› ›

Coming soon to cinemas near you! - The upcoming films thread

1…281282284286287…430

Comments

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    @bondjames @doubleoego @DarthDimi @ClarkDevlin @MajorDSmythe @Creasy47

    First images of Boy Erased, directed by Joel Edgerton, starring Lucas Hedges, Russell Crowe, Nicole Kidman, Joel Edgerton, and Xavier Dolan:

    vk1feHf.jpg
    WtLAY5F.jpg
    xzRxaVg.jpg

    The plot: The son of a baptist preacher is forced to participate in a church-supported gay conversion program.

    Release date: September 28, 2018.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited May 2018 Posts: 15,717
    1st trailer for Papillon, remake of the 1973 film:



    1st promo poster for the Men in Black spin-off:

    men_in_black_spin_off_promo_poster_1111165.jpg
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,994
    All right, even I, who is an Abba fan, think it's a bad idea, but here goes :

  • octofingeroctofinger
    Posts: 787
    Wow - I had no idea Papillon was being remade. Considering the original, that's a rather bold decision. . .
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,972
    octofinger wrote: »
    Wow - I had no idea Papillon was being remade. Considering the original, that's a rather bold decision. . .

    More like wildly unnecessary.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    They'll remake anything these days.

    I think I may have seen Papillon on tv once as a kid. Not sure. I keep mixing that one up with Cool Hand Luke for some reason. Doubt I'll see the remake.
    ---
    Gerard wrote: »
    All right, even I, who is an Abba fan, think it's a bad idea, but here goes :

    I'm sure there's a market for this given the first was very successful. I consider myself fortunate that I shan't ever watch either.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,756
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    Wow - I had no idea Papillon was being remade. Considering the original, that's a rather bold decision. . .

    More like wildly unnecessary.

    Yes! How can anyone compare to McQueen and Hoffman?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I saw it in the cinema in the 80s. Pretty good film.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited May 2018 Posts: 13,978
    DaltonCraig007 wrote: »
    @bondjames @doubleoego @DarthDimi @ClarkDevlin @MajorDSmythe @Creasy47

    9irj5jw95az01.jpg

    DTV films don't have a great reputation, but I have enjoyed (and not in a "so bad they're good" way) most of JCVDs latter films. Black Water looks like it won't disappoint.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    @bondjames @doubleoego @DarthDimi @ClarkDevlin @MajorDSmythe @Creasy47

    Chad Stahelski (John Wick 1 & 2) has signed on to direct the big screen adaptation of the comic book Analog.

    Analog is set in the near-future where the security of the Internet has been rendered useless thanks to an event referred to as the Great Doxxing. Out of those ashes, people turn to so-called Ledger Men, agents who carry sensitive secrets the old-fashioned way – with a briefcase handcuffed to one arm, and a gun held in the other.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    @bondjames @doubleoego @DarthDimi @ClarkDevlin @MajorDSmythe @Creasy47

    Liam Neeson is in talks to join the upcoming Men in Black spin-off.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    Wow - I had no idea Papillon was being remade. Considering the original, that's a rather bold decision. . .

    More like wildly unnecessary.

    Yes! How can anyone compare to McQueen and Hoffman?
    A totally unnecessary remake if ever I saw one. It even looks like its director Michael Noer has lifted Franklin J. Schaffner's scenes shot-for-shot is some parts, right down to the dialogue. Of course, I saw the original '73 movie in the theatres being a huge Steve McQueen fan at the time, but nothing will make me part with cash to see this pointless remake with actors that can't hold a candle to Hoffman or McQueen. Good to see that you too have a connoisseur's taste in good movies @Torgeirtrap.

    @bondjames, you need to see the original again and pronto before considering going to this pointless remake. I suspect that your adult mind will see things that were not self-evident to you as a child.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,756
    bondsum wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    Wow - I had no idea Papillon was being remade. Considering the original, that's a rather bold decision. . .

    More like wildly unnecessary.

    Yes! How can anyone compare to McQueen and Hoffman?
    A totally unnecessary remake if ever I saw one. It even looks like its director Michael Noer has lifted Franklin J. Schaffner's scenes shot-for-shot is some parts, right down to the dialogue. Of course, I saw the original '73 movie in the theatres being a huge Steve McQueen fan at the time, but nothing will make me part with cash to see this pointless remake with actors that can't hold a candle to Hoffman or McQueen. Good to see that you too have a connoisseur's taste in good movies @Torgeirtrap.

    @bondjames, you need to see the original again and pronto before considering going to this pointless remake. I suspect that your adult mind will see things that were not self-evident to you as a child.

    Aren't most remakes pointless, too? Of all the remakes I've seen, I can't really think of anyone that really added something to the original.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'll be sure to do that @bondsum. My recollection is very vague but I remember thinking it was a bit dull. I think I confuse it with Cool Hand Luke because Newman is in the latter, it's also prison oriented and both starred as co-leads in The Towering Inferno, one of my favourites. Funny how the memory bank works.
  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    I think there have been a few exceptions @Torgeirtrap. David Cronenberg's remake of the 1958 science fiction film The Fly springs to mind. As does Hitchcock's own 1956 remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much, and of course John Carpenter's The Thing. But yeah, if the original was great to begin with, then there's zero point in remaking it again pretty much shot-for-shot with similar-looking actors mimicking their roles.
  • bondsumbondsum
    edited May 2018 Posts: 3,333
    bondjames wrote: »
    I'll be sure to do that @bondsum. My recollection is very vague but I remember thinking it was a bit dull. I think I confuse it with Cool Hand Luke because Newman is in the latter, it's also prison oriented and both starred as co-leads in The Towering Inferno, one of my favourites. Funny how the memory bank works.
    If you were young at the time I can see where the confusion might have played a part @bondjames. I happen to like both movies, but for very different reasons. Bond topic connection: Cool Hand Luke stars Clifton James otherwise known as J.W. Pepper and Papillon Anthony Zerbe of LTK.
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,994
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »

    Aren't most remakes pointless, too? Of all the remakes I've seen, I can't really think of anyone that really added something to the original.

