new trailer of Abrams monster movie before Beowulf

[chumped]

Did you just say the movie would be nothing without its cast? You realize that....that applies to every film known to man? If a cast member is a bad actor, and cant play the part well, the movie will suck.

[ogsean]

Actually, I think he was saying it's a bad movie despite its cast.

That's one of the things I hated about Batman Begins, the fact that they felt compulsed to fill every role with an A-list actor, to try to cover the fact that they had a paper thin story that they dragged out for 3 hours. I could go on for days why I hate that movie, but like Tim said, there's no reason to derail this thread with anti-Begins tirades.

[tim]

captiancharisma said:

Did you just say the movie would be nothing without its cast? You realize that....that applies to every film known to man? If a cast member is a bad actor, and cant play the part well, the movie will suck.

no, there are plenty of movies that i thoroughly enjoy even though they may have a few bad performances and/or awkward casting choices

Begins was a movie i hated, despite the fact that i loved the majority of its cast(or, at least, their prior bodies of work)... i probably would've been asleep at the 50 minute mark if i didnt have faith in the cast pulling it through. in summation, the cast was a faintly bright spot in what was otherwise a terrible movie to me

[chumped]

www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=21492

woot HD!!!!!

[tim]

i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff86/Ryanw234/Picture12.png

uhh... that thing is ing huge. still have no clue what it actually is, but its big, thats fer damn sure

i noticed a few things from watching the HD version... if you compare the Statue of Liberty scene to that of the July teaser, the teaser was obviously some rough pre-vis. because they've completely changed it. the head is much larger in scale, a bit more drowned out in color, and generally much more realistic looking. and most of the background decor was changed too.

its definitely guys in HazMat suits, even though they laid a cheap growling sound over it to confuse people. and is it just me, or does the girl literally begin to inflate and looks like shes about to explode? definitely an "infection" angle going on, and the infection seems legitimate; unlike in "The Host," where it was just a government conspiracy.

oh, and notice how all the army guy's faces are pixelated out to conceal their identity? couple that with the pre-amble about "codename Cloverfield" and the area "formerly known as Central Park," and i'm fairly sure this movie won't be entirely from the PoV of a handheld camera. i think 80% of it will be the shaky cam footage of the attack as it happens, but then there will definitely be some prologue/epilogue stuff shot in normal fashion, probably explaining how the government/country reacted to the attack

[chumped]

clydesimmons said:

i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff86/Ryanw234/Picture12.png

uhh... that thing is ing huge. still have no clue what it actually is, but its big, thats fer damn sure

i noticed a few things from watching the HD version... if you compare the Statue of Liberty scene to that of the July teaser, the teaser was obviously some rough pre-vis. because they've completely changed it. the head is much larger in scale, a bit more drowned out in color, and generally much more realistic looking. and most of the background decor was changed too.

its definitely guys in HazMat suits, even though they laid a cheap growling sound over it to confuse people. and is it just me, or does the girl literally begin to inflate and looks like shes about to explode? definitely an "infection" angle going on, and the infection seems legitimate; unlike in "The Host," where it was just a government conspiracy.

oh, and notice how all the army guy's faces are pixelated out to conceal their identity? couple that with the pre-amble about "codename Cloverfield" and the area "formerly known as Central Park," and i'm fairly sure this movie won't be entirely from the PoV of a handheld camera. i think 80% of it will be the shaky cam footage of the attack as it happens, but then there will definitely be some prologue/epilogue stuff shot in normal fashion, probably explaining how the government/country reacted to the attack

It seems as though there is some sort of parasite exploding out of her or something

Also, that screenshot looks like only its ing leg! Like, you can see the knee bending and such. If thats only its leg, it must tower over the entire city.

[sasso]

clydesimmons said:

i dont want to turn this thread into some Batman tirade, but jesus christ its good to see someone else who thinks Begins was lame. comic fans nut all over it like its the greatest comic film ever, the greatest action film ever, the greatest noir film ever, and the epitome of the Batman character.

really, it was just a movie that sustained any enjoyability thanks in large part to its tremendous cast. i fell in love with Bale as Batman ever since 98 when Ratner/McG were trying to get "Batman vs Superman" off the ground. Caine brings life to the character of Alfred like i've never seen before. Morgan Freeman is can't-miss as the Grandfatherly-type. Cillian Murphy rocked in limited screen time, and Liam Neeson turned in his typically solid performance.

but take away the cast, and what was there? they take 60 minutes diving head first into Bruce Wayne going on some kind of quest to find his inner being, throwing in a muddled and confusing attempt at Ra's Al Ghul... Murphy was awesome but served no point other than to release Arkham... i know they wanted the movie to focus more on Wayne than his villains(like the previous entries did), but i think they went too far in the opposite direction.

and the forced hand of realism is something that really annoys me. all of Batman's equipment has to be real military prototypes, and he can't drive a badass Bat Mobile because it wouldn't be realistic enough. Scarecrow has to be a guy with a potato sack on his head. Al Ghul has to be some weird monk. and now, in DK, the Joker is a guy who has his mouth cut open so he goes crazy and puts face paint on.

jesus christ, its a comic book movie! its about a guy dressing up in a ing bat suit and jumping from building to building fighting crime. so why the need to meticulously give everything about the character some kind of real life foundation? and how are they going to justify Eckhart's Two-Face, a guy symmetrically burnt down the middle with acid, yet they can't let us have an chemical-bath Joker. ugh

end rant

Comic book fans nut over it? Most I know hated it. Everyone else who isn't a comic fan that I know loved the movie.

