Cool News
Tons of SOUTHLAND TALES casting confirmed!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with some weird weird weird and cool at the same time casting confirmations for Richard Kelly's SOUTHLAND TALES. Looks like he's gotten a weird selection of SNL alums, like Cheri Oteri, Amy Poehler and Jon Lovitz are now offiically in the flick as well as John Larroquette, Miranda Richards, Bai Ling and Wallace "Inconceivable!" Shawn. According to Hollywood Reporter, Oteri is playing a "villainous lesbian bodybuilder"... Awesome can't describe that. And also added on is Jill Ritchie who is playing a porn star and friend to Sarah Michelle Gellar's character.
This movie can not arrive here soon enough. This sounds fucking awesome and this cast... is second to none weird and awesome. Weird and awesome... that's Richard Kelly in a nutshell. If you want to see some of that, make sure to visit the Southland Tales website. Lovitz and Larroquette and Shawn and The Rock and Buffy and Bai Ling? Fuck me this is gonna rock my socks off!
-
+ Expand All
-
I'll see it just for that.
-
still involved?
-
and oooh wow, amy poehler. i wonder if she's going to stop and smirk for 20 seconds after delivering each "joke"
-
this sounds just plain fuckin weird
-
All this news has absolutely no signifigance without it.
-
well I beat christianzane anyway
-
I liked Donnie Darko to a certain extent, but man, the casting of this flick just makes me nervous. SMG, Oteri, Lovitz, Poehler (hate her on SNL, though she was great on Arrested), & Sean William Scott? If this was any other writer/director I'd have already written this flick off. Though oddly I completely dig Laroquette, that's a guy who oughta get more roles. Just gonna have to wait and see I guess, this flick looks like it may be shaping up to be a lot more comedic than I was originally thinking though.
-
I'm confused. The website is very dark, brooding, and hauntingly cerebral, and looks like a smarter Donnie Darko, if that's possible. However, every piece of information describes it as some wacky comedy. I hope its the former, with elements of the latter.
-
You should check him out. He's the only one who ends up surviving.
-
and movies like that suck
-
You're obviously pretty stupid.
-
exactly. And not only do movies like that suck, but the people who go crazy over how "deep" they are suck even more
-
You're obviously well educated, have mature tastes and can see bullshit for what it is. And I mean that. Then there's the other crowd that gets off twirling their fingers in front of their own face and visting the imdb message boards proclaiming "OMG! U just didnt get it!!11 LOL!11!1"
-
Worst message boards ever. It's true though, this looks to be one of those movies that screams "Look at all the odd shit we can throw into a movie!! Aren't we fucking quirky". It will be praised before release, and will be hated by many because it will already be overrated.
-
Serenity will suffer because according to the trailer it's just Buffy in space with some sub Babylon 5 effects and a load of Whedon one liners...how fucking boring... ( oh and I do love Buffy, I thought Joss may come up with something a bit better than Kung-fu girl in space ) Southland Tales on the other hand looks highly original, funny and quirky so in the hands of Kelly it should be fucking monumental....Seems Gellar chose the right movie eh?
-
Fucking enter key...That really doesn't help my point any, does it...
Anyway, I think you're being kind of an asshole. Don't get me wrong, Darko was at times pretty convoluted and full of itself, but don't even try to tell me that movie wasn't a think piece out the ass, whether or not you liked it. Sadly, Darko is a really good flick that ended up getting absorbed by the Hot Topic clusterfuck. If I see another twelve year old girl with a shirt that says, "They Made Me Do It" I'm gonna fuckin' stab her, right in the face. -
What big star are you talking about that could have been in Serenity? Was it a specific actor? I'm just curious as hell now.
-
I've heard things about an alternative reality and such, but I don't want to hear anything until I see the film.
-
It`s gotten ridiculous.
-
I saw some photos of SMG in costume a couple of weeks ago.
-
Aug 30, 2005 7:14:35 AM CDT
I hope, Richard Kelly doesn't ends in Tarantino-hack-land
by derlanghaarige
Reservoir Dogs was great, everything else sucked (although Kill Bill 1 was in some parts very entertaining), but at least he can have every actor for his films, that he wants. Donnie Darko was great, too, now he has a great cast for his follow-up...let's pray.
-
KB1 was in some parts very entertaining and KB 2 was boring.
-
Especially Volume 2. Terrible acting, terrible dialogue, and the everytime it tried to show heart, it came off as sappy dogshit. As for Richard Kelly, Donny Darko is overratted and the fact that it's taken him so fucking long to follow it up makes me not like this guy. He's not good enough to make people wait this long.
