Cool News
The WORLD WAR Z Movie Gets A New Writer...
Merrick here...
For a while now we've known that J. Michael Straczynski (BABYLON 5, CHANGELING) has been adapting Max Brook's WORLD WAR Z.
For those unfamiliar with the title, WWZ (available HERE
) more-or-less chronicles life during & after a great war with zombies - via a recounting of witnesses' "first hand experiences" and perspectives. WWZ author Max Brooks is offspring of Mel, by the way, which has nothing to do with anything other than being a vaguely interesting bit of trivia.
Now comes word that the movie's script is being reshaped:
Now taking on the adaptation reins is Matthew Michael Carnahan, a specialist in political thrillers whose credits include STATE OF PLAY and THE KINGDOM.
...reveals Fangoria/Fangoria Radio HERE.
Matthew Michael Carnahan is brother of director Joe Carnahan(NARC, SMOKIN' ACES< and soon THE A-TEAM) - a factoid which also has nothing to do with anything other than being a vaguely interesting bit of trivia.
At this points, seems QUANTUM OF SOLACE director Marc Forster is still attached to the project - with Paramount and Plan B (Brad Pitt's company) heading it up.
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus-
+ Expand All
-
Seriously pal, ask the nurse for attention and stop bothering us.
-
Too much caffeine, I guess... I think that Carnahan will bring pretty good structure and pace to the work; Brooks' book was a great read, but I couldn't wrap my head around how to make a movie out of it! I think I can now...
-
July 17, 2009, 11:28 a.m. CST
At least she has tits, NEILF...what are you offering AICN?
by Bob Cryptonight
It sure isn't wit.
-
"First," I guess...
-
..if that makes any sense. Ultimately I'm not someone who thinks JMS is actually that wonderful a writer, so I have concerns over him being attached - that said, unless they're going wildly off the course of the book it will be hard to make it, at the least, very good. But that said, I'm not going to hold my breath for the defining zombie flick here. Wonderful book though, really excellent. And when the fuck are they going to start adapting Walking Dead into a miniseries...? HBO, helloooo?????
-
Nope, they aren't--- Neil posted his usual rant but it's been deleted...
-
...so a promising project starts up on shaky ground. I've never seen a chase so poorly & over-edited as I did at the opening of that movie.
-
Gonna happen.
-
that's a relief.
-
It'd be a shame for you to stage a brilliant action sequence only to ruin it by making all of your shots too tight. Asshole.
-
that the book paints, it will be impossible to fit them all in. Plus there are no central characters. How will this work? <p> Be interesting if they can do the japanese kid caught in his family's high rise apartment building. That was crazy.
-
July 17, 2009, 11:39 a.m. CST
Looks like Neil F just got his ass kicked from the site.
by Hint_of_Smegma
Here's hoping, anyway. Expect him to resurface as all the good trolls do under a different account. Anyone wanting to start a betting pool over how long it will take? I'm betting one day.
-
(If this posted twice, sorry about that). I really don't have any faith in this movie being any good. Please stop making it. Also, I always thought Scriptgirl was kind stupid and LCD appealing myself, but this Neil dude posting in every talkback around eclipsed her awhile ago. I can not click her links if I want, but stumble onto him during talkbacks, making his own brand of assery far worse. Good riddence.
-
like a straight to video parody of Bond. Piss poor. And that opening car chase was sloppy as fuck.
-
He's just expressing his displeasure with ScriptGirl in every TB- one post each- and I commend him for that. ScriptGirl is fine and dandy, but not on AICN.
-
I can't wait.
-
I agree I was disappointed with QoS in comparison to the superb Casino Royale, mainly due to the dumbass holographic displays more than anything else it has to be said - but it was still a bettter outing than anything after Spy Who Loved Me - something we all know as the greatest Bond flick, ever. Minus the Dalton flicks of course, which were also superb. I didn't see much sloppy in QoS at all, and in terms of parodying Bond, isn't that what Brosnan did in every single film he made?
-
Scheduled for worldwide release July 2020.
