Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Overstreet

Trailer Alert!

Recommended Posts

That's the same Potter trailer they had on the official site a couple weeks ago. None-the-less, I'm really excited about that movie!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But this IS the new full trailer for Spider-man 2. I know some people didn't like the first film, but I really enjoyed it and it looks like I'm going to enjoy part 2 also! Looks great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Napoleon Dynamite

The trailer gives me a serious case of the giggles (esp. that line about the bike)... probably because that kid really reminds me of someone I went to high school with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Napoleon Dynamite looks great! Man, I laughed so hard during that trailer.

"What are you drawing?"

"A liger."

"What's a liger?"

"It's my favorite animal. It's like a lion and a tiger mixed."

laugh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. Definitely some potential there. I hope it's not just a character, but a story. Rushmore definitely pulled that off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some trailers that made me dread the movies they were advertising played in front of KB2 last night. Included were: IRobot (mentally deficient), Van Helsing (laughably ludicrous), and The Stepford Wives (appallingly atrocious). I am sure there was one that was even dumber than these dumb ones but i can't remember it, i left my notebook in the car.

Van Helsing has to be the worst. In the first place it's directed by the same guy who did the Mummies 1 and 2 (i can't remember his name), in the second place it takes the mythology and the contextuality of the vampire and completely perverts it, like OH-SO-MANY other bad movies about vampires.

It's a crying shame.

-s.

Edited by stef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Napoleon Dynamite looks great! Man, I laughed so hard during that trailer.

I did some digging and found this review on FilmThreat.

The cast playing these eccentric characters is magnificent.  Each actor perfectly compliments the Hess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some trailers that made me dread the movies they were advertising played in front of KB2 last night. Included were: IRobot (mentally deficient), Van Helsing (laughably ludicrous), and The Stepford Wives (appallingly atrocious).

There were two trailers in from of the screening of KB2 I attended... I can't remember the first one, probably because the second was for Hero! Might my wish finally come true, that I'll finally get to see this film in a theatre after many a viewing on DVD? My heart's all a-flutter...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, see here.

And yes I'm looking forward to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure there was one that was even dumber than these dumb ones but i can't remember it, i left my notebook in the car.

Ugh, Bortz's new av just reminded me of it. It's Seed of Chuckie, due out around Halloween-time. I'm actually sorry i remembered.

-s.

Edited by stef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Napoleon Dynamite

The trailer gives me a serious case of the giggles (esp. that line about the bike)... probably because that kid really reminds me of someone I went to high school with.

Y'know, what really bugs me in this thread is that I've never been able to get Quicktime to work properly on my computer, despite repeated re-installs. So, many of these trailers won't play, especially ones like Napoleon Dynamite, and there aren't any other formats posted online yet (that I've found).

Sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try hitting iFilm or Movie-List. You might some there in alternate formats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember the first one, probably because the second was for Hero! Might my wish finally come true, that I'll finally get to see this film in a theatre after many a viewing on DVD? My heart's all a-flutter...

eek.gifeek.gifeek.gif

OMG, OMG, OMG!

There was a trailer for Hero??? I haven't seen the film yet in the hopes that my first experience viewing it would be in the theatre. But I've heard so much good about it, and I've seen some screenshots and promotional art that excite me to no end.

Goody goody goody! I'm all giddy now!

Does anyone know when it comes out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow. Casshern is really something. Can't wait to see that on a big big screen. (I hope we get the chance.)

Just came across this review. AICN also recently posted a couple. All are incredibly enthusiastic.

The review above also has some thoughts about the upcoming Ghost In The Shell sequel, titled Innocence, and the author describes it as "an essay on human identity that is to most animation what Kant is to 'Chicken Soup for the Soul'". Hmmmm...

Oh, and some U.S. studio is apparently interested in distributing Casshern stateside and possibly even remaking it with the original director.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and some U.S. studio is apparently interested in distributing Casshern stateside and possibly even remaking it with the original director.

WHY???!!!

Why can't we just enjoy the original? Jeez, it's not even out yet, and they're already thinking of remaking it for we poor Americans who just can't comprehend watching something from another country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm guessing it's the whole "reading subtitles" thing. I guess it's just too hard to multitask like that for the general American viewer. At least they're considering using the same director, a la the American remake of the creepier-than-creepy Ju-on, but it does seem even more redundant, doesn't it?

My fear is that, in remaking these movies for American audiences, they'll strip them of much the alien-ness that adds to their appeal. Just imagine if someone were to remake Spirited Away from an American/Western context? Much of the movie's wonder and appeal comes from its Japanese-ness, its otherness, which allowed Western viewers a glimpse of something they'd truly never seen before - even if they were familiar with Miyazaki's work.

