Oh I'm sorry, Did I Break Your Conversation........Well Allow Me A Movie Thread by S&T

[johnnyredstorm]

I'm looking at your avy JRS.... I have no idea how he saw that punch coming.

I've been tryna figure that out since I came across the clip :x

I used to have this thing where I thought chicks from the 60s and 70s weren't as hot as today' s girls. Watching these old Bond movies has me changing my mind. All the old Bond girls were bad.

The women were just different looking back then but I dig the way those chicks looked.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

JJ Abrams is definitely not directing Star Trek 3 due to his commitment to Star Wars Episode VII, but as CP1708 said he is working as a producer. They haven't even picked a director yet to helm the ST3 movie. Names being bandied about are on Jon M. Chu (Step It Up 1 & 2 , Justin Bieber: Never Say Never & G.I. Joe: Retaliation) & Rupert Wyatt (Subterrain & Rise of the Planet of the Apes).


http://www.hitfix.com/news/jj-abrams-says-rupert-wyatt-would-be-a-great-for-star-trek-3-watch

Watch: J.J. Abrams: Rupert Wyatt would be great for 'Star Trek 3'
Will the 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' helmer take over?
BY DAVE LEWIS WEDNESDAY, SEP 11, 2013 2:43 PM

With "Star Trek Into Darkness" director J.J. Abrams heading to the "Star Wars" galaxy, rumors have been flying about who will take his place in the director's chair for "Star Trek 3."

HitFix caught up with Abrams at the release party for "Star Trek Into Darkness" on DVD and Blu-Ray, where he addressed the rumor that director Rupert Wyatt ("Rise of the Planet of the Apes" ) will step in for the rebooted series' threequel.

Although there is no director signed to the project, Abrams seems to approve of Wyatt. "He's incredibly talented," he says, "and we'd be lucky to have someone as talented as Rupert. But there are things we're focusing on right now before the director, which is just sort of the fundamentals of where the story is gonna go."

"It's too early to talk about details," Abrams continues, "but there have been a lot of really exciting ideas about what comes next."

Although he apparently won't be calling the shots, Abrams will stay onboard as a producer. "I plan to be involved in the story and producing the film and I feel very blessed to be involved at all," he says.

"Star Trek 3" is expected to feature the return of "Star Trek Into Darkness" stars Chris Pine, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, Zachary Quinto, John Cho, Karl Urban and Alice Eve. Benedict Cumberbatch and Peter Weller also starred in the sequel.

"Star Trek Into Darkness" is now available on DVD and Blu-ray.

 

[laker4lifeman]

Talking about Alice Eve

 

[rustlenomics]

the bling ring sucked balls...

what a waste of time.

 

[|A-Man|]

I'm pretty sure her and Tarantino used to date.

That's Andy **** in a wig.

 

[big j 33]

Alice Eve was especially great in that interview.

 

[big j 33]

BREAKING: TOM HANKS IS STILL EVERYONE’S FAVORITE

 

[lawdog1]

^^^My wife has met Hanks a couple times. She used to nanny for a kid that went to school with his kids. She said he was always super nice and friendly. I saw him once at a carnival for the school and, thought I didn't meet him, he seemed to he acting just like one of the other parents.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

I thought this was an interesting story about Scorsese shooting Gangs of New York. Harvey Weinstein's battles with directors to cut time are legendary.

http://www.slashfilm.com/trivia-how-george-lucas-helped-with-the-gangs-of-new-york-elephant-problem/

Trivia: How George Lucas Helped With the ‘Gangs of New York’ Elephant Problem
Posted on Thursday, September 12th, 2013 by Russ Fischer

Harvey Weinstein is a guy whose nature leads to intensely polarized opinions. He’s a mogul in the old style, who exerts his will with force, and grandstands, and makes good movies and irritating decisions in equal measure. Having been part of some of the biggest films of the last couple decades, Harvey also has endless stories to tell, and when he opens up there’s great stuff to learn.

Take Gangs of New York, the Martin Scorsese film that Weinstein produced in 2002. The massive project shot in Rome, and quickly became legendary in some circles as an example of Harvey’s heavy-handed demands for a shorter cut than the filmmaker wanted to deliver. Weinstein recently talked about that aspect of the film, but he also explained the origin of the CG elephant that roams through the elaborate riot sequence that acts as the climax of the film.