-
One, more zombies?!? Why? It's getting to be over kill. People constanly bitch about too much vampire stuff but there is just as much if not more zombie stuff, games, movies now. At least with vampires you can change in up a little (not that people really do but you can) but zombies are just the same survival story over and over and over. So boring. <p> 2 I'm all for NeilF getting banned, he is an annoying troll. You don't have to click the Sctipt Girl links if you don't want to but you can barely avoid his stupid posts if you want to read or participate in a TB. More power to whoever exercised some trolling control on these forums. Besides, what is really the problem with Script Girl anyway?
-
This really needs to be a mini-series. I just don't think a two or three hour movie would do the book justice. One the things that makes the book work so well is the epic scale of the conflict. It is a world wide conflict against the Zombies and it takes place all over the planet over the course of several years. <p> I would love to see the book given a Band Of Brothers treatment. But I doubt the money or support is there for that sort of series.
-
That don't make no since. <p> forget about ScriptGirl, forget about your opinions of her, and focus on whether or not you think its right to ban someone who expresses his displeasure with the site. <p> If you don't like his pleas for "No ScriptGirl", why not take your own advice and... scroll past his posts?
-
That guy was ten times more annoying than Scriptgirl; at least I can avoid Scriptgirl articles. I don't want an edit feature, but this site could definitely use a little more moderation.
-
...in the Scriptgirl TB's. That asshole's whining in EVERY TB. He'd get more of a pass if he was funny, but it's just complaining. I say good riddance.
-
The guy is literally posting the same inane comment, over and over, week after week. Regardless of whether you like or dislike SG, no-one here is forced to watch her video's or read the posts - they're clearly advertised. Neil was simply looking for attention - which he's got, it seems - by posting in virtually every sodding talkback where we couldn't get away from it if we want to participate in said talkback. It's all very well to spout about free speech, but continually posting 'no tits' and getting banned is hardly an infringement of his civil rights. It's the same as anyone taking issue with rude behaviour and telling someone to behave, or refusing them service, or even calling the cops - we shouldn't because they have a right to free speech? Come on. He was deliberately annoying people, and he's apparently - and hopefully - been banned. If he occasionally had anything other to offer beyond the 'no tits' comments, then it would be a different matter. But he didn't. It's not exactly Big Brother if he's had his account canned this many weeks/months later.
-
Lots of pple don't like ScriptGirl. I don't like her either, and I think its obvious Harry doesn't pay attention to her talkbacks. Sometimes the only way to get the point across is by shouting. In Neil's case, he did his part by expressing his opinion in every talkback. <p> I have absolutely no problem with that. Its like someone who posts FIRST all the time. You get used to it. <p> I'd like to think he got noticed and the powers that be took his plea into consideration.
-
It could be any story, any column that someone doesn't like. If they don't like it, I have no problem with them posting one message in every talkback. Which is why I will ignore the whole "don't click on her if you don't like her" routine. That's beside the point.<p> How is what he did any different from someone posting "Damn you Michael Bay!" in every story? Its not. Its kind of his schtick. Its his form of protest. <p> Now, I'd have a problem if he spammed and repeated the post over and over in every single TB, but he didn't do that. <p> You make it sound like he ruined every talkback he was in bc you were forced to read past his post. Was it really that hard to continue scanning down?
-
Look at Dioxholster in the ScarJo/Iron Man 2 talkback. Look at how he spams with the multiple "iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii" posts. <p> And yet he doesn't get banned? This is where I have a problem with AICN mods. Neil posts one message of protest in every talkback- which, just as you say he or I should do with ScriptGirl- everyone can ignore and scroll past, ie, no one is forcing them to read it, and he gets banned? I don't agree.
-
I couldn't care less about Scriptgirl. I can wholly avoid her articles, and, except for a glance at how prominently her cleavage is on display in the freeze frame, I do avoid her articles and TB's, because listening to FMB and JNR's foreplay makes me want to join Al Qaeda. I am actively annoyed by NeilF because he whines in every TB. Lots of people are annoyed by NeilF. He contributes nothing but his whining. His banning from this site is only a good thing, IMO.