There's a completely different approach to structure and storytelling in Asian films (and not just Asian films, but since the movie in question is Asian, I'm sticking with that). Sometimes its confounding, sometimes its troubling, but more often than not, I find it incredibly invigorating because of the totally different perspective it gives me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

opus wrote:

: Well, I'm guessing it's the whole "reading subtitles" thing. I guess it's just too hard

: to multitask like that for the general American viewer.

I guess years of reading subtitled aliens in Star Wars and Star Trek movies haven't changed things?

: At least they're considering using the same director . . .

This is not always a good thing. I believe the American remakes of The Three Fugitives and The Vanishing were also directed by the same directors, but I haven't heard anybody argue that the remakes were remotely worthy of the originals.

: My fear is that, in remaking these movies for American audiences, they'll strip

: them of much the alien-ness that adds to their appeal.

Hmmm. I'm not sure what I make of this particular argument. I'm all for being exposed to other cultures and artforms, but do the films have an "alien-ness" for their original intended audiences? If not, then why should we consider the "alien-ness" essential to appreciating the films? Hypothetically speaking, might there not be some value in re-doing the films so that the "alien-ness" is downplayed in favour of what is truly important about those films? (I am reminded of that article which pointed out that Mel Gibson wanted his choice of languages in The Passion to confound, NOT to communicate -- but is that what the characters themselves actually had in mind when they originally spoke to each other?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I'm not sure what I make of this particular argument. I'm all for being exposed to other cultures and artforms, but do the films have an "alien-ness" for their original intended audiences? If not, then why should we consider the "alien-ness" essential to appreciating the films? Hypothetically speaking, might there not be some value in re-doing the films so that the "alien-ness" is downplayed in favour of what is truly important about those films? (I am reminded of that article which pointed out that Mel Gibson wanted his choice of languages in The Passion to confound, NOT to communicate -- but is that what the characters themselves actually had in mind when they originally spoke to each other?)

Might this not be pushing the point too far, though? Audiences are different from one another. There is no way I can watch Spirited Away exactly the same way as a native Japanese viewer, and I very much appreciate the freedom to have a uniquely American reaction to a Japanese film, even though my reaction was not foreseen by the director, as opposed to trying to filter everything through a cultural translation matrix in an attempt to engineer an exactly parallel American equivalent experience to the Japanese viewer's experience of the film. (The latter might also be an interesting exercise, but not a replacement for the real thing.)

The inescapable fact is that Jesus lived and died 2000 years ago in an ancient culture at a time and place where there were no Oxonian, Cockney, Brooklyn or So-Cal English accents -- and the gospels were first written for people familiar with THAT world, and WE are NOT those people. The context of the story IS alien to us. The gospel writers had no intention of confounding us, but they had no intention of communicating to us in our own cultural idiom, either. Don't we honor the truth about the story by reflecting its alienness at least as much as by trying to adapt it to our own cultural idioms? And didn't Mel do that at least by shooting in ancient languages that, nit-pick his linguistic choices however one may, successfully bring home the fact that Jesus and other Gospel figures weren't modern-day Westerners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SDG wrote:

: Might this not be pushing the point too far, though? Audiences are different from

: one another. There is no way I can watch Spirited Away exactly the same way as

: a native Japanese viewer, and I very much appreciate the freedom to have a

: uniquely American reaction to a Japanese film, even though my reaction was not

: foreseen by the director, as opposed to trying to filter everything through a

: cultural translation matrix in an attempt to engineer an exactly parallel American

: equivalent experience to the Japanese viewer's experience of the film. (The latter

: might also be an interesting exercise, but not a replacement for the real thing.)

Oh, quite.

: The inescapable fact is that Jesus lived and died 2000 years ago in an ancient

: culture at a time and place where there were no Oxonian, Cockney, Brooklyn or

: So-Cal English accents -- and the gospels were first written for people familiar

: with THAT world, and WE are NOT those people. The context of the story IS alien

: to us. The gospel writers had no intention of confounding us, but they had no

: intention of communicating to us in our own cultural idiom, either.

Ah, but the interesting thing about the gospels is that they DO communicate to a culture that is at least one step removed from the original events -- the gospels are written in Greek, not Aramaic, and on the rare occasion when they do record a word or phrase in Aramaic, it is sometimes in a context which suggests that there is something confounding, magical, otherworldly about the original language (like when Jesus heals the one guy by declaring "Ephphatha!" or when he raises the dead girl by saying "Talitha koum"; OTOH, the preservation of "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani" in Aramaic was probably intended to convey the prayerful or liturgical nature of his cry). So the gospels are, themselves, already a translation of what actually happened. And this arguably goes beyond mere language -- one could, presumably, point to various details in the writing, even various "plot elements", to show how the gospels have told the Jesus story in a way that makes it more accessible for their readers.

: Don't we honor the truth about the story by reflecting its alienness at least as

: much as by trying to adapt it to our own cultural idioms?

That depends on how we balance the alienness with the non-alienness, but yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...