Personally, I still consider one of the most iconic American music videos to be the one where Nick plays an air violin, only to then step in front of an avalanche to save Tina from being buried alive.🙂
Unfortunately, it isn't available on YouTube, but there is another production that features some truly incredible CG-effects 🙏 🙏 🙏
briskhound2 said:I almost had to do a double take... A $120 million budget? Jesus. I’d love to know what on earth they actually spent all that money on...
The film actually cost $50 million. Speed Racer had a $120 million budget.
rowdyridge3 said:Here is something I noticed... in Eamon's song "fu*k IT", he sings: "fu*k What i Said , IT don't mean shit now". Shouldn't it actually be "It DOESN'T MEAN shit now"??? Is this just a simple mistake, a case of artistic license, or is there some other explanation at play here?
Try singing those lyrics using perfect grammar and you'll find your answer immediately.
The teaser that popped up on the Blu-ray last night (someone filmed it using a camera pointed at their computer screen 🤣) seems alright. It looks like R. Zombie wasn't lying when he mentioned that Halloween II is going to be a complete departure from the first film. I have to say, Sheri Moon looks almost comical in those visions Michael is having (likely a dream 🤷) — she looks exactly like she did in the "Living Dead Girl" video!
The link is still active, though the quality is pretty terrible, you can still see and hear everything clearly. Yahoo Movies really ought to upload the teaser in HD quality sometime today.
Boy bands like *NSYNC and their contemporaries are relics of the past, pretty much everywhere except in Asia. Even in Germany—though, let’s be honest, does anything really catch on there?—they struggle to find footing. The only way for a modern boy band to actually survive is to follow the blueprint set by Take That and the Backstreet Boys (and I mean now, not ten years ago when they were stuck doing those clumsy choreographies like everyone else). They need to pivot toward pure mainstream pop infused with rock elements.
@ironbadger21, of course it’s going to be terrible. That’s exactly why people go see it. 😍Besides, the movie is only 84 minutes long (including credits), so the experience will be more or less painless.
That is official trailer which was likely intended strictly for distributors. Don't be misled by the lack of polish; it runs over two minutes and spoils at least half of the death scenes from 😁. The actual official trailer will undoubtedly look much better 🙂. If the link above doesn't work, try this one instead.
While I personally find this franchise endlessly entertaining, I am fully aware that the movies themselves aren't exactly high-quality cinema. However, one thing remains constant: the trailers were always exceptionally well-made:
dustyjackal15 said:Has anyone actually sat through this garbage movie??
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0435679/
I was naive enough to see it had a 7.7 on IMDb, so I figured I'd give it a shot. pa I decided to watch it.
The film is trash. I don't even want to waste my time providing a detailed critique; I just want to know if anyone here actually thinks this is good.
It is entirely possible that the rating is inflated solely because obsessive teenage fans of Jesse McCartney were spamming ten-star reviews without even watching the damn thing.🙂
Anthony Smith3 said:Finally, a high-quality trailer...
TRAILER
I am genuinely curious to see if this movie will "take flight" thanks to the Wrestler, especially since it’s hitting American theaters at the end of this month, if I recall correctly...
Word is this film has been pushed back for two whole years; they supposedly went back and reshot several scenes multiple times—if you check IMDb, you can find some pretty interesting stories about the production.😁 Personally, the trailer doesn't grab my attention, but what does catch my eye is seeing Johnny Knoxville in a supporting role.😁
I haven't sat through a massive amount of films from 2008, but the ones that actually met my standards were The Dark Knight, Slumdog Millionaire, Let the Right One In, Rambo, Be Kind Rewind, and a few others. 🙂
As for the fourth "Indiana Jones" installment, it was a disappointment. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a bad movie, but calling it "solid" is effectively an insult given the legacy of such a franchise.
It was also a rather lackluster year for horror. If I had to pick anything worth noting, I'd point to The Ruins, Cloverfield, and Quarantine (I would have included [REC], but that was released in 2007).
It’s a solid remake. I think most cinephiles would find it interesting to watch both versions side-by-side to compare the differences and see what the American producers thought would work better—even if they didn't quite pull it off entirely 😁 .
There are plenty of subtle differences; here are a few of them:
1. Shaky-cam — this is one area where the remake struggles compared to the original. It isn't quite as extreme as in "Cloverfield," but it's still pretty obnoxious.
2. Violence — the remake is definitely more violent. The scenes lifted from the original feel more aggressive, while the "new" sequences are quite bloody, leaving you wondering how they even managed to film them (especially that bit with the rat and the broken leg 😱 ).
3. Lighting — whereas [REC] was filmed in a well-lit building, the lights are mostly turned off in the remake. This makes certain scenes actually scarier, even though it was annoying at first because it was hard to tell who was where.
4. The opening sequence is much longer in "Quarantine." There are more scenes involving Angela messing around with the firefighters, and the crew itself gets significantly more screen time. You can easily account for about 15 minutes just on that segment before they even enter the building.
5. The explanation for the infection — in "Quarantine," there's almost none, which is both a blessing and a curse. On the plus side, it leaves the audience to figure out what or who caused the mess in the building; on the downside, it lacks those religious undertones. For those who saw [REC], it's clear that Vatican City had connections to the outbreak, serving as a subtle critique of religion from the Directors. Here, you catch a split-second glimpse of news articles about a virus stolen from a lab, which might suggest some cultist was experimenting with it. Or something along those lines 🤷
I could go on describing it, but I won't. 🙂 Ultimately, the original is superior, but the remake is still worth a watch. There you go. 😳
Edward Johnson28 said:Honestly, this is the best horror movie I've seen in a while. I don't get why everyone is hating on it so much. Every horror fan I know thinks it's great. It feels like you guys just went in with impossible expectations, like you were expecting something along the lines of The Exorcist.
Wait... are you actually comparing "The Exorcist" to "One missed call"? 😱 Fine, I'll admit Shannyn Sossamon is easier on the eyes than Linda Blair, but that’s probably the only real advantage "One missed call" has over the original.😁
Go ahead and prošvrljati through this thread... there are plenty of much better movies listed here.🙂