-
Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!Damn you ScriptGirl!
-
...inanity into consideration. Of course they know ScriptGirl isn't incredibly popular on the site, they read the TB's. However she does entertain a significant proportion of people, and she keeps making them, therefore evidently Harry is happy to keep posting them for whatever reason. If the last ten years of people pleading with him to learn how to write a coherent review isn't going to sway him, I doubt some douchbag named NeilF posting a single inane comment in virtually every talkback is going to give him an epiphany about the SG sections. Neil didn't exactly give any argument either - and frankly, as a lot of people here do like her sections, for whatever reason, why the hell should Harry kick them? Just because YOU or a group of other want him to? Kind of the same argument there in reverse, Vader. Neil was simply annoying with nothing valid to offer, apparently - or if he did have, he never onve offered it up. Can't say I'm broken up if he is banned.
-
I guess that's the fundamental difference here. Asking for "No ScriptGirl please" every day does not constitute whining in my book. Pple bitching about ScarJo over and over in Iron Man 2- that's whining. <p> Also, I fully believe enough protest and the powers that be will change things. Harry can make excuses all he wants, but I believe Yoko's music column was dumped bc there was such a backlash against it.
-
I guess that's the fundamental difference here. Asking for "No ScriptGirl please" every day does not constitute whining in my book. Pple bitching about ScarJo over and over in Iron Man 2- that's whining. <p> Also, I fully believe enough protest and the powers that be will change things. Harry can make excuses all he wants, but I believe Yoko's music column was dumped bc there was such a backlash against it.
-
" why the hell should Harry kick them? Just because YOU or a group of other want him to?" <p> Not what I said, or am saying, at all. And again, SG is beside the point. But if you want to continue arguing about her instead of the banning, fine. <p> I don't think Harry should drop her bc I and others said so. That's foolish. I do, however, think Harry should take his fanbase, his readership, his customers, into consideration. And I think he has in the past, with the dismissal of the "GONE" stories (perhaps before your time) and Yoko's music column, so its not entirely out of the question to believe that if Harry sees how annoyed his readership is with SG, he may drop her.
-
...is funny. To me, at least. MCMV...whatever gets a pass. Like "Can't wait... such a huge fan!" guy. Wampa1, not so much, but that doesn't bother me, for whatever reason. NeilF whining about tits on AICN, I find that annoying. Just personal taste, I suppose. <p> The PTB take our reactions into account when the sentiment is REALLY obvious... remember GONE? Scriptgirl isn't that bad... it's Elston Gunn by way of Cinemax. What can I say, off-topic spamming is the easiest, if not most legitimate, way to earn a ban around here.
-
has been in development since the book came out three years ago. When is the damn thing going to finally go into production! If the movie's half as smart as the novel, it will be the best zombie movie ever made. Though I'm curious how they'll put it into one narrative, maybe give it a District 9 treatment, where it's a faux documentary? That could be cool.
-
Fuck Bond and Neil and whatever else. As for the subject at hand, what do you think definitely makes the cut. I'd say the initial outbreak, the battle in Yonkers, all the people camping out up in the cold, anything involving submarines, the downed pilot, and the final sweep across the U.S. Anything else I missed? That snot nosed asian kid trying to escape the apartment building was pretty sweet, STLost.
-
July 17, 2009, 12:23 p.m. CST
D.VADER - it's not about any column, any poster, any TB
by Hint_of_Smegma
...because that doesn't happen here by and large. It was one guy who was posting something negative, annoying the majority of people here whether they agreed with his sentiment or not. It's not about free speech, even though you want to make it about that - it's about behaving decently. Grud knows they gave him long enough to offer anything else up before finally doing it. And the whole 'don't click on her if you don't like' you can ignore until you're blue in the face, but it's central to the issue. I don't come to AICN expecting to like every column, every thing they try out - and I don't expect to wage a campaign of hatred against such a column or article when they pop up. You don't have to read her stuff, or watch her videos and that is exactly the whole point. Neil was making us all have to put up with his idiocy though. There is a large difference between what apparently has happened to him than the argument you are trying to apply to the situation. It doesn't. People don't have to put up with rudeness or incivility in real life, and it's not harming free speech to put a stop to it.