-
Aug 30, 2005 7:31:52 AM CDT
But do you think he's good enough to make his next film with
by derlanghaarige
That it takes so long is in my eyes a good sign. It has never been a good idea to hurry up.
-
Whats that? oh, you said it just to get attention? Oh all right, i forgive you. you deserve a lot of attention. you are a wonderful human being, dont let anyone tell you otherwise. Slightly more on topic: DD isnt crap just because you didnt understand it, or needed a website to explain it. 1) there is not necessarily just one correct interpretation of a work of art (thats the only thing im dissapointed in with kelly, he should have let the movie stand more for itself, not explaining everything with the directors commentaries (although they are entertaining)) 2) why do you need to understand works of art to enjoy them? i dont understand anything about Lost Highway or Mulholland Dr. but i still think they are absolutely brilliant.
-
As someone over at joblo stated, sounds like a load of horseshit marketing/hype covering up how overly complex the story is. If you can't tell the movie in 2hours then don't bother.
The Matrix did all that and it was one of the big reasons for me giving up on it as a franchise. I don't want to have to buy the game, the book, the tea cloth, the decoder ring to enjoy the film. I mean jesus, Lynch left so much cryptic in his films, but it was interesting cryptic- made me want to fill in the gaps myself, which makes the whole experience richer. -
...boring, stupid, annoying dialogues which are only funny, when you hear them for the first time, a screenplay that has less story then a Michael Bay film but tries to look smart by playing with the chronological order of the episodes, and when there's nothing else to do for the characters, they just kill someone or got killed. Wow. Grow up! 1993 is gone for a long time, you can stop saying "Royal with cheese!" PS: But at least the acting in it is great. Seriously.
-
all i can find about southland tales is that it's got an eclectic and interesting sounding cast, and is about society on the brink of collapse. funny i'm looking forward to two dwayne johnson films (this and doom...yeah, you heard me, doom). also, a scanner darkly, mirrormask, derailed.
-
Pulp Fiction is shite. For those reasons you stated above. DannyO, I completely agree with you too. If a movie is more than two hours, its not worth the trouble. Lawrence of Arabia, Apocalypse Now, Goodfellas, the Godfather, Once upon a time in the west, LotR, Seven Samurai, Schindler's List... Too long all of them. Should never have been greenlighted. Not worth the trouble. (one or more of the statements above can be read ironically). Tonay2, the one problem with DD is that the director tells us what is the correct (ie his) interpretation. he should have left it open, like Kubrick did with 2001. And why do you have to understand the movie? Sorry for the crass post folks, Im angry for a lot of reasons today and need to vent.
-
Too bad that you apologized for your post. Interesting: I like Tarantino as an actor! Don't know why.
-
who cares if you have to see the website to "truly understand" what the movie "means"? i don't have a clue what the fuck the intended meaning was but that doesn't stop me from enjoying the movie any less. i've seen the website and it's cool, but i didn't bother spending hours with it just to figure out what really happened to donnie, i just enjoyed the experience of watching the movie and drawing my own conclusions - whether those are right or wrong in anyone else eye's (ie the director) is pointless. i still like the movie overall. i don't pretend to understand half the shit that goes on in say some fellini or bergman films, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying the experience of watching them. they're interesting to see and to think about and that's what i like, i don't need to get every last little symbol or clue.
-
Aug 30, 2005 11:04:20 AM CDT
Aw Christ, do we really have to attempt to interpret that POS f
by jaguart
Try the imdb boards. http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0246578/board/threads/ . Knock yourself out.
-
And Richard Kelly said you're a fucking idiot, but one of those brooding, edgy ones.
