|
I like Antonio Banderas being in movies that are getting cinematic releases.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 04:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:15 |
|
|
Kramjacks posted:The worst kind of Dognap SchemeTM. Those fuckin' eyes. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 04:26
|
|
|
OnlyJuanMon posted:Can we just start an Indiana Jones mega thread so I can go into great detail and scream until I'm blue in the face on why Temple of Doom was the best Indy? Please do, I've always known Temple of Doom was the best, ever since I was a kid. KALI MA! Handsome Dead posted:I like Antonio Banderas being in movies that are getting cinematic releases. I haven't seen The Mask of Zorro since I was a kid, pretty much, was it actually any good?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 04:40
|
|
|
Legion of One posted:Here is a new trend in posters that i'm getting a little tired of. That's really eye-catching, actually. ruddiger posted:In honor of V/H/S/... Let it be known: Black Devil Doll From Hell owns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 04:42
|
|
|
Conceptually it's not bad, but yeah technically it's all over the place as it's a forced adaptation off this. There's also the alternate poster that seems to portray the main character as being a love obsessed creep. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 04:47
|
|
|
WebDog posted:There's also the alternate poster that seems to portray the main character as being a love obsessed creep.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 06:31
|
|
|
I didn't want to see Ruby Sparks at first, because the inherent creepiness of a guy dating a woman he conjures into being with his mind was just out of place with the generally twee nature of the trailer. Then I saw Ruby Sparks. It is pretty drat honest about how creepy that sort of thing could get, and it gets dark. I'm not sure if I like it, but I can say that the trailer is putting a smile on it that it shouldn't have and doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 06:31
|
|
|
Magic Love Hose posted:I didn't want to see Ruby Sparks at first, because the inherent creepiness of a guy dating a woman he conjures into being with his mind was just out of place with the generally twee nature of the trailer. It's the Funny Games of quirky indie girl romance films, right down to the trailer being deceptive about the approach to the subject matter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 07:13
|
|
|
OnlyJuanMon posted:See? We'll always be friends, you and I. Ah, but that was no ordinary Hitler. It was Michael Sheard, and he was the best of men. Everything that has Michael Sheard in it is better than anything comparable that does not, solely because he was in it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 10:21
|
|
|
Kramjacks posted:
Speaking of dognapping:  I don't even care what this movie is about, that is an awesome cast. Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 12:33 on Aug 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 12:30
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Speaking of dognapping: Tom Waits??? And this is from the writer of In Bruges!!!! I'll be there day one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 12:41
|
|
|
That's a very Snatch-y poster.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 12:47
|
|
|
The numbering is kinda reminiscent of Trainspotting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 13:25
|
|
|
It's the 'British crime caper' template. What a cast though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 13:30
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:That's really eye-catching, actually.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 15:18
|
|
|
WebDog posted:The numbering is kinda reminiscent of Trainspotting. Also a cute way to tackle the contractually-obligated billing order problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 15:46
|
|
|
Speaking of which:
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 16:56
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Speaking of dognapping: My favourite thing about this poster is Colin Farrell not giving a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
The Leck posted:Have you seen Tales from the Quadead Zone? I haven't been able to track that one down. Never, never, never to my eternal shame. I was tempted to get it on VHS even.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 17:51
|
|
|
Magic Love Hose posted:I didn't want to see Ruby Sparks at first, because the inherent creepiness of a guy dating a woman he conjures into being with his mind was just out of place with the generally twee nature of the trailer. When the actually face the consequences of how creepy it is in the film, I was very much  That said, I was thrilled they took it that way instead of actually having that fantasy and being a creepy and misogynistic film, instead of just having the character be that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
Edit: gently caress it
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 18:50
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:It's the 'British crime caper' template. What a cast though. Which is great because from my understanding the premise is that Colin Farrell plays a hack writer who tries to write generic 'British crime caper' novels and then gets involved in a more bizarre, hosed-up crime situation in reality. TheBigBudgetSequel posted:When the actually face the consequences of how creepy it is in the film, I was very much So the movie was pretty good, if really hard to watch, while it was doing this. Then, in the last five minutes it completely lets the Paul Dano character off the hook for all the loving rapes and abuse he's done, makes him beloved and successful and popular again, and even gives him the opportunity to start another relationship with Ruby. But it's okay, because he wiped her memory of all the psychological and physical abuse he gave her. gently caress Ruby Sparks, most repulsive movie I've ever seen. Other movies may have been more boring or incompetently made, Ruby Sparks on the other hand made a very concerted and very well-crafted effort to be a disgusting pile of gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 19:12
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Speaking of dognapping: I poo poo you not, I thought they labeled the dog on this poster as #2 for a second. On that note, I'd watch Christopher Walken: The Tale of a Psychopathic Dog any day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
This is a hard one but if you have a high res version of this cover or you're holding it in your hand it's very obvious the heads have been photoshopped on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:09
|
|
|
At least Ray Winstone should be used to being a floating head.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:11
|
|
|