    The Maltese Falcon. It was a remake of two movies based on the same novel. And it's the one people remember.

    220px-The_Maltese_Falcon_1931_Poster.jpg

    SatanLadyPoster.jpg

    220px-Falconm.JPG

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,883
    I quite like A Perfect Murder (1998). It's a pseudo remake of Dial M For Murder (1954), which takes the basic premise of Hitchcock's original (which I'm a big fan of as well) and expands upon it. Great cast too (Michael Douglas, Gwyneth Paltrow, Viggo Mortensen and David Suchet).

    I was thinking of viewing The Maltese Falcon last night actually (I've never seen it before). May get round to it this weekend.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    @bondjames @ClarkDevlin @doubleoego @Creasy47 @MajorDSmythe @DarthDimi

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    @bondjames @ClarkDevlin @doubleoego @Creasy47 @MajorDSmythe @DarthDimi

    Beware of spoilers- watch at your own risk:



    ---

  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    edited May 2018 Posts: 17,756
    bondsum wrote: »
    I think there have been a few exceptions @Torgeirtrap. David Cronenberg's remake of the 1958 science fiction film The Fly springs to mind. As does Hitchcock's own 1956 remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much, and of course John Carpenter's The Thing. But yeah, if the original was great to begin with, then there's zero point in remaking it again pretty much shot-for-shot with similar-looking actors mimicking their roles.

    Is The Thing remake good? Haven't seen that one (nor the original).
    Rami Malek is a decent actor though, to be honest - but again, a remake of a classic is just unnecessary.
    Regarding The Man Who Knew Too Much, it's a bit funny for a director like Hitchcock to remake one of his own films. How often have we seen something similar?
  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,994
    Well, there was Topaze, written originally as a theater play by Marcel Pagnol, who later on filmed two versions of it, one in 1936 and one in 1951.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    I think there have been a few exceptions @Torgeirtrap. David Cronenberg's remake of the 1958 science fiction film The Fly springs to mind. As does Hitchcock's own 1956 remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much, and of course John Carpenter's The Thing. But yeah, if the original was great to begin with, then there's zero point in remaking it again pretty much shot-for-shot with similar-looking actors mimicking their roles.

    Is The Thing remake good? Haven't seen that one (nor the original).
    Rami Malek is a decent actor though, to be honest - but again, a remake of a classic is just unnecessary.
    Regarding The Man Who Knew Too Much, it's a bit funny for a director like Hitchcock to remake one of his own films. How often have we seen something similar?

    Carpenter s remake was very poor.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    @bondjames @ClarkDevlin @doubleoego @Creasy47 @MajorDSmythe @DarthDimi

    0Am4N4H.jpg
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,756
    Gerard wrote: »
    Well, there was Topaze, written originally as a theater play by Marcel Pagnol, who later on filmed two versions of it, one in 1936 and one in 1951.

    Interesting. I'm unfamiliar with those films (and French cinema of that era in general) - any good?
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Torgeirtrap wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    I think there have been a few exceptions @Torgeirtrap. David Cronenberg's remake of the 1958 science fiction film The Fly springs to mind. As does Hitchcock's own 1956 remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much, and of course John Carpenter's The Thing. But yeah, if the original was great to begin with, then there's zero point in remaking it again pretty much shot-for-shot with similar-looking actors mimicking their roles.

    Is The Thing remake good? Haven't seen that one (nor the original).
    Rami Malek is a decent actor though, to be honest - but again, a remake of a classic is just unnecessary.
    Regarding The Man Who Knew Too Much, it's a bit funny for a director like Hitchcock to remake one of his own films. How often have we seen something similar?

    Carpenter s remake was very poor.

    Is the Carpenter film also a remake?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Yes.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,756
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Yes.

    Of which film? Is the original called The Thing, as well?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It is very similar to THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD from 1951, which is a much better film.

    They were both loosely based on a novella from the 30s called WHO GOES THERE?
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,756
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    It is very similar to THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD from 1951, which is a much better film.

    They were both loosely based on a novella from the 30s called WHO GOES THERE?

    Hadn't heard about that film before. You learn something new every day!
  • octofingeroctofinger
    Posts: 787
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    Wow - I had no idea Papillon was being remade. Considering the original, that's a rather bold decision. . .

    More like wildly unnecessary.

    I was trying to be diplomatic, but yes: those are some awfully big shoes to fill. There are lots of old films out there with potentially interesting premises that could be revisited, but choosing this one feels both unnecessary and risky. As I remember Papillon it was well written, well shot, and the acting . . . who the hell wants to try to take over from in-their-primes McQueen and Hoffman?
Sign In or Register to comment.