-
Weep because in the end it's just a BS sci-fi explanation, which is probably why it was left more ambiguous and sort of romanticised in the normal cut. Thinking about the Darko explanation just makes your head hurt because you realise that all the movie is about is showing us what could happen in an alternate timeline, i.e. a timeline where a plane engine appears out of nowhere for no reason whatsoever. A quick explanation is this - the jet engine appearing out of nowhere fucks up the universe and splits it into a normal timeline and a tangent timeline (see what I mean by BS sci-fi?) Donnie is saved from being killed by the jet engine by a vision of a dead guy in a bunny suit who is being manipulated by God or equivalent. He is saved because he has been chosen to set the universe right again (i.e. to stop this tangent timeline) Donnie slowly learns that he is living in the tangent universe through reading the book The History of Time Travel (pages of which appear onscreen in the director's cut of the movie) To cut a long story short, in the end Donnie decides to send the jet engine back in time using a wormhole that he creates (are you with this?) thereby giving it a purpose to be there in the first place and therefore it becomes part of the normal timeline (as opposed to the tangent timeline, which then ceases to exist). Donnie dies because the jet engine lands on his room in the normal timeline. People ask why is he laughing at the end before he dies, well it's because he remembers what happened in the tangent universe and so he knows when he dies he's got so much to look forward to in death, and that all the bad things that happened in the tangent timeline won't happen. Fuck it. Just fuck it right int the eye. It makes some sense if you watch the director's cut. But the director's cut also throws out the mystery of the movie which is I suppose what makes it any fun in the first place. Damn it all to Hades!!
-
Its rare that life lets you turn and stare right into the camera, and with a wry smile, share a knowing moment with the home readers. greatn, Donnie Darko is the perfect film for you.
-
Gave more explanation if required -by the audience. The movie itself is really about devine intervention, in a really subversive way..
-
could work surprisingly well. The Donnie Darko cast that included Drew Barrymore, Patrick Swayze, Noah Wyle, etc just sounds weird on paper but worked well on film.
Give it a chance cause you never know... -
Yea, I kinda figured that "you meant to do that".
-
is pretty much exactly what I got from the film, what is it exactly I'd have to go to the website for to understand?
-
Your just not funny.
-
I dug "Donnie Darko" for many reasons. The "bs sci-fi explanation," performingmonkey, seems to be based on the "multiple universes" theory -- a component of quantum physics -- that cutting edge institutions around the world are researching alongside other properties of quantum physics, so it ain't exactly bs. Google the term "quantum computing" or "quantum computer chips" for an explanation of products that'll soon be released in mass production. These are viewed as next-generation computers (along with optical computers, which will utilize liquid light rather than microprocessors) whose speeds will revolutionize the way people with money acquire and crunch data. It's creepy, fascinating, but it is happening. I found it refreshing Kelly didn't feel like explaining the concept to the uninitiated in the original cut. He just wrote it into the story and let it sit there for viewers to mull. Other parts of the film weren't extrapolations of quantum physics, I acknowledge, including the superhero part of Donnie's character or the God-cypher influencing Donnie's actions, but I thought the film was brilliant for its characters, its off-color setting and mood, its first-love story, its heartfelt portrayal of Donnie's relationship with his parents and sisters, its dialogue and skewering of self-help gurus, and its accurate portrayal of late 1980s suburbia. What a film. I know many people didn't understand it, or didn't care to understand it, and that's cool. I never tell people, "If you only understood it, you'd love it." I think that's an arrogant, dismissive way to view movies. But I think Richard Kelly researched quantum physics before he wrote "Donnie Darko," thus educating himself with a base of cutting-edge theoretical knowledge on which to create his story. Thus, even with its wacky casting, I'm looking forward to "Southland Tales."
-
From imdb.com: "Southland Tales is an ensemble piece set in the futuristic landscape of Los Angeles on July 4, 2008, as it stands on the brink of social, economic and environmental disaster. Boxer Santaros is an action star who's stricken with amnesia. His life intertwines with Krysta Now, an adult film star developing her own reality television project, and David Clark, a Hermosa Beach police officer who holds the key to a vast conspiracy."
-
I totally agree. When I first saw DD, I didn't care that much about the sci-fi. I thought it was a wonderful story with great emotion, and evoked a very charged time in my own life in the late '80s. The final sequence with the Mad World song playing is just gorgeous. Tubgirl - STOP COMPARING EVERYTHING TO JOSS WHEDON! Some comparisons are merited, but not every goddamn thing. When you do this, all you're doing is diminishing his great work and giving a bad name to true Joss fans.
-
1) While performingmonkey's explication is pretty much correct, he leaves out yards of incredibly cool stuff, most obviously the fact that the Tangent Universe contains not one but two closed causal loops (e.g., Donnie creates Frank who manipulates Donnie into creating Frank). Far from being bs, it's incredibly solid sf, in the tradition of classic sf stories that play with time paradoxes, like Heinlein
-
Fuck your correct interpretation. These are just different layers of interpretation and you can get what you want out of the movie. Stop telling everyone what to think, tonay. You're a bully and we're all sick of it.