Nolan has stated he brought the heavy realism into the movie to give the Batman character the respect the character deserves. I hate the mentality of "it's a comic movie, who cares about realism?" Because of that thinking most comics are mocked and considered trash for kids. Movies like Begins show that comics/comic movies can appeal to older teens and adults and that they aren't always the goofy campy garbage sterotype they think they are (and sometimes are).

[tim]

i haven't met a die hard comic fan that wasn't in love with the movie. i'm sure thats in large part due to the fact that everyone was starving for a legible Batman movie after Schumacher's movies, but if you go to sites/message boards that are populated with die hard fans like SuperHeroHype or AintItCool, everyone there is absolutely crazy about that movie

there is a pretty broad line that separates "forced realism" and "campy stereotype." many comic book movies have been successful in playing the fence, lifting the right amount of fantasy elements from the books but leaving enough of the camp behind. i just thought Begins went too far in one direction. i know Batman, as a literary character, is based much more in gritty reality than, say, the Fantastic Four. but any way you cut it, when you're dealing with a character like Batman, you're dealing in a set medium. people are going into the theatre knowing what to expect. you don't need to "justify" every element of superheroism or villainry in order to appease the "older teen and adult" demographic. because in doing so, you're also depriving the film of some of its potentially captivating moments and action sequences; ie giving us "The Tumbler" instead of the Bat Mobile and downplaying all of the villains.

i dunno, maybe Nolan didn't do that stuff with realism in mind. maybe he just felt they were better creative directions. either way, I disagree with him, and i think there are Batman movies out there that can be a lot, lot better than what Begins was. and so far, from what i've seen, Dark Knight won't be one of them.

[jake_317]

Def. looks like a documentry released after the goverment got control of it. So, i believe in some way, it will be a "government conspiracy flick" also.

[jake_317]

Many believe it's based on works of HP Lovecraft, or even a LOST Spin-off?

I go with Lovecraft on that.

But i do have the idea that the monster is indeed called the "parasite", like many others. Hence, it seems that he is infecting people/

[Barrett]

I hadn't realized just how poor quality the trailer(s) I had seen before were. You know that part where it shows the head of the state of liberty being flung across the city? I thought that was a car.

[sasso]

Slightly off topic: Can someone fill me in on this unknown moster on LOST that's been mentioned?

[chumped]

halloween said:

Many believe it's based on works of HP Lovecraft, or even a LOST Spin-off?

I go with Lovecraft on that.

But i do have the idea that the monster is indeed called the "parasite", like many others. Hence, it seems that he is infecting people/

The monster would be Cthulhu, which would ing own.

[ogsean]

clydesimmons said:

i haven't met a die hard comic fan that wasn't in love with the movie. i'm sure thats in large part due to the fact that everyone was starving for a legible Batman movie after Schumacher's movies, but if you go to sites/message boards that are populated with die hard fans like SuperHeroHype or AintItCool, everyone there is absolutely crazy about that movie

there is a pretty broad line that separates "forced realism" and "campy stereotype." many comic book movies have been successful in playing the fence, lifting the right amount of fantasy elements from the books but leaving enough of the camp behind. i just thought Begins went too far in one direction. i know Batman, as a literary character, is based much more in gritty reality than, say, the Fantastic Four. but any way you cut it, when you're dealing with a character like Batman, you're dealing in a set medium. people are going into the theatre knowing what to expect. you don't need to "justify" every element of superheroism or villainry in order to appease the "older teen and adult" demographic. because in doing so, you're also depriving the film of some of its potentially captivating moments and action sequences; ie giving us "The Tumbler" instead of the Bat Mobile and downplaying all of the villains.

i dunno, maybe Nolan didn't do that stuff with realism in mind. maybe he just felt they were better creative directions. either way, I disagree with him, and i think there are Batman movies out there that can be a lot, lot better than what Begins was. and so far, from what i've seen, Dark Knight won't be one of them.

From the word go I always thought Heath Ledger would be a terrible Joker, but I think he's pretty bad in most roles.

And to support tim's theory that most people that defend Begins are hardcore fans, here's a small slice from this board alone, mainly getting their pants in a twist because I didn't love it.

Check out this thread:
I'm dieflappydie/phuck.

wfigs.proboards48.com/index.cgi?board=Wrestling_Figures&action=display&thread=1186218486&page=1




To stay on topic, the HD trailer didn't really tell me anything more than the crappy YouTube quality one did. Which is just as well, I'd rather stay more in the dark than make too many assertations and figure it out before I see the movie. One thing I want to know though is if the entire movie is going to be Blair Witch style handheld that will make me sick to my stomach. That could have a large bearing on me seeing the movie or not.

[HoganBai]

Personally, the bigger the monster the better. If it's 25-30ft tall it'll seem just...a letdown.

Yet, by the looks of things it looks about 300m tall, which is frickin' huge. and that will make a better, more fun-to-watch movie IYAM

[RAC]

Download: