE WILD BUNCH as a modern Will Smith adventure
is the epitome of several industry pulses we pray would go silent...

[moviePig]

I don't know about "reviewed badly", but I personally could have done
without:

HITCH
THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS
I AM LEGEND
HANCOCK
SEVEN POUNDS
MEN IN BLACK 3
AFTER EARTH

...in other words, everything he's done since I ROBOT in 2004. True,
I've actually seen only three on that list, but they haven't lured me
to the others...

[nick]

On May 17, 8:54 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/13 7:40 AM, nick wrote:
>
> > On May 17, 8:35 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/17/13 6:31 AM, nick wrote:
>
> >>> I didn't see the "twist ending" coming.  I didn't expect the ending to
> >>> The Sixth Sense either, but when it happened I thought, "oh, the old
> >>> Carnival of Souls bit" and expected something after that, but there
> >>> wasn't.   Shyamalan's not a bad director as far as having the basic
> >>> skills but I can't think of another director who deteriorated into
> >>> self-parody so quickly, with each release worse than the one before
> >>> it.   There's nothing in the plot summary or the trailer to suggest
> >>> After Earth is going to stop the downward spiral.
>
> >> Interesting.  How many times has a Will Smith movie been reviewed badly?
>
> > People who avoided Wild Wild West sight unseen made the right call.
>
> Good point.  One movie 14 years ago.  Meanwhile, if we look here:
>
> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=willsmith.htm
>
> Will Smith movies have grossed 2.7 billion dollars.  That's a lot.
> That's what Hollywood calls a "bankable" star.  So, here are some
> salient points:
>
> a) One movie 14 years ago is disingenuous.
> b) I guess I didn't expect credit for an *extremely* valid point.
> c) Adults don't even look to be the target audience for the movie.
> d) Is anyone else on this group mentally capable of discussing the facts?
>

You can say Will Smith is fucking worthless. You can say he's the
greatest thing ever. Neither would be a *fact*. This is a forum of
opinion and my opinion is After Earth doesn't look like it's going to
be any good.

[trotsky]

Cite? I've never seen anyone allude to that at all.

[bermuda999]

On Thursday, May 16, 2013 5:05:45 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:

> On May 16, 11:23 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>
> > On 5/15/13 2:24 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
> > > I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'.  Yes, the M. Night movie
> > > sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
> > > fact.  The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western -

> > > sounds merely inane.  (DEA agents in Mexico?  Hell, why not Ewoks on
> > > Mars?)
>
> > Okay, and is there are reason why "movies that are likely to be shit"
> > are a topic of conversation?  How in the mother fuck is that more
> > interesting to talk about then movies you are anticipating seeing?
>
> It's about the pulse of the industry. It's "shooting the shit" (in
> more ways than one). E.g., for movie fans it beats the hail out of
> talking about the weather (underground). Meanwhile, as you know, I'd
> largely rather *not* talk about movies I'm planning to see. Moreover,
> from all this "lemming chatter" about AFTER EARTH, I've learned that
> 1) Shyamalan's directing... 2) a sequel's in the works... and 3) no
> one seems to have perspective that alters my initial bias. And did I
> mention it's always interesting to shoot the shit?

I agree. Discussing what movies we are dreading and which we are looking forward to viewing is a large part of the movie-going/movie-watching experience (and yes, I realize your personal mileage varies greatly regarding too much info revealed).

Oh, and have summer reruns started here already?

"The previews look excellent, and it's from a director that I think has a great track record for this kind of entertainment.

Alternately, we could just all jump on the "That movie has to be a piece
of shit!" bandwagon. That never gets old!!"

-- Someone here eagerly awaiting "Alex Cross"

[moviePig]

Don't you think that bitching about crappy movie-output implies
contrast to some earlier, superior time or another (whether imaginary
or not)? Because indeed if these were the first movies ever then I'm
sure we'd all be ecstatic every weekend...

[moviePig]

(I saw it on my public library shelf, but left it as someone else's
Cross to bear...)

[nick]

You would have seen it by now had it been the Idris Elba R-rated
thriller originally intended. I bet you passed on Peeples and
Temptation as well.

I made a wrong call this week on a filmmaker Trotsky doesn't have any
time for--Eli Roth. With low expectations I watched Aftershock on
demand and it was a pleasant surprise, a throwback to the disreputable
European exploitation of the seventies, a downmarket The Impossible
with Eli Roth and some Zack Galafianakis ringer instead of Naomi Watts
and Ewan McGregor. I should hang my head in shame but instead I'll
give Aftershock a thumbs up and move on.

