[worry]

At the very least it lets us all know that Guy Ritchie still exists. That's worth something, at the level of human concern for one another's well-being.

[Studlock]

Hey, he did the Man from U.N.C.L.E. remake that was pretty good not to long ago!

[amphibian]

 Studlock, on 24 July 2016 - 07:49 PM, said:

Hey, he did the Man from U.N.C.L.E. remake that was pretty good not to long ago!

It genuinely was good. I had zero expectations going in and it was better than Spectre.

[Aptorian]

Trainspotting 2



I wonder what the plot is. The original was interesting because of its depiction of drug use and the life that surrounds that. Now they're in their 40-50s, surely it's not going to be about them doing a heroin bender.

This post has been edited by Apt: 26 July 2016 - 05:12 AM

[worry]

They're teaming up with the cast of The Station Agent and they're really gonna get serious about spotting trains this time.

[polishgenius]

 Apt, on 26 July 2016 - 05:10 AM, said:

I wonder what the plot is. The original was interesting because of its depiction of drug use and the life that surrounds that. Now they're in their 40-50s, surely it's not going to be about them doing a heroin bender.

Porno (the book sequel to Trainspotting) is based around, well, porn. Although from what I understand it also has Renton owning a nightclub in Amsterdam and I can see them focusing more on that- since it seems (I've not read it) that Sick Boy is closer to being the main character and I can't see them going that way in the film.

It's a smart teaser. Although it's really more of an announcement than anything else because it tells us more about the first film than the new one.

[QuickTidal]

 polishgenius, on 26 July 2016 - 08:12 AM, said:

 Apt, on 26 July 2016 - 05:10 AM, said:

I wonder what the plot is. The original was interesting because of its depiction of drug use and the life that surrounds that. Now they're in their 40-50s, surely it's not going to be about them doing a heroin bender.

Porno (the book sequel to Trainspotting) is based around, well, porn. Although from what I understand it also has Renton owning a nightclub in Amsterdam and I can see them focusing more on that- since it seems (I've not read it) that Sick Boy is closer to being the main character and I can't see them going that way in the film.

It's a smart teaser. Although it's really more of an announcement than anything else because it tells us more about the first film than the new one.

I read an interview a while back with Boyle when this was in its infancy, at least then the script seemed to focus on Renton and Sick Boy in equal measure as the core of the story. I've never read PORNO, but it seems like it would be a solid follow-up.

[QuickTidal]

 QuickTidal, on 24 July 2016 - 06:53 PM, said:

 champ, on 24 July 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:

I was actually really looking forward to the film until I saw the trailer, it just didn't work for me, looks all over the place.

The first time I watched the trailer, I was not on board.

The second time I watched it, it started to get under my skin.

The third time I watched (when I showed my wife), I decided I'm all fucking in...and I can't explain why. Lol

You know what I think I realized on my 5th watch of this trailer (yes 5th, don't judge meeeeee!)...that this is CLEARLY a Guy Ritchie film. Like he's not compromising on his vision of what type of movie he likes to make even a little bit...and here he is proving that he can step ENTIRELY outside his own wheelhouse and make a film that retains his style, while telling what is essentially a moderately anachronistic fantasy fable. I love when Directors can do that.

[QuickTidal]

 Slow Ben, on 22 July 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

In case anyone hasnt seen it yet.

Magnificent 7 Trailer





And yes QT, Amph, and countless others, I know it wont be as good as the original.

It should be noted this was just announced as the opening night Gala screening at TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival), and as such I feel even safer in assuming it will be good. The TIFF Gala programmers are NOTORIOUSLY picky with their Gala material choices.

[WinterPhoenix]

So how many times has Magnificent 7 (the story) been done now? Counting Seven Samurai of course.

[worry]

Now you gotta watch Uwe Boll's Dungeon Siege movie, and compare them.

[worry]

Yup! With a bizarre cast that includes Jason Statham, Leelee Sobieski, Ray Liotta, and Burt Reynolds.

[Macros]

I think name of the kind edge d&d a little bit.
The tiniest bit.
It's like saying one turd is better than another because it has a bit of sweetcorn in it to give some colour.

[QuickTidal]

 Kanyemander West, on 29 July 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

Yup! With a bizarre cast that includes Jason Statham, Leelee Sobieski, Ray Liotta, and Burt Reynolds.

I saw this in theatre during the After Dark film fest (cheesy horror and supernatural and genre flicks) and Uwe Boll was actually THERE and introduced it. He's every bit the asshole you'd expect him to be live and in person.

Also, even though that movie is hilariously bad (we saw it because we knew it would be bad and wanted to goof on it), I think there are some excellent bits that serve to explicitly tell you just how bad it is. Like Matthew Lillard is in it, and he plays this duke (son o the king)..and in almost every scene he's in, he delivers his lines with this over-the-topness that he KNOWS is bad...and then he looks at the fucking camera and very nearly winks at you to let you KNOW he knows it's that bad. Goddamn we laughed ever time.

