Cool News
Sony's perking their ears up and getting ready to hear some of Richard Kelly's SOUTHLAND TALES!!!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Despite the Pigpen dirt cloud that was SOUTHLAND TALES' Cannes screening, SOUTHLAND TALES remains one of my most anticipated flicks of the year. I spent a day on the set, read the script and have seen some sequences edited together and I refuse to believe Kelly fumbled this one. That would depress me so much.
I just hope that Cannes was the SOUTHLAND TALES version of DONNIE DARKO's Sundance experience, where the audience doesn't get it and Kelly recuts and comes up with a movie that works perfectly. It looks like that's what Sony hopes, too, as they just picked up domestic distribution rights and are waiting on Kelly's next cut to "figure out the distribution plan." However, Ben Feingold of Sony Home Entertainment says it will definitely get a theatrical release. Pressure's on Rich Kelly, then, to make this cut work so the film gets the widest release possible. Fingers are crossed.
-
+ Expand All
-
possibly...
-
..succeeded against the tide of critical vitriol from Cannes. I'm looking forward to this, and hope it's just as good as DD was
-
And this comes from someone who has been first in three talkbacks in a row TODAY (Without yelling FIRST!)!!!
-
oops
-
...and the director's cut of "Donnie" which took a good movie and made it very much not, I'm thinking Richard Kelly could possibly be a one-hit fluke. I'll admit it if I'm wrong, but I don't think I am. I'm not sure how much of "Domino" was his fault, but goddamn that movie was a steaming piece of shit. Well, alot of it was Tony Scott's fault, he's driving down the path of career suicide at full throttle. And some of it was Keira's fault, she just sucked a pantload in that movie. But, the dialogue was fucking horrible and the story was total ass. I would've been much more interested in a straight ahead bio-pic.
-
I was shocked at how poor that film was. Perhaps it might serve to show others that just trying to mix a bunch of cool 'tricks' together will lead to nothing but a crap film and a bunch of sad pandas... I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Richard Kelly.
-
But I cannot understand how Donnie Darko came to be so overrated. I mean, it's this decade's Nightmare Before Christmas for all the stupid teenaged scenesters. Really, it wasn't that great kids, now come out of the corner, get a girlfriend and maybe get into some sunlight once in a while! I don't have high hopes for ST, because there's no indication that Kelly is exploring anything different from what made Darko so terrible.
-
I can guarantee ya that much
-
Inappropriate! Guy in a Superman suit in a wheelchair!? I'm sure it is unintentional, but it is very disrespectful! Allludes way too much to the late Christopher Reeve!
(Sorry to post off topic, but seriously...) -
Go to the Superman TalkBack and read all the shit about people being pissed off about that image. Your not the only one. Look in the time frame of yesterday afternoon, 3:00 and later.
-
Thanks for the heads up. Looks like I missed the boat on that one.
-
... might as well declare it months and months in advance.
-
I'm not sure if it will be good or not but I'll look forward to it anyway. Not every movie needs a simple narrative. Not all audiences need to be spoon-fed while Will Smith rattles off one-liners. So it's a big confusing mess? Fine. But is it a good big confusing mess?
-
"DONNIE DARKO's Sundance experience, where the audience doesn't get it". Um Quint, you didn't get it either. And the sad but true reality is neither does Richard Kelly. His director cut is a mess that doesn't make sense. Southland Tales will show that he isn't a great storyteller, which is what you NEED to be to be a good director. Ambiguity and vagueness don't translate directly into brilliance.
-
Of course, with everything that's good and pure, with shit that is original and refreshing, you always have the people who "don't get the hype". It's not fuckin hype, people. Donnie Darko was a sensational movie, and the director's cut was even better, because it pulled everything in much tighter. Domino was decent, I wouldn't call it terrible. Richard Kelly is a talented guy... who looks like a boy. Let's have a little faith and not rip him for doing some original shit. Lord knows there isn't enough Richard Kelly's in the industry.
-
What I've been hearing is Sony is picking this up mostly because of the name actors involved in the project. They are hoping to at least make a few bucks from the curious and from fans of the many many stars in the film and the devoted DD fans. Privately, they don't believe in this film at all and unless Kelly pulls a diamond out of his ass in the editing room, the release will be very limited and over quickly. As a fan of Donnie Darko I hope that all the Hollywood talk that Kelly is a one hit wonder is wrong. Even if this turns out to be a collossal mess as I've heard it is, I hope Richard doesn't get too down on himself and comes back swinging with some better (and apparently less indulgent) material. Every director has misfires and most aren't run out of town because of it. There's a backlash in town against Richard because DD wasn't your typical studio success story. I'm not optimistic about Southland. I'm more interested in what Kelly does to come back from this swing and miss.
-
His director's cut is a "mess that doesn't make sense"...? I don't believe you've seen it, buddy. It's tighter than a nun's cunt, quite easy to follow. If you're being serious and you really didn't understand it, I suggest you stick to: The Transporter and Fast and the Furious.
-
"The Trasporter and The Fast and the Furious"? How about Sunset Boulevard and Amadeus? I like great films, but I don't like when mediocre to poor films are called great by the uniformed. Read: You. I'll take an apology from you when Southland Tales is released, and it doesn't do well critically or commercially.
-
So did they drop it from their slate completely? Jesus, this film must be absolutely pathetic.
-
i def prefer the shorter, more ambiguous cut that i saw first, as opposed to the directors cut with all that added hooey and chapter breaks and passages from the book and other garbage. and i heard richard kelly is a ridiculous pothead...which is cool by me...we'd prolly get along even better
-
And yes i was in Cannes at the screening. I loved Darko but ST is not good. It's a plain and simple bad, bad film and will kill Kelly's career if they release it. Dont do it Richy Boy! It's far to long and they need to lose a least an hour and a lot of plot lines for it to even to make it even half coherent.
-
You weren't one of the folk that walked out after an hour are you? If that were the case, you didnt see the whole film. I dug it.
-
Nope. I love Kelly and put up with it thinking there would be some fantastic payoff and the film would be completely redeemed....sadly didn't happen. I i got was a floating ice cream truck with stereo twats inside. there are some good little scenes (watching Eli Roth get iced on the crapper made me happy!) BUT there should be if you want 3 hours of my life watching your pretentious wank Mr Kelly.
-
Dont think much of Mr Kellys output. Cannes doesnt fill me with hope. Still liked the 90210 stars in Domino, though. Irony or what, lol?
-
Or whomever helped him cut his debut...the director's cut really does show that the guy is much better off with an outsider coming into cut stuff, he's way too in love with his own ideas to be subjective at all.
-
End of discussion. Discuss.
-
I watch Tarkovsky movies in one sitting. Yes, including Andrei Rublev. Yes, including the 15 minutes of slow pans over the real Rublev's icons at the end. And I still liked Donnie Darko. Didn't like Amadeus though, fopps and dandies aren't really my thing.
-
"I watch Tarkovsky movies in one sitting. Yes, including Andrei Rublev. Yes, including the 15 minutes of slow pans over the real Rublev's icons at the end. And I still liked Donnie Darko." STILL like Donnie Darko? My fellow talkbacker you sound perfectly prepared to like non-sensical movies. Oh, and maybe you're foreign and don't understand the nuances of English, but I was using Amadeus as an example of good storytelling, not as an example of my tastes. Although I do love the film.
-
"See the movie that everyone said sucked! I dont want to see your shit movie twice dude..it sucks!!"
Sounds hip to me! -
was okay. Quality cast, good performances, lovely to watch with great cinematography and an immersive soundtrack. Weird delirious atmosphere. Nothing beneath the surface though - the commentary on the DVD confirms the obvious: that the film is all fur coat and no knickers. Hopefully Southland Tales has a little more substance.
-
LOL!!11! YOU JUST DIDNT GIT IT! OMG! IS ECHO AND TEH BUNYM3N ON DA SOUNDTRAK
?!!??? WTF LOL -
Cause I was getting worried about those Sundance reviews. I love Darko, but a movie should be judged on its own merit. Fingers crossed for this one. Southland and The Fountain are my most anticipated movies of the year.
-
"Good storytelling" can be experimental. Amadeus has a linear narrative that isn't hard to follow, so i guess that is good storytelling for some. It won Oscars. I found it a little bit tedious, but like I said fopps and dandies aren't really my thing. Andrei Rublev also has a linear narrative as well, it is long and slow but is not hard to follow at all. You wrote: " I like great films, but I don't like when mediocre to poor films are called great by the uniformed." Tarkovsky makes great films. That was the point I was making. He has made some brilliant science fiction films that are extremely unconventional. And Donnie Darko is a good film that is fairly unconventional. Amadeus is a good film that I don't enjoy, but it won Oscars so it's a safe choice to throw out there when you're trying to belittle someone for liking a movie you don't. My post was a pretentious comment that was a direct response to your previous pretentious comment. You think your taste is superior to Lino because he likes Donnie Darko. You like some silly movie from the 80s about Mozart, fine, I like superior films from one of the greatest directors who ever lived. It's not hard to play that game. And no I am not foreign, your insinuations about my grasp of the English language are inexplicable.
-
"I watch Tarkovsky movies in one sitting. Yes, including Andrei Rublev. Yes, including the 15 minutes of slow pans over the real Rublev's icons at the end." Without a doubt that sentence is THE SINGLE MOST PRETENTIOUS THING EVER WRITTEN IN AICN'S TEN YEAR HISTORY. Honestly, I defy you to use the Ain't It Cool Search to find something even more pretentious. And your continued argument of "Well I watch Tarkovsky" only makes you sound more and more ridiculous. Atomic.Lobster above has made the most perfect statement possible concerning Donnie Darko: "that the film is all fur coat and no knickers". Beautifully said Atomic.Lobster. Gwai Lo get back to your Tarkovsky, but quit thinking that it makes you cultured.
