What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Movies 52 - 1917: Sonic the Bad Boys of Prey

Status
Not open for further replies.
I read a review from a friend that saw an early screening of The Flash and if he's correct, good Lord DC still cannot figure out how to get out of its own way.
 
The moral: shave.


One review:

Potential buyers should not be put off by the crappy sound, average picture, and rubbish subtitles. Did I mention the shoddy direction, acting and script? None of this matters. This begins in the usual plodding fashion. I have seen quite a few Far-Eastern horrors now, but I still can't get used to the seemingly de rigeur dull first half. Clumsy exposition, shallow characters and soap opera style drama make me check how much time has elapsed on the DVD player every time I watch one of these shlockers. Usually, you are repaid in the second half. This time, you get 1000% interest. The film descends into random lunacy; there is the typical exorcism, but this time it's by a hi-tech Hare Krishna, who has a purpose built exorcism chamber handily designed to be carried around on an articulated truck. Why? Who paid for it? Who designed it? Aren't Krishnas peaceful? That's after an initial exorcism attempt by a part time policeman, that has the usual pratfalls, bungling, screaming, and some bowl-of-dog's-blood juggling that would make the Brazilian football team proud. There is a hairy-titted werewolf woman, whose encounter with a jive faux-voodoo African undermines the cheap (and super-dated) stereotyping, by making it utterly ridiculous and hilarious at once. There is the usual crazy synth-based sound effects, backwards flowing gloopy green blood, multi-transforming possession-victim, flying possessed children, mystic exhumations etc. Also, a dismembered arm that unfortunately still has a gun in it's hand is a particular highlight. I can't be bothered to work out where this film stands chronologically in the timeline of the classic western horror canon, but it fits right in somewhere near Evil Dead 2 (although I was also reminded of Poltergeist for some reason) The difference is that there is very little tongue in cheek here. Also, there is very little coherence, reality or sanity. Another reviewer has commented on the lack of a hardcore horror element. That is certainly true - this is no gorefest. I think its minor legendary status stems almost entirely from its lunacy, its hilarity, and its totally unhinged unpredictability. Marvellous.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Disney is making a "live-action" Bambi. Because the cartoon didn't do enough psychological damage to generations of American youth. (Actually because Disney likes money)

This version will be a musical directed by Sarah Polley and feature tunes from country star Kacey Musgraves.
 
ticapnews said:
Disney is making a "live-action" Bambi. Because the cartoon didn't do enough psychological damage to generations of American youth. (Actually because Disney likes money)

This version will be a musical directed by Sarah Polley and feature tunes from country star Kacey Musgraves.
Click to expand...

Who will actually be shot live-action? The hunter?
 
Maybe I'm looking too much into this, BUT...

Could Disney be making a long play here with some of their live action remakes? When it comes to their legacy characters, they are going to lose a fair amount of them to Public Domain in the next 25 years (Steamboat Wilie hits on Jan 1). Live Action provides a fresh interpretation on these characters and locks them up for the next 75 years. I'm sure this is at least somewhat on the minds of the people that run things. (To be fair, THE LITTLE MERMAID was made in the 80s so that's not a factor with that).
 
Eh, I'd like to think that wouldn't help. The copyright is for the character's likeness, isn't it? Like you said, steamboat willie goes public in 2024. I don't think making mickey into an actual mouse is going to cut it.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
Eh, I'd like to think that wouldn't help. The copyright is for the character's likeness, isn't it? Like you said, steamboat willie goes public in 2024. I don't think making mickey into an actual mouse is going to cut it.
Click to expand...

With Mickey, no... But any of their Disney Princess properties are worth protecting. They make significant money off of that group of characters.
 
RaceBoarder said:
Maybe I'm looking too much into this, BUT...

Could Disney be making a long play here with some of their live action remakes? When it comes to their legacy characters, they are going to lose a fair amount of them to Public Domain in the next 25 years (Steamboat Wilie hits on Jan 1). Live Action provides a fresh interpretation on these characters and locks them up for the next 75 years. I'm sure this is at least somewhat on the minds of the people that run things. (To be fair, THE LITTLE MERMAID was made in the 80s so that's not a factor with that).
Click to expand...

It's possible. Hell that loophole may exist because Disney lobbied it in there.
 
A lot of these stories aren't Di$ney stories anyways. Cinderella is one of the oldest stories out there and The Little Mermaid is a Hans Christian Andersen story.

I am not sure how well the Di$ney loophole is going to hold up but I guarantee the only reason Di$ney is doing these live action remakes is because people are dumb enough to go see them. That is what Di$ney does, they churn out this stuff at an unimaginable pace to take every last cent you have. They also treat their workers like dreck whilst doing it. You should hear what visual artists say about working on Di$ney projects some time...you will never complain about crappy CGI again!
 
Handyman said:
A lot of these stories aren't Di$ney stories anyways. Cinderella is one of the oldest stories out there and The Little Mermaid is a Hans Christian Andersen story.

I am not sure how well the Di$ney loophole is going to hold up but I guarantee the only reason Di$ney is doing these live action remakes is because people are dumb enough to go see them. That is what Di$ney does, they churn out this stuff at an unimaginable pace to take every last cent you have. They also treat their workers like dreck whilst doing it. You should hear what visual artists say about working on Di$ney projects some time...you will never complain about crappy CGI again!
Click to expand...

I understand that Disney doesn't own a lot of the characters in fair tales. But what they do own in the distinctive look that is associated with their character interpretations (Mickey with his white gloves, Pooh Bear with his red shirt, Cinderella and her dress, etc.). That is what all this hinges on.
 
Handyman said:
A lot of these stories aren't Di$ney stories anyways. Cinderella is one of the oldest stories out there and The Little Mermaid is a Hans Christian Andersen story.

I am not sure how well the Di$ney loophole is going to hold up but I guarantee the only reason Di$ney is doing these live action remakes is because people are dumb enough to go see them. That is what Di$ney does, they churn out this stuff at an unimaginable pace to take every last cent you have. They also treat their workers like dreck whilst doing it. You should hear what visual artists say about working on Di$ney projects some time...you will never complain about crappy CGI again!
Click to expand...

Agree.

This is goign to be looked back at as a very dark time for creativity in the disney timeline.
 
Handyman said:
A lot of these stories aren't Di$ney stories anyways. Cinderella is one of the oldest stories out there and The Little Mermaid is a Hans Christian Andersen story.

I am not sure how well the Di$ney loophole is going to hold up but I guarantee the only reason Di$ney is doing these live action remakes is because people are dumb enough to go see them. That is what Di$ney does, they churn out this stuff at an unimaginable pace to take every last cent you have. They also treat their workers like dreck whilst doing it. You should hear what visual artists say about working on Di$ney projects some time...you will never complain about crappy CGI again!
Click to expand...

They don't just make bank at the box office. Disney makes more off the merchandise than movie tickets. And unlike the movie, the merchandise will continue to make money for decades. It can also be incorporated into the theme parks (the real money maker) and grow the brand even more.
 
Yeah I know. I have enough friends who are parents to not know the score. I also know a lot of adults who go to Di$ney Parks a lot...

I spent 2 weeks in South Africa for less than those trips cost!
 
Daddy/daughter day today so we went to see The Boogeyman. She likes horror movies and it was my kind of movie(hour and a half long)and I gave it a B.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top