-
That's the feel of the book, should be the feel of the film.
-
...that I wouldn't WANT to see cut. All of the stories in WWZ were compelling and fascinating, and in some cases genuinely touching (the dog handlers, for example). I would really prefer to see this as a mini-series, or even a series, on a premium channel where the time to develop all of the stories could be properly taken. Even so, I realize the limitations of film and the constraints of time, but there's so much good stuff in that book that I can't really make a decision as to what I would cut. Perhaps this is the problem that JMS had while trying to script it. Anyone know why he was pulled from the project? ??Pseudo?? Out
-
MONSTERS BALL, STRANGER THAN FICTION and QUANTUM OF SOLACE were all very disappointing, there's no reason to believe this one will be any different. Put a real director on it.
-
I'm starting to agree with Pseudo that it should be a miniseries, so we can get every aspect of the book. Too much going on for a 2 hour movie.
-
If they get half of whats in the book on the screen, then God help us all! The Battle for Yonkers, and that scene set in the Indian shipyard burned holes in my mind! If you've not read it (or listened to the audio book), then do so now!
-
Sounds really interesting.
-
Check out this painting someone did. This is a set by set of how they did it. Final frame is the finished product <p> http://tinyurl.com/n5dzzs
-
Well the approach was just one post, towards the top of some threads, no different to other posts featuring "first", "second", "third", "fourth", "fifth", "Avatar coming to....", "Damn you Michael...", but which instead at least had some modicum of a purpose...<br> <br> Oh well...
-
"...annoying the majority of people here whether they agreed with his sentiment or not." Comments such as that don't belong in this discussion bc you're just pulling it out of your ass without any proof to back it up. <p> "Neil was making us all have to put up with his idiocy though." <p> What? Really? He was forcing your hand? Honestly, do you not really see how there's no difference between what you just said and how anti-SG pple feel about seeing her story up on AICN? <p> There are FAR ruder things on AICN (which I notice you've ignored, my ex re: dioxholster) too, by the way, which deserve a banning far more than what NeilF did. You think its rude to complain? Honestly, you're starting to sound a but hypocritical. You didn't like what he had to say, therefore, in your eyes, its rude and an example of incivility? <p> Fuck that, the guy didn't like SG and he made his opinion known. Just like the rest of us do on a daily basis.
-
Some great zombie images in that book. Alot better than Zombie survival guide.
-
It got solid-to-outstanding reviews all over the net. The chief complaint with it was that some of the dialogue seemed to pontificate too much. With Carnahan coming in I hope that's what he is being asked to fix. The script was supposed to be really, really good.
-
Please no "Tits Out For Attention Girl" this weekend! :)
-
What NeilF did was no different, as Deann expertly pointed out, than the same poster who type "FIRST", "DAMN YOU MICHAEL BAY", "AVATAR-FUCKING OUR EYEBALLS...", etc etc in every talkback. What he did is absolutely no different, and what he did actually had a point. And he made it without being offensive and without cursing. <p> It never bothered me. But apparently, it bothered you. <p> Therefore, you think the banning is justified, and somehow see it as a totally different situation than the examples I mentioned above. <p> Therefore, we argue. <p> Did I just about sum it all up?
-
Though I say this without having read JMS screenplay. Much as I love JMS, he has at least one weakness, and that's dialogue. Go rewatch B5, and you'll see characters often spoke not dialogue, but dueling speeches. Having just listened to the WWZ audiobook (I read the book about a year ago), there was some blatant speechifying in the novel that, while not so bad when read, just batters you in the head when spoken aloud. Given JMS's predilictions, I imagine this problem remained in his script. (NOTE- I have no problem with the concepts and ideas addressed in the speeches being in the film; just that as a movie it needs to handle them in a less heavyhanded manner).
-
but I can't see it working as a movie. And whoever said that about the Japanese kid in the apartment building is right, its only second to the female pilot lost in no mans land in my eyes. Good stories. Should be a mini series.