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Friday, May 17, 2013 8:09:32 PM UTC-4, nick wrote:

>
> I made a wrong call this week on a filmmaker Trotsky doesn't have any
> time for--Eli Roth. With low expectations I watched Aftershock on
> demand and it was a pleasant surprise, a throwback to the disreputable
> European exploitation of the seventies, a downmarket The Impossible
> with Eli Roth and some Zack Galafianakis ringer instead of Naomi Watts
> and Ewan McGregor. I should hang my head in shame but instead I'll
> give Aftershock a thumbs up and move on.

Or, you could try Feng Xiaogang's Aftershock . . .

[moviePig]

Is that like BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA? Regardless, I'll give it a peek,
since Nick's AFTERSHOCK hasn't yet tickled Netflix's seismometer...

[wlah...@gmail.com]

Nope. It's a big-budget earthquake disaster flick. I added the director's name to separate it from that other film. The difference -- it's got plenty of CGI -- is in the politics, ie, how the state responds. It's far from propaganda, just a difference in context.

[nick]

Feng Xiaogang's Aftershock is on Netflix streaming, along with another
Aftershock, with John Saxon and Russ Tamblyn, sounding like something
RichA watches:

"In a post-apocalyptic new millennium, earthquakes have decimated
Earth, a planet now ruled by militant groups who kill the
intellectually inclined. Sabina (Elizabeth Kaitan), a seemingly ditzy
woman, plans to save the world and save herself from government agent
Oliver Quinn (John Saxon). But when Sabina is taken to rebel
headquarters by two resistance fighters (Chuck Jeffreys and Jay
Roberts Jr.), they discover she's smarter than she seems."

[Michael OConnor]

> It's the last big score before the drones are unleashed. The original
> was Maxim guns and Colt 1911s. Same premise. :-P

I hope Will Smith doesn't forget to put one of his sampled rap songs
over the closing credits.

[trotsky]

On 5/17/13 8:08 AM, moviePig wrote:
> On May 17, 8:40 am, nick <leftbehindbythetalk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 17, 8:35 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:> On 5/17/13 6:31 AM, nick wrote:
>>
>>>> I didn't see the "twist ending" coming. I didn't expect the ending to
>>>> The Sixth Sense either, but when it happened I thought, "oh, the old
>>>> Carnival of Souls bit" and expected something after that, but there
>>>> wasn't. Shyamalan's not a bad director as far as having the basic
>>>> skills but I can't think of another director who deteriorated into
>>>> self-parody so quickly, with each release worse than the one before
>>>> it. There's nothing in the plot summary or the trailer to suggest
>>>> After Earth is going to stop the downward spiral.
>>
>>> Interesting. How many times has a Will Smith movie been reviewed badly?
>>
>> People who avoided Wild Wild West sight unseen made the right call.
>
> I don't know about "reviewed badly", but I personally could have done
> without:
>
> HITCH
> THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS
> I AM LEGEND
> HANCOCK
> SEVEN POUNDS
> MEN IN BLACK 3
> AFTER EARTH

Interesting. I would say "Seven Pounds" is far and away Will Smith's
best movie. Different strokes I guess.

[trotsky]

Box office totals and bankability are facts. These aren't arbiters of
quality, and certainly is no guarantee that M. Night won't have produced
something that isn't received well.

Otoh, Will Smith likely wasn't enticed by the money, so there must have
been something that attracted him to the project. Sure you could be
cynical and say he only comes as a package deal with his kid. Hell, he
probably wanted the Jackie Chan role in the Karate Kid remake.

[trotsky]

On 5/17/13 3:12 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <Db2dnWq_27MNtQvM...@mchsi.com>

> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 5/17/13 7:40 AM, nick wrote:
>>> On May 17, 8:35 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/17/13 6:31 AM, nick wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I didn't see the "twist ending" coming. I didn't expect the ending to
>>>>> The Sixth Sense either, but when it happened I thought, "oh, the old
>>>>> Carnival of Souls bit" and expected something after that, but there
>>>>> wasn't. Shyamalan's not a bad director as far as having the basic
>>>>> skills but I can't think of another director who deteriorated into
>>>>> self-parody so quickly, with each release worse than the one before
>>>>> it. There's nothing in the plot summary or the trailer to suggest
>>>>> After Earth is going to stop the downward spiral.
>>>>
>>>> Interesting. How many times has a Will Smith movie been reviewed badly?
>>>>
>>> People who avoided Wild Wild West sight unseen made the right call.
>
>> Good point. One movie 14 years ago. Meanwhile, if we look here:
>
>> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=willsmith.htm
>
>> Will Smith movies have grossed 2.7 billion dollars. That's a lot.
>> That's what Hollywood calls a "bankable" star. So, here are some
>> salient points:
>

