[Coco with marshmallows]

So, just watched the fan trailer/ short film of a gritty power rangers reboot.

It's actually really good.

It's also very violent, profane, and has some nudity, so i won't embed it, but suffice to say a short search will turn it up for you.

Honestly, rather like the webisodes of mortal kombat a few years back, its actually taking something silly and making it better (IMNSHO)

Anybody else seen it?

[melonhead]

That actually looks fantastic. I would love if that was made into a movie. Or even better, a tv series.

http://digg.com/vide...-katee-sackhoff

[Coco with marshmallows]

I know, right?

They took the basic elements, and just added to it. Surprisingly good stuff.

Would definitely watch a feature length version.

[Tattersail_]

So is it a taster for things to come?

[Khellendros]

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2015 - 09:43 AM, said:

So is it a taster for things to come?

No. It was intended as a parody/satire of dark, gritty reboots. It's not actually meant to be taken seriously, but lots of sites reporting on it appear to have missed that point.

[Tattersail_]

Khellendros, on 25 February 2015 - 10:40 AM, said:

Tattersail_, on 25 February 2015 - 09:43 AM, said:

So is it a taster for things to come?

No. It was intended as a parody/satire of dark, gritty reboots. It's not actually meant to be taken seriously, but lots of sites reporting on it appear to have missed that point.

I was wondering were they would go with it if all the Rangers were dead. I kind of liked it though. Yet you couldn't see the good guys or bad guys clearly. I thought the gore was a bit too high, felt like I was watching Gears of War.

[Tattersail_]

You think it was a piss take for Age of Ultron?

[Tsundoku]

It's actually ... not that bad. I think in seeking to produce a dark satire, they may have created something with more actual potential than they intended. Irony, no?

[D'rek]

Meh, it was ok, but nothing really stood out about it, IMO. And not that I really remember power rangers much, but nevertheless I don't really see anything that made this power rangers rather than just generic-gritty-action-thing. Other than the costumes and maybe 2 lines of dialogue, you could call this a gritty reboot of any of dozens of franchises.

[amphibian]

D, on 25 February 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

Meh, it was ok, but nothing really stood out about it, IMO. And not that I really remember power rangers much, but nevertheless I don't really see anything that made this power rangers rather than just generic-gritty-action-thing. Other than the costumes and maybe 2 lines of dialogue, you could call this a gritty reboot of any of dozens of franchises.

This lady is right - even though she's not up on Power Rangers as a whole.

The coolest part was the reimagining of the megazords fighting in the early part. Everything else was sorta blaaah. The Mortal Kombat short film done by Kevin Tancharoen was phenomenal - to the point where Kevin now does fight choreography for and directs occasional super-solid and fight-centric episodes for Agents of Shield. This is in the same vein, but is much less focused on delivering actual characters than gritting things up in general.

[amphibian]

The actual Power Rangers are less important than establishing villains with city and planetary existence level threats. In a way, the early Power Rangers were basically ultra-equipped footsoldiers in an interplanetary war between Zordon and Rita/Zedd. There has to be a threat for Zordon and the Rangers to come to prominence.

A strong and early focus on Rita/Zedd or whoever they pick for the villain is what the filmmaker should have gone for, with the adulted up Rangers coming in later.

[Khellendros]

D, on 25 February 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

Meh, it was ok, but nothing really stood out about it, IMO. And not that I really remember power rangers much, but nevertheless I don't really see anything that made this power rangers rather than just generic-gritty-action-thing. Other than the costumes and maybe 2 lines of dialogue, you could call this a gritty reboot of any of dozens of franchises.

I believe that was kinda the whole point, to show how cliche dark gritty (and unecessary?) reboots have become...

[Dolmen 2.0]

The reason its cliche is because it works.

As far as parodies go? this had better production value than the actual show. Strange as it came out around the same time the most recent red ranger was sent to jail for stabbing his roommate with a katana.

Edit

This post has been edited by Dolmen 2.0: 25 February 2015 - 05:15 PM

[Primateus]

Damn I KNEW that was Van Der Beek playing the interrogator. He actually did pretty damn good, not even a single trace of Dawson there.

[amphibian]

Haim Saban is a litigious bastard, which is well evident in his past, and he is suing Kahn and the producer/claiming copyright.

[amphibian]

Briar King, on 26 February 2015 - 02:06 AM, said:

He's probably jealous cause this was super compared to that OG show.

The following articles will be interesting reading to you and others interested in Haim Saban - who is quite a character:

http://www.newyorker.../the-influencer

http://www.thewrap.c...-profile-16870/

http://en.wikipedia....eries_and_films

(He had his fingers deep into kids TV, kids toys and Marvel toys for a long time. Disney owns most of them now, but he still holds onto Power Rangers, Samurai Pizza Cats and Digimon)

Saban launching a live action movie of Power Rangers in the next year or two.

http://www.huffingto..._n_5279661.html

Seriously, it's worth reading about a Jewish monomaniacal multi-billionaire and shark of a negotiator who leveraged kids TV into supporting Israel with millions and millions of political donations and a swaaaanky house in Beverley Park (gated community above Beverley Hills).

Saban will never grit up the series to the extent above and he'll sue the shit out of people who do stuff like this because that's what he does.

[melonhead]

amphibian, on 26 February 2015 - 01:01 AM, said:

Haim Saban is a litigious bastard, which is well evident in his past, and he is suing Kahn and the producer/claiming copyright.

Correct me if im wrong, but wouldn't Kahns reboot be protected by the parody laws? I think its called the fair use doctrine or something

[Abyss]

melonhead, on 26 February 2015 - 11:47 PM, said:

amphibian, on 26 February 2015 - 01:01 AM, said:

Haim Saban is a litigious bastard, which is well evident in his past, and he is suing Kahn and the producer/claiming copyright.

Correct me if im wrong, but wouldn't Kahns reboot be protected by the parody laws? I think its called the fair use doctrine or something

Unlikely. Parody is generally making fun of something.... Robot Chicken gets away with this every episode. Sure there's humorous to the power/Rangers thing, but it's inherently a reimagining that treads on copyright.

[amphibian]

melonhead, on 26 February 2015 - 11:47 PM, said:

Correct me if im wrong, but wouldn't Kahns reboot be protected by the parody laws? I think its called the fair use doctrine or something

Technically, yes.

Buttttt, that's in a court of law after a lawsuit and deliberation by a judge.

In the meantime, the video is to be taken down by YouTube bc they have a policy of deferring to the copyright claimants instead of the uploader. Any reuploads would have to get Saban's permission - which will never happen because he is who he is.

It's technically legal, but to actually get a declaration of such would cost more money than it's worth for Kahn and the producers.

Parody or transformative use is the usual legal justification - but it has to be worth the money or be linked with a stubborn idealist party who has deep enough pockets to get this through court.

[amphibian]

Abyss, on 27 February 2015 - 02:58 AM, said:

Unlikely. Parody is generally making fun of something.... Robot Chicken gets away with this every episode. Sure there's humorous to the power/Rangers thing, but it's inherently a reimagining that treads on copyright.

That's sort of the argument Saban's lawyers would make. Parody is a tricky thing to actually define in an artistic sense, so most judges use the old "I know it when I see it" test. I think most judges would say it's parody enough to get by, especially with the goofy north Korean segment.