ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Media Center (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Movies and TV John Carter (of Mars) trailer (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=247147)

keg in kc 07-14-2011 03:37 PM

John Carter (of Mars) trailer
 
Brought to you by Disney, from the Edgar Rice Burroughs classics...

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6Rf55GTEZ_E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Deberg_1990 07-14-2011 04:20 PM

Looks interesting, kind of weird......i like that it appears it was shot on location instead of all CGI backgrounds.

tk13 07-14-2011 07:21 PM

I don't know if I was blown away, but it'll be interesting to follow this one. It's directed by Andrew Stanton of Pixar fame... he directed WALL-E and Finding Nemo, and was a writer on the Toy Story films. Also, Peter Gabriel on the music there, it's a great cover of an Arcade Fire song "My Body is a Cage."

KcMizzou 07-14-2011 07:46 PM

Riggins!

JD10367 10-01-2011 11:52 AM

Hey, guess what? I just got my IMAX print of "Real Steel". Guess what it came with? Yup... a "John Carter" trailer. Not sure if it'll be 2D or 3D yet, I'll have to run the trailer and see what it says.

keg in kc 10-01-2011 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD10367 (Post 7956513)
I just got my IMAX print of "Real Steel".

My condolences.

JD10367 10-01-2011 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 7956526)
My condolences.

Eh, I'm sure it'll be okay. At least it looks like it has some neat action and special effects. It's "Rock Em Sock Em Robots", how bad can they **** it up?

keg in kc 10-01-2011 12:21 PM

That's sort of like a guy in a horror film saying "what could possibly go wrong?"

Deberg_1990 10-01-2011 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 7956526)
My condolences.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD10367 (Post 7956513)
Hey, guess what? I just got my IMAX print of "Real Steel". .

Believe it or not, its actually getting decent reviews.

keg in kc 10-01-2011 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 7956690)
Believe it or not, its actually getting decent reviews.

I think it'll be fine for what it is, a kids movie.

Won't catch me watching it in a million years, though. And that's fine, I don't think 37-year old dudes are the target audience.

Deberg_1990 10-01-2011 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 7956713)
I think it'll be fine for what it is, a kids movie.

Won't catch me watching it in a million years, though. And that's fine, I don't think 37-year old dudes are the target audience.

heh, understood. Ill probably take my son.....although its another one of those "Transformers" quandries for me. I noticed its rated PG-13 and Hollywood feels like they have to add in language and adult situations to a kids movie. Meanwhile, anyone over 16 probably feels like this plays too young for them. I dont get why Hollywood does this??

mnchiefsguy 10-03-2011 01:23 AM

John Carter looks intriguing. Here's hoping that it is good.

JD10367 10-04-2011 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 7956720)
heh, understood. Ill probably take my son.....although its another one of those "Transformers" quandries for me. I noticed its rated PG-13 and Hollywood feels like they have to add in language and adult situations to a kids movie. Meanwhile, anyone over 16 probably feels like this plays too young for them. I dont get why Hollywood does this??

Per$onally it $eem$ to me like there'$ a few $pecific rea$on$.

By making it both a "kid's movie" and a "Transformers"-style FX film for nerds who remember playing "Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots", they double the market share.

If it were just a kid's movie, it'd make $40M. If it were a blood-and-guts FX fantasy, it might make $100+M. By doing both, it might not make for a better movie, but it'll probably make for $150+M. Which is all they care about.

Discuss Thrower 10-04-2011 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD10367 (Post 7966290)
Per$onally it $eem$ to me like there'$ a few $pecific rea$on$.

By making it both a "kid's movie" and a "Transformers"-style FX film for nerds who remember playing "Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots", they double the market share.

If it were just a kid's movie, it'd make $40M. If it were a blood-and-guts FX fantasy, it might make $100+M. By doing both, it might not make for a better movie, but it'll probably make for $150+M. Which is all they care about.

Wikipedia sez Real Steel is based off a 1950s short story, not RockemSockemRobots. Make of that what you will.

JD10367 10-04-2011 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower (Post 7966297)
Wikipedia sez Real Steel is based off a 1950s short story, not RockemSockemRobots. Make of that what you will.

Well, RESER was introduced in 1964. That whole 50s-1980 era was when robots took off in pop culture. Robbie the Robot, "Lost In Space", all the cheap sci-fi films, Isaac Asimov's novels, etc.,.

BTW, I'm screening my print now. So far it's not too bad. Because it's a Disney film it's definitely working the father-son-dysfunction angle. The kid playing his kid is like an 11-year-old version of the annoying kid who played little Anakin in "Phantom Menace" (picture that kid with an 11-year-old's annoying smart-ass attitude). Jackman is playing the "likeable rogueish asshole", and you know eventually he and the kid will bond, blah blah blah. Still, compared to a lot of the dreck I've seen lately, it's fairly entertaining and has some nice cinematography so far.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.