In Toronto on Tuesday, Weinstein was in a talkative mood. Asked about the production of Gangs of New York, which saw his ego clash with that of Martin Scorsese, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Daniel Day-Lewis, Weinstein talked about a few aspects of the shoot. One anecdote involves one of the more memorable, if brief bits used in the climactic Draft Riots sequence:

We needed an elephant on Tuesday at four o’clock in the afternoon. They assured us the elephant would be there, we called them on Monday and they said, ‘The elephant will be there,” and then [the day we needed it], the elephant’s not there. They literally brought a tiger in a cage. “We said an elephant, and you gave us a tiger!” And they said, ‘There are no elephants in Italy.’

The end of that story is I said, ‘Marty, just keep shooting,’ and I called George Lucas and said, ‘We’re effed. We don’t have a goddamn elephant. Tell us how to shoot it!’ And it’s the only CGI shot in the movie — they told us how to shoot it and how to create the elephant walking through the streets with [CGI].

(I’ve been under the impression that there are other shots with CG enhancement, but the elephant is likely the only purely CG creation in the film.)

As for comments on the battle over running time, Weinstein explains that Scorsese’s first favored cut ran over three and a half hours. “If you thought there was action in Gangs of New York the movie, you should have seen that editing room!” he exclaimed. An hour was cut, and the producer says that Scorsese came to accept the result. Scorsese calls the released version his director’s cut, despite the fact that Scorsese himself reportedly distributed a few tape copies of a longer cut to friends before the movie hit theaters.

Weinstein says of the idea of any release of a longer cut:

[Scorsese] says, ‘You think I’m that ******g stupid that I’m gonna put out the director’s cut at three hours and 36 minutes? That would prove Harvey’s a genius!’

Vulture notes that Weinstein added as a parting shot, “By the way, that’s how final cut works.”

Some news from the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media, Communications & Entertainment Conference... I'd like the first couple of origin stories to focus on Boba Fett, Han & Chewie, & Yoda. The spin off movies are supposed to be released in between the "episodes".

http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/st...ey-when-it-comes-to-opportunities-1200609291/

‘Star Wars’: The ‘Sky’s the Limit’ for Disney’s Spinoff Opportunities

Disney focused on growing the sci-fi properties' licensing opportunities worldwide in time for the saga's seventh film in 2015

Marc Graser
Senior Writer
@marcgraser

Not that Disney had any reason to be concerned over its $4 billion purchase of Lucasfilm, but “of all our worries, ‘Star Wars’ is not one of them,” said Walt Disney Co. chief financial officer Jay Rasulo at an investor conference on Thursday.

During a presentation of the Mouse House’s assets at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media, Communications & Entertainment Conference, in Beverly Hills, Rasulo said “the market is extremely hot for everything ‘Star Wars.’”

He called the franchise an “evergreen property” that continues to mint money through licensing deals, and had the potential to become even more valuable with the right deals.

When asked if Disney was worried that today’s kids may not be familiar with the films, Rasulo touted the strong sales of toys — the brand continues to prove one of the top franchises in terms of licensing revenue each year.

“This is not a new franchise for kids,” Rasulo said.

But there’s still room for growth. Disney purchased Lucasfilm late last year as a way to cash in on the ongoing appeal of the 35-year-old “Star Wars” franchise and grow the brand in new ways around the world.

“The sky’s the limit,” Rasulo said of the potential for the sci-fi franchise, including expanding its presence in the company’s theme parks. “There’s incredible flexibility. It’s an unbelievable palette to create from.”

Rasulo said Disney’s in-house licensing and consumer products group would devote the next year on brokering deals around the world to expand the reach of the “Star Wars” brand.

Given its much smaller size, Lucasfilm had focused primarily on U.S.-based licensing programs and then on toys and a few other categories. But Disney plans to expand broaden it into housewares and other merchandise categories the way it’s increased the vast variety of products that feature Marvel’s superheroes.

“We will lay the groundwork for that … and when the film comes out in 2015, we’ll be ready to blow it out,” Rasulo said.

The overall strategy is “to put out a great film” first, Rasulo said.

As Disney has often stated before, Pixar, Marvel and Lucasfilm pics, as well as Disney branded animated and live action films, will make up a majority of the studio’s slate.

Rasulo also noted that one “Star Wars” trilogy film or “origin story film” would also appear on the release schedule each year, starting with the seventh installment in the “Star Wars” saga that J.J. Abrams will direct and Disney releases in 2015.

The exec cautioned that after the disappointing box office performance of “The Lone Ranger” this summer, “there needs to be a cap on (budgets of) tentpole franchise movies.” “Going forward, we will see a cap on spending on those movies,” he said.

Rasulo said Disney has no plans as of yet to make other high-profile acquisitions the way it picked up Lucasfilm.

“We are not in a position today where we feel there’s a necessity to buy something, Rasulo said. “We don’t feel like there are holes that there are out there we’re trying to fill.”

But the executive still kept Disney’s doors open to the possibility for a purchase, should the right deal come along.

“We demonstrated we remain extremely opportunistic in things that might show up that demonstrate to us that it’s a way to accelerate ourselves in a marketplace where we feel consumers live or consumers will live in the future,” citing acquisitions of Playdom and India’s UTV in the past.

Instead, Rasulo said Disney intends to use its cash to buy back the company’s stock, spending around $6 billion, and as much as $8 billion, during its fiscal 2014 year. That’s up from $4 billion over the last couple of years.

Disney’s stock was lifted on the news, up $1.55 to close at $65.49, a gain of 2.4%

http://www.deadline.com/2013/09/warner-bros-chief-says-ben-affleck-perfect-new-vision-batman/

Warner Bros Chief Says Ben Affleck Is “Perfect” For New Vision Of Batman

The Dark Knight in the unnamed sequel to Man Of Steel is “kind of tired and weary and seasoned and been doing it for a while,” Warner Bros CEO Kevin Tsujihara told investors at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media, Communications and Entertainment Conference. Ben Affleck — a controversial choice to play Batman among many fans — “is perfect for the vision….We think it’s going to be huge.” Tsujihara says the film is one example of how his DC Comics unit “really does tie to all parts of our business.” The company has three animated TV shows based on DC characters, and “think about the direct to videos we do with DC and the games. This year we have two huge games.” The CEO added that “I love the way our slate is positioned going forward.” With opportunities in television and home video, “we’re confident we can grow this business.”

 

[CP1708]

Recent Blu Ray releases gonna leave me broke.

Star Trek 2
Iron Man 3
Fast Six
The Conjuring

All come out within the next 4-5 weeks.

And then of course, Black Friday always does work on my money.



Pirates of the Caribbean moved from 2015 to 2016.


And Dexter and Breaking Bad are finished by the end of this month.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

Yuck, you're going to buy Iron Man 3 CP1708? That movie was hot trash IMO...

 

[lawdog1]

Its just been announced that there's going to be a new series of films set in J.K. Rowling's wizarding world --

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/09/12/jk-rowlingharry-potter-fantastic-beasts/

The new movies will be neither prequels or sequels to the Harry Potter series, but a stand-alone franchise that takes place in the same universe. As a big HP fan, I'll be checking these out. I can't imagine they'll be quite as big as the original HP series, since, as I understand it, they're won't be companion books for each movie, but they'll still make Rowling and Warner Bros a ton of money.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

I love music & I love docs so here's what should be a good doc even though frickin' Gene Simmons is a narrator... What the eff?!?!? Of all the people they could've got to narrate they got this corny dude? To borrow the ranting style of 'Ye, he ain't got nothing to do with this mother effing cultcha...

Anyway, I digress. The film features Questlove, King Errisson, Jerry Butler, Freda Payne, Grandmaster Caz, Melle Mel, Roosevelt Grier, Afrika Bambaataa, & others.

It hits limited release on VOD today...

 

[big j 33]

Saw The Family today... De Niro, Luc Besson, Pfeiffer, Tommy Lee Jones, and Dianna Agron (who I wish was far more popular than she is)

And the verdict is "ehhh".

It's kind of hard to make a truly terrible movie since it's so well cast. They're all perfect, even the younger brother. But if they were going for a satire, they never made a point. If they were going for dark comedy, it wasn't funny enough. It they were going for a over the top action movie, it wasn't ridiculous enough.

I feel like if Martin McDonagh (In Bruges and Seven Psychopaths) did this movie, it could have been a sleeper hit of the year. It's not a groundbreaking premise, but if done well it could have been great because of the cast. But it just wasn't as funny as it needed to be, the characters weren't compelling enough to justify their violence or make it interesting, and it didn't give a new take on the material.

It's worth a rental and if you're desperate to see a movie in September, you won't hate it, but lower the expectations.

 

[rrlegend]

Recent Blu Ray releases gonna leave me broke.

Star Trek 2
Iron Man 3
Fast Six
The Conjuring

All come out within the next 4-5 weeks.

And then of course, Black Friday always does work on my money.



Pirates of the Caribbean moved from 2015 to 2016.


And Dexter and Breaking Bad are finished by the end of this month.

Iron man 3 you can definitely wait till Black Friday bought it on iTunes the other week and regret it

 

[lawdog1]

Saw The Family today... De Niro, Luc Besson, Pfeiffer, Tommy Lee Jones, and Dianna Agron (who I wish was far more popular than she is)

So Agron was good?

 

[CP1708]

Yuck, you're going to buy Iron Man 3 CP1708? That movie was hot trash IMO...

It makes no sense to me to buy ever Marvel film already on Blu in terms of the new breed Avengers films. Have to "complete the collection" so to speak.

You're talkin to a guy who's been buying all 23 Bond films one by one the last couple years, and not all of them are great, but they are stories in the legacy.


20 years from now, when the 4th reboot of Iron Man drops, and we're technically on Iron Man 11, makes no sense to not have 3 in hand.


If I didn't have all the other Marvel movies, then maybe I would skip it, but since I do, has to be in there otherwise the collection is not "complete".


*shrugs* That's how I look at it at least.

 

[big j 33]

Saw The Family today... De Niro, Luc Besson, Pfeiffer, Tommy Lee Jones, and Dianna Agron (who I wish was far more popular than she is)

So Agron was good?

The only problems were related to her character... but none of the characters were really 3-dimensional or fleshed out. She had a typical teenage girl character/story but she played it well. She was tough/violent, crying and broken, and damn attractive.

Character spoiler

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

A brief sex scene... no nudity or anything but a small scene where she does it up against a door... so it has that going for it

 

[jpzx]

20 years from now, when the 4th reboot of Iron Man drops, and we're technically on Iron Man 11, makes no sense to not have 3 in hand.


If I didn't have all the other Marvel movies, then maybe I would skip it, but since I do, has to be in there otherwise the collection is not "complete".


*shrugs* That's how I look at it at least.

I totally get what you're saying, but you are buying it almost at full price, and when it's a movie you feel is average to decent, why not get the most bang for your buck and wait. Especially if it's JUST to complete the collection (so you will eventually have it in your possession regardless)? I get there are exceptions like Django, Inception, etc.

I pretty much wait a whole year or more to buy the new releases, and on top of it, I wait until I see them at Pawn America. I'm telling you guys, you're spending WAY too much money if you're not getting your Blu's there. 90% the time the cases are w/o scratches, dents, any wear/tear of any kind, and as you all know from the inauguration of the Blu Ray discs, they almost are "unscratchable". Thus, there's no worry about getting them used.

For example, I bought Drive the other day for $6, Rise of the Planet of the Apes for $7, and it goes on. I'm not paying $26.99 for that ****!




Saw Don Jon two days ago. Will post my review soon.

 

[CP1708]

True, I can wait, but I don't ever pay 25+ either, I usually find deals around 18-20 at most on day 1 releases.

If IM3 is more than that, sure I'll wait, but typically I get everything I know has to be "in the case" on day 1-2.



True tho, I have paid 20 for movies plenty of times only to see them for 5 bucks on Black Friday. Every year.

 

[johnnyredstorm]

The Family is meh? Meh, I was hoping for a solid rebound flick from De Niro. How was he in the movie? Did he mail it in like he has the past 10 years?

 

[big j 33]

It's hard to criticize him because the material just wasn't there. The character wasn't likable and he wasn't dynamic or deep enough to be an interesting antihero or anything like that. DeNiro was far better in Silver Linings Playbook because the material gave him a real character.

Like I said before, same premise and cast but with a more confident script and direction and it would be a very good movie. Wasn't a black comedy, wasn't a satire, it was closest to an over the top mob movie, but that's been done so many times they didn't bring anything new to the table.

It's worth a Redbox/Netflix/download for sure... and if you're still curious or really like the cast, worth a matinee.

 

[CP1708]

Isn't Agron like 27? How are she and Maggie Grace (30) playing roles as teens still?

Don't take that as a complaint, just an honest question why that's happening.

 

[lawdog1]

Isn't Agron like 27? How are she and Maggie Grace (30) playing roles as teens still?

Don't take that as a complaint, just an honest question why that's happening.

I think it's just a testament to there not being a lot of good teen actresses (or actors). And Chloe Moretz and Emma Watson can't be in everything.

 

[lawdog1]

Another take on it is all these "teens" being scooped up by television ( esp Disney )

I feel like there's way more teen based shows then when I was growing up ( during the 90s )

That's true. Thanks to my son, I know that there's like 7 teen focused sitcoms on Disney channel alone. And I bet Disney keeps a right watch on what other projects their actors/actresses take on. Plus, they ALL seem to sing and act, so when they're not doing TV, they're cutting records for the Disney label.