-
Do I think Neilf should be banned? No. Do I find him extremely annoying HELL YES! Neil Shut up and don't click on the link for her if you don't like her. She's not hurting you at all. If you'd like to promote change and get her removed why not e-mail Harry directly or try to organize other TBer's to your cause. Probably a lot more effective than being annoying.
-
Don't bother with the book, it's not that great. The final sweep across the USA was the only part that held my interest. I'd tell you to wait for the movie but given it's rate of development I don't think we'll ever see it.
-
Theres just too many good scenes in the book for them to do justice to it. <p>The Israel borders one, the blind Japanese gardner, hell even the Windsor Castle (bring on the maces! and Her Maj never left the throne *salutes and sings Rule Britannia*). But that Indian ship yard scene. Jebus, that still gives me the shivers now thinking about it. That was one SICK chapter. And the body count in Yonkers will be boner inducing :)
-
is the pilot that punched out over LA's atchafalaya basin. By far the best account in the entire book.
-
Is if they got Peter Jackson to direct it. But I think he's done with directing zombie films.
-
Can't wait to see both that one and the Battle Of Hope. Here's hoping they get decent military advisors for those scenes.
-
No Contest. The South Korean border patrol. looking out at the utterly silent North Korean wasteland, wondering where the hell all of the NK's disappeared to several years earlier - and wondering about the ultimate horror of "What if it got down there with them?" Fucking goosebumps, folks...
-
This should be a 10 to 12 part 1 hour mini-series on HBO. This needs to be an exact translation of Brook's masterpiece!!!
-
The Japanese geek taking three days to climb down the outside of his highrise apartment building is pretty damned cool.
-
The thing you fail to realize is that this site is a privately owned site. It is not a democracy and while just about anything goes there is no freedom of speech here. It is up to the moderators, they get to decide what stays and what goes. Maybe the PTB got an over whelming amount of e-mail about NeilF and did listen to the the public but that is beside the point. You're trying to make a martyr out of NeilF and your own argument. At the end of the day this is Harry's site and he can delete posts or ban people as he sees fit. If he wanted to he could just disable the TBs completely. NeilF was a spammer and spammed for the sake of spamming, if he really dislike SG that much he would waste so much time and effort on it he would move on. Personally I'm glad some action was take and I wish more would be. I wish Harry could pay someone to moniter the talkbacks full time and delete every "first", "damn you michael bay" and any other spam posts. These forums are for discussion, debate and argument over nerdy things, not for spam or someone's "protest" over something that is a complete nonissue.
-
The Indian soldier watching the zombies fall off of the cliff trying to reach him.
-
"Please no boobies this week!" on every thread...btw How u know he's banned??
-
Mr FTW, you couldn't be more wrong. I've been here for years and of course know this is a "privately owned site". Its not a democracy. Neither is the relationship between a customer and a marketer. <p> What *you* seem to fail to realize, however, is that this site is absolutely NOTHING without us. Therefore, we do have some modicum of control here, ie, we can express our displeasure at the way Harry runs the site and hope he will act accordingly. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, and I think everyone here understands that's how this place goes. <p> Secondly, I would not consider NeilF a spammer. A spammer is someone who repeats the same thing over and over in the same talkback. <p> But you are wrong on your last point: yes, this is a place for debate and discussion, but if we want to protest a story or an editor, or express our anger- we do so, and we do it ALL the time. NeilF is no different from you or I when we complain about a particular story; only in this case, Neil expresses his displeasure in every TB. <p> At the end of the day, you have to ask yourself this: why was he banned, but every person that posts FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, or FOURTH is allowed to stay? Why was he banned, but AVATAR FUCKING OUR EYEBALLS!! is allowed to stay? Why was he banned, but dioxholster's completely ridiculous and very OBVIOUS spamming in the Iron Man 2 talkback is allowed to stay? <p> Is it because the only different out of all of these, is that NeilF's posts had some modicum of criticism against the site? <p> Food for thought.
-
July 17, 2009, 2:39 p.m. CST
I WANT ROLAND EMMERICH DIRECTING THIS!!! INSANE? YES.......
by CharlesThomasMathews1978
But hear me out motherfuckers. This book is about a world wide zombie apocalypse and my suggesting of Roland is based on the fact that he has made a career out of giant disaster films and global destruction. After seeing the trailer for 2012 I am convinced that he should be doing it. Is he my ideal choice? FUCK! NO! But rather then live in fantasy land and suggest George A. Romero (or whoever the morons on the Rue-Morgue/Fangoria message boards might) I’m suggesting Emmerich because this has the potential to be the most epic zombie film of all time and you need someone with a track record to get the proper budget (100 million plus) to do this project justice.<br> <br>Like I said, Emmerich is not my ideal choice but one of practicality and if he was given a good screenwriter then there is the chance that the movie might be very enjoyable but let’s be realistic that we are NOT going to get someone on the level of Christopher Nolan near this.
-
Making this a movie not smart. This would be the greatest Mini Series of all times. Hire KEN BURNS to direct.
-
for his uninterests in looking at a girl's rack. I guess he suspected Script Girl to look like Gene Siskel's ghost.
-
would be fantastic. And also a good play by the channel. Lord knows HBO isn't what it use to be for awhile now. I'd see Showtime buying it before HBO though.
-
One you not only ignore, but even mention and cast off as 'irrelevant' to you when it's the whole fucking point - convenient. Script Girl is a single article, once every week or two, that is advertised as one of her bits. You DON'T have to watch it, and it's a posted article by the site. Neil however, was posting in virtually every talkback and there is a big difference between his actions and those people who choose to chime in with the 'first' nonsense, "fucking eyeballs" or other such inanity. They do it to take part/have a laugh/be nerds about this site or some movie. He was doing something repetative, purely because he didn't personally like a set of articles, that was starting to get annoying - oh, and you want proof? Try reading the boards where he did so, you'll see plenty of people who were annoyed by it, not to mention in this very thread - and he was doing it to try and get an article that HE doesn't like dropped. Something others do like. That's like me spamming in every talkback about banning any news by Quint, or Moriarty, or any news about the next sodding Harry Potter film simply because that's what I want. It's fucking childish, it's ignorant of the fact other people have different views and it was continued spamming, whichever way you cut it. If he had a point to make, he didn't make it because simply posting the same comment over and over is not an argument, it's mental illness. He didn't have to watch her bits. Nor do you. We all had to read his crap every time we opened up a talkback though. You also come off as not even reading my posts. Would I think it rude to complain? Try reading the posts again, but this time comprehend rather than misinterpreting some very clear points. It is one thing to not like an article here. It is one thing to mention you don't like it. It is something else to post the same comment over and over again in every talkback even when you know it is pissing people off. Have I summed it all up enough for you? As for others, I think this site could do with a bit more moderation. Having a go at each other when we get in debates about movies is one thing, but spammers and deliberate attempts to piss people off should get banned. Evidently TPTB on AICN agree with those of us pissed off about Neil and his douchebaggery. Hopefully they'll get around to sorting out more of the people that do delight in going beyond the pale here.
-
But he shouldn't have been banned. Didn't he post normal shit from time to time? <P> But as for script girl, she must be sucking some mean dick (probably cups) because a other colums have been killed for less. Yoko's & C music factory, that book that I keep thinking was Twilight but was not chapter a day thing.
-
Didn't we all wish the Damn you Micheal Bay fuck head was around for Trannys 2?
-
I have a feeling it was more to do with posting it over and over in nearly every talkback, and people being fucked off with it. People complain about all sorts of things the site has a vested interest in without getting banned, which kind of blows that little nugget of AICN turning into Big Brother out of the water. And a spammer is only a spammer if he repeats the same thing over and over in the same talkback? You're really reaching now, man.
