The unremarked upon trailer is below.
The unremarked upon trailer is below.
Does the image to the left remind anyone else of the scene in Close Encounters of the Third Kind when the alien mothership hovers over Devil’s Tower?
That’s the first thing that came to mind when I saw this image from Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.
The other thing was that, if I’m lucky, it might also be the first movie directed by Gareth Edwards that I think I might enjoy.
Monsters was underwhelming, and Edwards with Godzilla pulled of the seeming impossible: namely making a Godzilla movie that was dull.
Here’s to Rogue One making up for lost ground, directorially speaking at any rate.
For a movie who’s job was to reboot a blatantly uncontroversial movie, the 2016 reboot of Ivan Reitman’s Ghostbusters proved remarkably controversial.
And while I’d rather not rehash the whole debate, I was reading a story from Brett White from Comicbookresources‘ Spinoff Online, where he draws a comparison between the way numerous movies are treated; commenting upon which get a sequel, and which don’t.
One of the points he raises is how Ghostbusters is doing better than numerous other movies from a financial standpoint, such as Star Trek: Beyond, at a comparable time and yet while that latter is apparently receiving a sequel yet Ghostbusters isn’t.
Though there are problems with White’s logic.
First, just because a studio says that a movie is getting a sequel doesn’t make it so. I mention this because Star Trek: Beyond has earned just over $198 million, which means that despite Paramount saying that there will be one doesn’t mean that there will actually be the case (and if its box office doesn’t increase significantly before it leaves theaters, the likelihood of that diminish accordingly).
Second, he makes a comparison between the box office of Ghostbusters and X-Men: Apocalypse but that’s a problematic comparison at best because the latter movie has earned over $534 million during it’s theatrical run, on a budget of $178 million.
So, despite the relatively weak legs of Fox’s X-movie it’s made enough to get a sequel. If Ghostbusters had earned as much–legs or no legs–then it would as well.
And that’s not to say that there weren’t bad actors on Sony’s side as well as the fan community, but when all is said and done–despite all the mud-slinging and vitriol–if Ghostbusters were profitable, then who said what to whom would be irrelevant.
That hasn’t changed.
Though I find the first full trailer for the movie interesting because it contains various elements from the first movie, such as the laser trap…
Now that I think of it, I also don’t quite know how to classify the Resident Evil movies. The first I would call an action movie, though a very horror-adjacent one.
The other movies in the franchise? They’re all pretty much mediocre action films, with occasional horror elements.
“David Ayer’s Suicide Squad is a better movie than either Man of Steel or Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Which unfortunately isn’t saying all that much.”
By my reckoning the greatest problems with Man of Steel and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was that director Zach Snyder forgot–or choose to ignore–two important things:
First, both Batman and Superman were originally made for children. Now, I can understand the drive to make them more acceptable to adults, but what I don’t get is why he had to alienate younger folk in the process.
Though by doing so he removed two of the things that made them (particularly Superman) interesting to their millions of fans, which is a sense of wonder and possibility.
And while Superman was never my favorite superhero, I also never though of him as a god, something that Snyder has fixated on and feels the need to bludgeon viewers over the head with.
Zach Snyder’s fingerprints are all over Suicide Squad as well, particularly his tendency to equate murkiness and dreariness with darkness of tone.
And I’m also not sure that David Ayer was a good choice for the material (especially considering his filmography, such as End of Watch and Fury, though to be fair he seems to get that this stuff is essentially silly, so nothing’s any more serious than it needs to be) though he seems acquit himself well.
What’s more problematic is that the story–also written by Ayer–is way bigger than it needs to be. Deadshot, El Diablo, Captain Boomerang, Harley Quinn, Slipknot, the Enchantress and Killer Croc are like the Avengers composed of lesser versions of Hawkeye, with the exception of El Diablo, Headshot and the Enchantress.
Which isn’t to say that they can’t be lethal, but if you’re looking for someone to stop an evil that threatens the world they probably wouldn’t be the first group you’d call.
But there’s a more serious problem that directly links to Zach Snyder’s treatment of Batman in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.
Namely Batman, when he encounters Deadshot and Harley Quinn, he kills neither one. If you recall in Batman v Superman he was really keen on killing virtually every person that opposed him.
Here? Not so much.
It’s not a corner that half-decent writing couldn’t get themselves out of, though it’s also a place that Snyder shouldn’t have taken the character in the first place.
And I fully understand that the movie would have been quite a bit shorter if Batman killed off Deadshot and Harley Quinn, but it would have also been truer to what Zach Snyder was doing before the soft reboot of the DC Extended Universe, which Suicide Squad is the first movie in.
Did you know that George Romero (Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, Creepshow, The Dark Half-one of the better adaptations of a Steven King story) was in contention to direct the first Resident Evil movie before Paul W.S. Anderson was chosen?
That the father of the modern day zombie movie somehow couldn’t approach a property that revolves around the walking dead to the satisfaction of Capcom (the creator of the Resident Evil video games) I find particularly interesting.
That being said, I haven’t read Romero’s screenplay so I have no idea why it was rejected, though having seen virtually all the movies that make up the franchise, I have to wonder if some executive in Japan aren’t kicking themselves.
Or maybe committing seppuku if he hadn’t already (and yes, I’m reasonably sure that most , if not all, of Capcom’s executives are male).
Because, while the first movie is pretty decent, the latter certainly aren’t and in fact they get progressively worse as the series moves toward this, the the penultimate chapter.
I love a good war flick, though preferably of the more–relatively speaking–modern variety, where the people doing the fighting believe that what they’re doing is for all the right reasons, till they often come to see whichever conflict they happen to be engaging in a context larger than themselves.
I think the first I can recall enjoying was Stanford Whitman’s Baby Blue Marine, starring Jan-Michael Vincent.
Followed by The Big Red One, Hamburger Hill, Platoon and Full Metal Jacket.
While the four movies–by no means an exhaustive list–aren’t the only war films I’ve seen, they did make the strongest impression upon me.
So now comes Hacksaw Ridge, directed by Mel Gibson–which the trailer does everything in its power not to mention.
Besides, if there’s anything Mel Gibson has shown us it’s that he can direct, though if you look at some of those movies, like Apocalypto and The Passion of the Christ, it goes without saying that Hacksaw Ridge will likely not neglect the gorier aspects of combat.