-
You think Kelly needs to write more explanation to explain his movies. That's cool -- you're entitled to your opinion. Oisin5199 and I disagree with you, though. We don't accept that Kelly needs more exposition in "Donnie Darko," or better editing to improve the film. I've watched both versions of "Donnie Darko," and I enjoyed the original version far more than the director's cut. You wanted more exposition and you enjoyed the director's cut. That's fine. Let's leave it at that.
-
I loved the original little gem that I happened to discover.I like that fact that me and my friends were able to discuss it afterwords and have slightly different interpretations.The directors cut totally ruined it for me.The extra special effects and cliff notes were almost like Kelly saying "Ok this is for you people who need everything explained to you".Also Tonay2 were did you hear that the rabbit guy was "god".I must've missed that.I just thought he was the guy murdered from the alternate timeline..peace
-
Sometimes a director can overexplain a movie. I like it when directors refuse to give the "definitive" explanation for their film because it cuts off the possibility of individual interpretations. To me, that's how art should function. I don't know which version of DD I prefer because I still haven't seen the director's cut. But I can definitely say, people who scream about THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION annoy the fuck out of me.
-
what was cool with the original cut was that you could read all kind of things into it. there was actually a possibility it was all in donnie's mind. i dont care what kelly says is the "correct" reading of the movie. once the director has released the film, it stands on its own legs and as a consequence, different interpretations will appear, and are perfectly legitimate. "the birth of the reader is paid with the death of the writer". what kelly intends doesnt matter anymore, its what we read into it that is valid. when i saw the original cut, i understood that it was about divine intervention/deus ex machina, but all the same about a pretty fucked up adolescent trying to cope with reality and fear of growing up/death. i dont need no philosophy of time travel to explain me that. and i dont need to know about all the tangent universes/sci fi stuff. to me, that detracts from the mystery of the film, making it less of a "spiritual experience" (i mean that in the least pretentious sense). kinda like 2001. thankfully kubrick didnt release an extended version with captions from arthur clarkes novelization explaining how the monolith is a cosmic swiss army knife,and dave bowman has evolved into a being of pure energy, so that he can merge with HAL9000 and help develop life on Europa. to read a really good take on the film, that doesnt have anything to do with tangent universes, check out this (its long, but its worth it): http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041102/EDITOR/41022001
-
I totally agree Col. Blimp. After a film (or book) is released, it doesn't matter anymore what a director intends (it may be interesting and overall shouldn't be ignored). The 2001 analogy (though the films themselves can't compare) is quite accurate I think. Kubrick didn't need to explain the Star child (even if most the contemporary audience went, "Huh?") - it just was and it was beautiful. And if Donnie gets into that bed knowing that the plane engine will crash on him, what else do you call it if not suicide? Sacrifice, surely, but still suicide. And I don't buy that he's still living in a tangent universe because Kelly filmed a scene of him dead in the debris and cut it. I don't know if they put this in the director's cut, but he was most definitely dead. And any credibility you had, tonay, was destroyed by your juvenile sexual comments, not to mention your sick intimations of pedophilia (didn't we just have a thread on that?).
-
you'd be killed off immediately as a joke. Because you're a boring, broken record.
-
OK, here's the final word . . there are some viewers, like tonay2, who have little or no tolerance for ambiguity and suggestion. There are others, like fried samurai, who are such junkies for ambiguity and suggestion that they actually dislike it when something is coherent and logical. The luckiest among us have a healthy love for both modes of storytelling. DD may be my favorite movie of all time (it's either that or Memento), but the movie it just surpasses in my heart of hearts is Eraserhead, which has no exposition or explanation whatsoever and is all the greater for it. ...... Kelly set out to make a coherent, logical sort of film and discovered as he was editing it that it was far more opaque than he intended. He conceived of the solution (in the form of the pages from The Philosophy of Time Travel) but he was already cutting scene after scene that he loved because he was contractually obliged to deliver a movie of a certain length. His solution was to provide the missing pieces to the puzzle on a web site and as DVD extras, and to trust that the existing film, for all its unintended opaqueness, would still resonate with people. He hit a home run on that score, as many people who love ambiguous and open-ended storytelling fell in love with it. . . . The original cut does indeed have perfectly valid interpretations that Kelly did not intend (this is indeed the way great art works), and that is one of the reasons why it's still worth looking at. However, there is no denying that the coherent, logical cut that he was eventually able to deliver is a magnificent example of coherent, logical sf storytelling. While it is fair to criticize the original cut for its lack of apparently intended coherence, that does not mean the film was not hugely successful regardless, because the material was so rich that it made for a rewarding open-ended story. It is absurd to criticize the final cut for having too much coherence and logic, though, since that just expresses a distaste for these qualities in general. And, BTW, the film is hardly dumbed down or too spelled out in its final cut; I've taken many DD virgins to see it, all of them highly experienced sf readers and viewers. All felt highly challenged, but were able to grasp the essentials in their entirety. And they all adored it.
-
You're obviously a younger fan of Whedon, one who's unable to appreciate the multitude of ways a story can be told. Yeah, if Joss had directed "Donnie Darko," it would've been different, possibly good. But I doubt it would've contained the twisted, multi-faceted beauty and mystery Richard Kelly gave it. You must need to have all facets of a story spoon-fed to him or you don't appreciate it, Tonay2, right? I think you're incapable of truly appreciating anything not written by Whedon. Listening to you, Tonay2, I'm thinking I won't even go see "Serenity" now, since I know that film will be total shit compared to "Donnie Darko." I mean, if Richard Kelly had directed "Serenity," it would've been so much better: deeper character development, fewer silly comic book lines, and far more mystique, pathos, and subtlety. It works both ways, Tonay2. Joss is one out of millions of storytellers, and he ain't that good compared to most of them. Get your head out of your "Proper Storytelling" textbook, please, and admit Joss ain't even in the top 500 greatest storytellers ever. Top 1000, even. Seriously.
-
Donnie Darko and Serenity (or Buffy) are two completely different universes conceived by two very different writer/directors with two very different tones. To compare them is ludicrous. These stupid comparisons in which Joss is god and everything else sucks are just turning everyone against him. I believe that Joss is one of the best writers of dialogue out there, who understands the poetry of contemporary language. And yes, he's a damn good storyteller. Would he have done his own Donnie Darko? Who fucking cares? He does his own stuff just fine, thanks. Anyway, tonay, if you are a troll and trying to get people not to see Serenity, congratulations. I hope the true Joss fans see through your bullshit and everyone else just ignores you. And, you idiot, Joss would never direct a sex romp (as if - I'm sorry but anyone who's that obsessed cannot be getting laid). Have you seen his shows? One of the first rules of Joss - Sex is Bad.
-
You took my post the wrong way.I have no problem with films being coherant or logical.I just felt the orginal cut was fine the way it was.I love films that make me think a little.Darko reminded me of 2001,Solaris and Primer.All films that made me want to do research and hear other opinions like yourself to see if maybe I was missing something.I just didn't think the directors cut was necessary but from what you wrote apparently people do and enjoyed it.It doesnt make me some elitist film prick because I didnt enjoy the cliff notes.Hell,I watch kung fu films on a continuous loop.Do I expect to be enlightened.No way.I love being entertained and if something like Darko has a little more meat on its bones I'm all the more happy..peace
-
He is typical of writer/directors, so called, coming out today. They have one good idea, made it into a movie, and now all they have left is the bad ideas that got them nowhere in the business, but now, because of that one good idea, we have to see all the bad ideas, like Domino and this sure to be piece of shit. Kelly is enamored of reality TV, and for that reason, the guy has no clue. He now has two new scripts where a reality show figures prominently. I'd rather people with actual ideas, you know, more than one, get to make films. Fuck this dude, I am so jealous he was connected at CAA. Oh wait, you thought he wasn't connected? Let me tell you something....EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO WORKS IN HOLLYWOOD HAD A CONNECTION!!!! No one makes it in this business unless you know someone.
-
If so, great, she's a wonderful underrated actress.
But this is easily the most bizarre cast I've ever seen put together... -
Sorry to make a wrong guess about your brain . . . I bet that if you'd seen the DC first, you would have loved it. There's still plenty there to provoke thoughts and discussions. Sometimes we get stuck on a first version, e.g., in three viewings of the DC I went from being uncomfortable with the lack of Echo and the Bunnymen in the opening scene, to kinda liking the change, to loving the change (which was of course Kelly's original intention). And I was shocked to discover years later that the local radio station demo tape of the Cars "Just What I Needed," when it was finally released, did not in fact shred the album version (which everyone in Boston hated for the simple reason that it wasn't the demo version we all got used to). You might try the DC again and learn to love it. Peace indeed. ............. BTW, one of the world's biggest Whedon fans here, too. Comparing Joss to Kelly is absurd. Joss has a long track record of genius, Kelly has only DD, which Joss couldn't have come up with in any timeline. What's the point of only treasuring any one creative artist at the expense of others? The whole point of great art is that only the specific artist could have created it.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts