199 replies to this topic

[Robert B]

I see what Christian's saying, though. There's a dash of Errol Flynn that's missing in modern action movies. Or even Indiana Jones, where the stars can actually smile (well, smirk) and seem to be thrill seekers who are slightly bemused by the various predicaments they find themselves in. We've seen that change in superhero comics, too. When you look at comics even from as recently as the 1990s, you see them having fun, smiling, and you think for a second, "Wow, superheroes were once allowed to smile!"

I think audiences actually miss that sort of swashbuckling sense of joy and adventure, and it's a large part of why the Pirates movies have been so successful. And a part of why Robert Downey Jr. has become one of our top action stars.

[garjones]

There's always Alan Davis to ensure we still get a smile Robert.

[T Masters]

I think audiences actually miss that sort of swashbuckling sense of joy and adventure, and it's a large part of why the Pirates movies have been so successful. And a part of why Robert Downey Jr. has become one of our top action stars.

I think that's true. I haven't seen Tintin but it could be one of the reasons it's not pulling in box office billions (like Spielberg/Jackson predicted) - it's an adventure, but maybe the main character lacks an 'adventurous soul' and that he's more of an observer and commentator than swashbuckling adventurer.

It could be one of the reasons that Bale hasn't really been able to kick-start his action career outside of Batman (despite some attempts: Terminator: Salvation, Rescue Dawn, Harsh Times, maybe Public Enemies).

It might also be one of the reasons, despite the nostalgia factor, that films like The Expendables and Fast Five have succeeded where others haven struggled: the assembled actors seem to be having genuine fun with the material, which encourages us to forget the plot contrivances and have some fun ourselves.

Edited by T Masters, 26 December 2011 - 06:36 PM.

[Steve Sensible]

Just watched the prologue for the bazillionth time. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the soundtrack almost as much as seeing the film.

[David Chapman]

I think that's true. I haven't seen Tintin but it could be one of the reasons it's not pulling in box office billions (like Spielberg/Jackson predicted) - it's an adventure, but maybe the main character lacks an 'adventurous soul' and that he's more of an observer and commentator than swashbuckling adventurer.

Harry Potter in the first book/movie is almost entirely a spectator, and that didn't stop those movies coining it in. I think it's more that Tintin has no soul or character of any kind.

[garjones]

Harry Potter in the first book/movie is almost entirely a spectator, and that didn't stop those movies coining it in. I think it's more that Tintin has no soul or character of any kind.

He doesn't and never has. Tintin is one of those things like Judge Dredd or even Batman where the world around him is the star of the show. The problem is that works the opposite to the standard Hollywood method where the star comes first. I remember loving the books as a kid, and they have sold millions upon millions, but the mysterious sigil on the tins of fish were always more interesting than Tintin was.

Tintin is essentially a computer game avatar before they existed, of indeterminate age and gender. Insert yourself here and enter his world.

[Johnny Henning]

And besides, the characters in the movie looks creepy as hell. Seriously, every critic seems in awe of the animation, but I can't really look at these disturbing deformed creatures for very long without shivering. Can't imagine the 3D experience.

Still, honestly, it is not a bomb at the box office - I think it's meeting expectations.

[steveuk]

Hardly anyone is seeing 'Tintin' in 2D. It's a film that being chosen for spectacle, not character but its suffering against Tom Cruise and RDJ. It's even suffering against Alvin and the Chipmunks.

But there seems to be enough Christmas cheer for everyone, I wouldn't want to predict how much it will drop next week though.

[Robert B]

I saw Tintin in 2D for the spectacle, because the spectacle I wanted was "bright colors" not "a little bit of depth".

But yeah. What Gar said about the avatar thing works better in comics than in a movie.

[Stephen G]

Just watched the prologue for the bazillionth time. I'm looking forward to getting my hands on the soundtrack almost as much as seeing the film.

I totally agree on the soundtrack...cant wait!

Is there a better version of the prologue out there now? I haven't seen one that's better yet.

[craggy]

haven't seen any version of the prologue. my search-fu has been weak as of late.

[Stephen G]

Was it ever substantiated that Liam Neeson's Ras' was renturning for TDKR? I remember the rumor & internet buzz...but have heard boo about it since' then.

[Steve Sensible]

Was it ever substantiated that Liam Neeson's Ras' was renturning for TDKR? I remember the rumor & internet buzz...but have heard boo about it since' then.

There's a young Raas, played by Josh Pence, so I'd be very surprised if Neeson didn't at least have a cameo. From what Cillian Murphy said in an interview recently, it seems likely he may make an appearance too.

[garjones]

From what Cillian Murphy said in an interview recently, it seems likely he may make an appearance too.

Was that the Kermode and Mayo interview? That was funny. His answer was "I'm not allowed to tell you" from which they surmised that he must be in it because not allowed suggests a non-disclosure agreement and why would you sign that for a film you weren't even in?

Then kept following up with things like "How is Chris Nolan? When did you speak to him last? etc". He kept being evasive to the point that he's either the best double bluffer out there or definitely in the film.

[Steve Sensible]

Was that the Kermode and Mayo interview?

Yep, that's the one. He was in the Dark Knight as well of course, but that was for all of 5 seconds, so it's not as though he'd have to have a significant role.


Also, the fact that there's a young Ra's al Ghul in the movie could mean one of two things; a) there's a flashback, or b) there's a Lazarus Pit.

[garjones]

Yep, that's the one. He was in the Dark Knight as well of course, but that was for all of 5 seconds, so it's not as though he'd have to have a significant role.

It's more than likely it'll be that if he is in it. I don't think they could hide his presence with all the on set photos and prying journalists if he had a large role but a quick day or two in the studio and they probably could.

[Johnny Henning]

I felt the Scarecrow was out of place in The Dark Knight. I mean, he's selling the fear drug to the Russian mobster to get it on the streets. That just doesn't make sense in two ways.

First, that drug is not going to be a big hit on the street since it can kill you with fear - people take drugs to feel better usually.

Second, if he is just selling the drug to get money, that makes sense. He needs cash to get the hell out of Gotham or whatever, but why take a meeting with the mobster since he knows it's not gonna turn out well. He's not giving a refund and the Russian isn't going to just say "okay."

Unless, there is a subculture of Gotham fear addicts - which is an interesting idea and ties into how screwed up mentally the city is - or Scarecrow has orders to stay in Gotham and keep stirring the pot with his fear drug until the next Ras rep shows up to really take the city down.

[Steve Sensible]

There's a lot that doesn't make sense in the Dark Knight, but it pays not to over-think these things.




Look who I'm talking to....

[steveuk]

I felt the Scarecrow was out of place in The Dark Knight. I mean, he's selling the fear drug to the Russian mobster to get it on the streets. That just doesn't make sense in two ways.

First, that drug is not going to be a big hit on the street since it can kill you with fear - people take drugs to feel better usually.

Second, if he is just selling the drug to get money, that makes sense. He needs cash to get the hell out of Gotham or whatever, but why take a meeting with the mobster since he knows it's not gonna turn out well. He's not giving a refund and the Russian isn't going to just say "okay."

Unless, there is a subculture of Gotham fear addicts - which is an interesting idea and ties into how screwed up mentally the city is - or Scarecrow has orders to stay in Gotham and keep stirring the pot with his fear drug until the next Ras rep shows up to really take the city down.

Or, he's not a very rational thinker anymore?

[Rory Abel]

I felt the Scarecrow was out of place in The Dark Knight. I mean, he's selling the fear drug to the Russian mobster to get it on the streets. That just doesn't make sense in two ways.

First, that drug is not going to be a big hit on the street since it can kill you with fear - people take drugs to feel better usually.

Second, if he is just selling the drug to get money, that makes sense. He needs cash to get the hell out of Gotham or whatever, but why take a meeting with the mobster since he knows it's not gonna turn out well. He's not giving a refund and the Russian isn't going to just say "okay."

Unless, there is a subculture of Gotham fear addicts - which is an interesting idea and ties into how screwed up mentally the city is - or Scarecrow has orders to stay in Gotham and keep stirring the pot with his fear drug until the next Ras rep shows up to really take the city down.

I thought he was selling it to them as weapon, not as a recreational drug.