Jonny Angel posted:So the movie was pretty good, if really hard to watch, while it was doing this. Then, in the last five minutes it completely lets the Paul Dano character off the hook for all the loving rapes and abuse he's done, makes him beloved and successful and popular again, and even gives him the opportunity to start another relationship with Ruby. But it's okay, because he wiped her memory of all the psychological and physical abuse he gave her. gently caress Ruby Sparks, most repulsive movie I've ever seen. Other movies may have been more boring or incompetently made, Ruby Sparks on the other hand made a very concerted and very well-crafted effort to be a disgusting pile of gently caress. I guess I had a different reading of the film then I never saw him raping Ruby. After he starts to change her to keep him with her, they don't have sex. It's not even implied in the "she's really clingy" change. Yes, what he did was creepy, but the film never paints him as a good guy at that point. He is scum, and he realizes his mistakes. He then learns from them, and writes his book. If it were truly repulsive, he'd have never let her go, and wouldn't have learned a goddamn thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
MrBling posted:At least Ray Winstone should be used to being a floating head. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDqsbzV5MQE And either their grammar is appalling or they had to put 'guilty' in scare quotes for legal reasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
HoldYourFire posted:And either their grammar is appalling or they had to put 'guilty' in scare quotes for legal reasons. The expression is usually "to protect the innocent," so maybe they're just trying to emphasize the difference. Also, that's appalling punctuation, not grammar
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
Slasherfan posted:This is a hard one but if you have a high res version of this cover or you're holding it in your hand it's very obvious the heads have been photoshopped on.  Cage fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Aug 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
Cage posted:I really wanted to find this and Im glad I did. You can see the bad lines where they pasted Rays head on a thinner mans body, and Colm just looks hilarious. I bet he wasnt even wearing a hat for that picture. I wonder why they felt the need to introduce Louise Redknapp? She was famous as a pop singer before she married a footballer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:33
|
|
|
They still do it if it's their first time acting. The TV show Smash even had "introducing Katharine McPhee", who not only was really well known from American Idol, but had several acting roles before that too. Then there's Ocean's Twelve.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:43
|
|
|
Jack Huston looks totally different without a tin face.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:I guess I had a different reading of the film then I never saw him raping Ruby. After he starts to change her to keep him with her, they don't have sex. It's not even implied in the "she's really clingy" change. Yes, what he did was creepy, but the film never paints him as a good guy at that point. He is scum, and he realizes his mistakes. He then learns from them, and writes his book. If it were truly repulsive, he'd have never let her go, and wouldn't have learned a goddamn thing. My real problem with the movie is that it was just 500 Days Of Summer with a magic girl.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Then there's Ocean's Twelve. I saw no problem with this gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Speaking of dognapping: Holy poo poo, what a cast. Tom Waits, Sam Rockwell, and Woody Harrelson all in the same movie is going to create some sort of singularity of awesome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
Jonny Angel posted:So the movie was pretty good, if really hard to watch, while it was doing this. Then, in the last five minutes it completely lets the Paul Dano character off the hook for all the loving rapes and abuse he's done, makes him beloved and successful and popular again, and even gives him the opportunity to start another relationship with Ruby. But it's okay, because he wiped her memory of all the psychological and physical abuse he gave her. gently caress Ruby Sparks, most repulsive movie I've ever seen. Other movies may have been more boring or incompetently made, Ruby Sparks on the other hand made a very concerted and very well-crafted effort to be a disgusting pile of gently caress. Yeah, it would have been leagues better if the author had very specifically rebuffed Ruby at the end, conscious of his mistakes and determined to do better even if it denied him a chance to be with her. We never see him specifically go out on a date with her, but it does hint that they get back together, and that sits unsteady in my stomach. It feels like such a mismatch from the honesty it shows in scene where Ruby finds out she's a fictional character that I have to wonder if the ending was changed at the last minute. Still not sure how I feel about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 03:21
|
|
|
Magic Love Hose posted:Yeah, it would have been leagues better if the author had very specifically rebuffed Ruby at the end, conscious of his mistakes and determined to do better even if it denied him a chance to be with her. We never see him specifically go out on a date with her, but it does hint that they get back together, and that sits unsteady in my stomach. It feels like such a mismatch from the honesty it shows in scene where Ruby finds out she's a fictional character that I have to wonder if the ending was changed at the last minute. Still not sure how I feel about it. I gotta wonder if that ending is a studio-mandated thing. It feels so out of place and really throws off the entire film. I wouldn't be surprised to find out an earlier draft/cut had a much better ending.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 05:55
|
|
|
I was just watching The Damned United on Netflix when it caught my eye that there were two similar but different posters for this film:  On the left, you have Michael Sheen as boss, tormentor, harsh leader, and critic. On the right you have Michael Sheen as funloving, bon vivant, fresh faced man about town that any young lady would love to be on the arm of. The best thing is that they used the same body for both images, but the two different heads don't even look like Michael Sheen all that much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 06:06
|
|
|
That person on the left is not Michael Sheen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:15 |
|
|
GonSmithe posted:That person on the left is not Michael Sheen. I know, eh. He just looks so freakish there. The smaller Netflix image makes it look even weirder, like he's a zombie who's just so drat bored of it all. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2012 06:16
|
|