-
you made a pretentious statement and i made one right back. that was the point of name dropping tarkovsky. amadeus is pretentious without substance. notice the topic read "lah-dee-dah". It was a sarcastic response to your "I watch great films" snobbery.
-
Donnie Darko was a good movie, but I never would of guessed the cult following for that movie; There were a couple of good scenes but the whole never amounts to anything of substance...kinda like I don't understand Napolean Dynmaite worshippers either. A couple of good scenes stringed together. But, isn't that the great thing about "cult" movies? There's just a nice little group that you can truly love a movie with...I enjoy my little cult of Dazed and Confused. Is Dazed and Confused a cult movie? It deserves more credit, therefore I think it's considered a "cult" movie.
-
...when people declare that a challenging, complex film has "nothing beneath the surface" or "never amounts to anything of substance" ... as if THEIR failure to get anything deep establishes that as objective fact. It's just hysterical. OTOH, if someone (like me or many other DD fans) can rhapsodize at length, coherently, on why the film IS deep (in fact, it may be the most profound take on free will, destiny, sacrifice, and the nature of time in all of science fiction, written or filmed), that actually DOES establish objectively that the film has depth. The DD doubters remind me of the folks (professional film critics, some) that embarrassed themselves by declaring definitively that the backwards storytelling in MEMENTO was "just a gimmick." Yeah, right. (The 30-second version of what DD is about: almost anyone, if given the "opportunity" to save the whole world by sacrificing themselves, would do so. So in what we could that person be said to have free will? (The 30-second version of what DD is about: almost anyone, if given the "opportunity" to save the whole world by sacrificing themselves, would do so. So in what way could that person be said to have free will? (And this is a metaphor for falling on a grenade to save 20 buddies in Iraq or any other act of sacrifice.) "What if you
-
You are attributing the quote: "I watch great films" to me, but if you will scroll up the talkback you will see with definitive proof that you are wrong. Don't take my word that you're wrong, scroll up and see for yourself that you are wrong. I mentioned Amadeus only as an example of a great film. You on the other hand went off on a "I watch Tarkovsky" rant. I love that you think that Amadeus is pretentious without any substance by the way, that alone shows that you don't understand filmmaking/storytelling. Amadeus is the perfect deliberation on nature versus nurture.
-
"not understanding" a movie is obviously a subjective statement, so you're just as bad as us, the ones that didn't really get anything from Donnie Darko and, at least me, don't say this as objective fact. That's what makes movies so great is that at least someone is getting something meaningful from a film. In this case, it's just not me. In your case, just as you call the "non-Darko" fans ridiculous because they would think Memento's plot is just a gimmick, we "non-Darko" fans could call you ridiculous because you think the movie is the most profound take inm all of sci-fi, written or film. So, spare us your angst. I think it's cool as shit that you like Darko that much and I understand the basic nature of what the film is about. But, hey, that doesn't MOVE me. At least you're passionate about it, I can respect that.
-
I got Donnie Darko, I just didn't really like it, just thought it was an OK film. When I heard the cast for Southland Tales I was really looking forward to it, despite not being that impressed by his first film. I was really hoping for something special and now it looks like I'll be disappointed.
-
yep. you know simple travel through dimensions as a result of drugs, wowee wee wah. oh and lost highway is about men in black, i just hope this movie makes morons rek ig eyes
-
Donnie Darko was thoroughly mediocre (and occasionally inept) and the script for Domino was a confused mess from a hack Hollywood writer trying to pretend he
-
Amen Brother!
-
Just keep that in mind.
-
I agree strongly with half of what you say and think the other half is nonsense. Had you simply said that DD didn't work for you (rather than lacked substance), I would have totally respected that. There is a sense in which any film (or novel or TV series) is truly and objectively as great as its passionate adherents believe it to be, provided they can articulate a sound and reasonable argument for the greatness (so the existence of, e.g., a small coterie of Space 1999 fanatics doesn't mean a thing). How many people are capable of loving a work of narrative art -- that is a separate and equally as important a dimension. It's valid to say that DD didn't work for you or many others and therefore it can't fairly be compared to, say, Jackson's LOTR trilogy. Well, the audience for _Finnegan's Wake_ is probably 100,000 times as small as the audience for _To Kill a Mockingbird_, but that doesn't mean the former isn't also a masterpiece of literature, too. And there is nothing wrong with not getting DD or FW, but having it not work for you is not license to declare it shy of substance, or declare its adherents ridiculous. (The only thing that
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 383 total posts 380 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 111 total posts 111 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 75 total posts 73 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 71 total posts 68 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 77 total posts 55 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. -- 54 total posts 48 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 165 total posts 41 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 41 total posts 41 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 500 total posts 35 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 28 total posts 28 posts