> How does that compare to Eddie Murphy?
>
> <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=eddiemurphy.htm>
>
> 3.8 billion, granted 1.2 billion of that or so are the 4 Shrek movies.
>
> Still, I've yet to see a Will Smith movie I didn't enjoy, even Wild Wild
> West and Men in Black II were entertaining, even if they weren't any
> good. Hancock was maybe his most disappointing movie, as I thought it
> had great potential to be a great movie, and it failed on that score and
> was merely average.


I would say that Will Smith is far more of an indicator of quality than
Eddie Murphy, who seems to have been slumming it for a couple of decades
now.

[trotsky]

On 5/17/13 3:31 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <L_CdneD9HKT8uQvM...@mchsi.com>

> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>> On 5/17/13 7:10 AM, moviePig wrote:
>>> On May 17, 7:20 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/16/13 4:05 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On May 16, 11:23 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/15/13 2:24 PM, moviePig wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know from a 'Chuck Heston thing'. Yes, the M. Night movie
>>>>>>> sounds exactly like shit -- the summer's most unpromising shit, in
>>>>>>> fact. The WILD BUNCH remake -- as a remake of the iconic Western --
>>>>>>> sounds merely inane. (DEA agents in Mexico? Hell, why not Ewoks on
>>>>>>> Mars?)
>>>>
>>>>>> Okay, and is there are reason why "movies that are likely to be shit"
>>>>>> are a topic of conversation? How in the mother fuck is that more
>>>>>> interesting to talk about then movies you are anticipating seeing?
>>>>
>>>>> It's about the pulse of the industry. It's "shooting the shit" (in
>>>>> more ways than one).
>>>>
>>>> You just pegged the B.S. meter. I'm going to see Star Trek today--that
>>>> looks to be really good. And I'm paying extra to see it in a Dolby
>>>> Atmos theater.
>>>
>>> I am too. And I would too. But what that has to do with a 'B.S.
>>> meter' is darkness...
>
>> We're into the summer movie season. These are purported to be the
>> biggest
>

> Yes,
>
>> and best movies
>
> No.


Cite?

[trotsky]

On 5/17/13 5:39 PM, moviePig wrote:

> (I saw it on my public library shelf, but left it as someone else's
> Cross to bear...)

You could always waste your time seeing "Knowing" again.

LOL!!!

[trotsky]

Yeah, black people are scary.

[moviePig]

You don't have to be cynical to see that particular parenting move.
They're trying to sell this kid (who's filing for amicable
emancipation, btw), and AE's movie receipts will hang more on his
appeal as a pre-teen heartthrob than on M. Night's directorial
prowess.

[wlah...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, May 18, 2013 9:33:26 AM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:

> You don't have to be cynical to see that particular parenting move.
> They're trying to sell this kid (who's filing for amicable
> emancipation, btw), and AE's movie receipts will hang more on his
> appeal as a pre-teen heartthrob than on M. Night's directorial
> prowess.
>

It's not M Night's project. He sounds more like a hired gun than the impetus of the film. And cynicism isn't the issue where these kinds of projects occur. It's long been part of Hollywood lore. Eg (as you might write), the Hustons, the Barrymores, et al. It isn't a movie as much as it's a deal and it will fly as a Smith film or sink as an M Night film. That's the way it goes.

[nick]

On May 18, 8:28 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/13 3:12 PM, Lewis wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

> > In message <Db2dnWq_27MNtQvMnZ2dnUVZ_gudn...@mchsi.com>

It's an apples and oranges comparison anyway. At Smith's superstar
level, his only peers are Tom Cruise and Denzel Washington. I'd say
Tom Hanks but his star seems to be dimming rapidly.

[trotsky]

Denzel seems to winding down too. Tom Cruise is still making big budget
extravaganzas, but I still don't think he ever rebounded from his
retarded stint on Oprah. I would say the hottest actor in America right
now is Bradley Cooper, but he's not given to make the blockbusters like
the other dudes are.