[Aptorian]

Based on the favorite scene thread I just jumped back into The Prestige. Started an hour further in. 20 minutes later they suddenly revealed something and holy shit, the implications. The film went from ordinary drama to "what the fuck" in a split second.

EDIT: And then I finished the film and hated the ending. The prestige lacked a prestige of its own.

This post has been edited by Apt: 29 July 2016 - 05:57 PM

[worry]

The ending rules.

[QuickTidal]

 Kanyemander West, on 29 July 2016 - 09:18 PM, said:

The ending rules.

It does indeed. Apt is on crack.

[amphibian]

 Apt, on 29 July 2016 - 05:19 PM, said:

Based on the favorite scene thread I just jumped back into The Prestige. Started an hour further in. 20 minutes later they suddenly revealed something and holy shit, the implications. The film went from ordinary drama to "what the fuck" in a split second.

EDIT: And then I finished the film and hated the ending. The prestige lacked a prestige of its own.

What on earth is up with you?

[Aptorian]

 amphibian, on 30 July 2016 - 12:07 AM, said:

 Apt, on 29 July 2016 - 05:19 PM, said:

Based on the favorite scene thread I just jumped back into The Prestige. Started an hour further in. 20 minutes later they suddenly revealed something and holy shit, the implications. The film went from ordinary drama to "what the fuck" in a split second.

EDIT: And then I finished the film and hated the ending. The prestige lacked a prestige of its own.

What on earth is up with you?

Maybe it's because I jumped an hour in to skip the stuff I remembered, but after the prestige was revealed, the rest of the story ceased to shock or surprise.

Going by the films rules, the art of the magic trick, lies in the use of the pledge, the turn and the prestige. I think the story lost me at the turn, because when I saw it, my mind suddenly went a million miles in every direction. What was the implications? To me they seemed endless, to the story the possibilities were mundane.

Spoiler

Quote

“Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called "The Pledge". The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course... it probably isn't. The second act is called "The Turn". The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you're looking for the secret... but you won't find it, because of course you're not really looking. You don't really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn't clap yet. Because making something disappear isn't enough; you have to bring it back. That's why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call "The Prestige".”

Now, having thought about the ending some more, I think my problem is why the two magic tricks matter. The one Christian Bale pulled off, and the one Hugh Jackman pulled off. Bale's is a classic act of subterfuge, missdirection. A simple trick, shown as something more, that fooled us. Jackman's on the other hand is actual real magic created through science, concealed as something less.

Bale's magic trick is only revealed at the very end. But Jackman's is revealed almost an hour before when they show the copied hats and cats. From that we, the audience, suddenly believe in magic. Anything is possible. A hundred scenes we were shown during the past hour could now mean anything.

Is there more than 1 Bale? Could there be more than 1 Jackman? What, and this is the part that disappointed me, what if there was more than 2? Now, Bale's book actually says that Bale must never have been copied, but at this point, why would we believe him? Surely he's just messing with Jackman, after all he lead him to Tesla.

From the point I saw the hats in the forest I thought the story was going to get convoluted. It didn't. Jackman used the machine in a dark but petty and simple way. Just a means to an end. I expected reveals within reveals at the end. I expected clones upon clones, playing roles, breaking out Bale's character. Yet it was simple. Boring almost.

Now I get that the real turn and prestige is Bale's reveal at the end and it fits wonderfully into the story of the two magician's story and the kind of people they were. However as the guy in the audience, I came to see real magic. And they did make me believe, because they actually showed me raw magic. In comparison a simple body double played by a Twin was so ordinary I experienced profound disappointment.

Sure, it was a fitting end to Jackman, showing how thoroughly outplayed he was. But I NEEDED more.

EDIT: Actually as I typed this out I am sitting and wondering if my negative reaction, is not actually disappointment is the story, but frustration that Bale tricked not just Jackman but me as well? Nah. Can't be.

Still though, when you saw what was going on. Holy shit.

This post has been edited by Apt: 30 July 2016 - 02:15 AM

[Coco with marshmallows]

 WinterPhoenix, on 28 July 2016 - 03:32 AM, said:

So how many times has Magnificent 7 (the story) been done now? Counting Seven Samurai of course.

Off the top of my head:

Seven Samurai
Magnificent Seven (1960s version) plus sequels (3 i think?)
The crap sci-fi remake with John Boy from the Waltons and Robert Vaughn basically reprising his role (Battle beyond the stars?)
Magnificent Seven tv series from late 90s/early 2000s (this was actually pretty good)
The anime mentioned above.
A Bug's Life


plus god alone knows how many one off episodes in tv shows round the world.