-
July 17, 2009, 2:53 p.m. CST
SCRIPT WHORE DOESN'T BOTHER ME ANY MORE....
by CharlesThomasMathews1978
When I see that numb nuts has posted yet another one of her "I have tit's Hollywood, HIRE ME to be on ET or Access Hollywood" videos I just don't even click on the link because the dumb bitch isn't even reading the scripts and giving any sort of critique. She’s the Sarah Palin of Hollywood, a stupid cunt who’s getting by on her looks and tits. End of story. So if you don’t like her JUST DON’T CLICK ON THE LINK and you will feel better.
-
you guys are making Gript Scurl cry.
-
She stopped giving Harry the Pasadina Mudslide.
-
NeilF's posts were at least irritating to some. If I were to put, "Please, no D.Vader ever again," in every thread, would that still be okay? If I wrote, "Dennis MM is an idiot" in every thread, would that be okay? Free speech has nothing to do with it, IMO.
-
You keep discussing SG when she has absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE. <p> NeilF could be posting "Down with Yoko's Column" in every TB and it'd still be the same thing. But you keep bringing SG up and how we can ignore her and yadda yadda yadda... <p> And you still think there's a difference between his posts and the others because they're doing it to "have a laugh"? What, you're a mind-reader now? You don't think its possible he was having fun? <p> Ah well, this debate was fun while it lasted.
-
I've got no problem with that in theory. It'd be annoying for me, probably, but I'd either just ignore it or ask a moderator to give you a warning or ban you. It'd be rude, but uh.... look at these TBs. There are far worse things around here. <p> It'd be pretty childish though.
-
I just wish people here would try to be more polite.
-
"We all had to read his crap..." <p> Ohh, sooooooo sorry for you. Man, that must suck.
-
July 17, 2009, 3:09 p.m. CST
DennisMM, FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING MOTHERFUCKER FUCKSTICK!!!
by CharlesThomasMathews1978
That's about as polite as I get :D
-
Says oh so much about you, Smegma.
-
I hope they make this in a fake documentary style and not a straight up action movie.
-
I hate when studios get directors of dramas to take on epic action franchises. For some reason, they think that bringing "class" to their event movies has some kind of genuine value, when all they're really doing is assigning somebody who doesn't know what the fuck to do with a Bond film or a global zombie epic.
-
like everyone else said, other columns have been axed while being more popular, or at least less hated. I think Harry either genuinely has no idea what goes on on this site or he's using Script Girl as a sticking point and won't budge for anything. But does anyone have any links to relevant site traffic? I'd love to see how this place is doing post-YouTube, MySpace, and Web2.0. Especially since Don Murphy allegedly cost AICN some big advertisers around here.
-
not a lot of comparison, fair enough. How about the best example of zombie art of all time? That argument can be made...
-
It should be done properly. On either HBO or Showtime. Done in the same vein as Band of Brothers. Make it so.
-
OK, the vampire-fest thing is getting old, and the Zombie thing was old after Romero's trilogy wrapped. Even his 4th installment with Leguziamo was winking at HIMSELF, fer Chrissakes, and now, "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies"...enough! We get it! But what we have to look at is track record. How many non-Bad Pitt movies has Plan B done? How many scripts have either tanked or are in turnaround because this guy can't stop fucking around with the scripts? My gut sez we'll have 4 more writers on this before it's done and Michael J gets boned up the ass with a Coke machine.
-
yeah mini series would kick ass. dont worry about linking the segments together. get rid of the whole 'go interview the old guy' parts tho. rather just start right in the action. (except for reddekker interview, that was great)
-
You seem to know a lot about fuckin' bannings. Any chance you've been on the end of that hammer before?
-
And sadly, it wouldn't surprise me too much. I don't think the moderators take much care in their bannings; I've heard of people who didn't do or say anything being banned either by association with someone else, or by accident.
-
Although I didn't buy the Israeli bit, not realistic. And since it's Harry's site he can ban whoever he wants for whatever he wants. It ain't a democracy.
-
is the book actually scary to read? I mean scary as in creepy. As in Stephen King in his prime.
-
Three fuckin' times, you say? Who were you before?<P>Just remember, pain or damage don't end the world...or despair or fuckin' bannings.
-
As a major fan of Clint Eastwood's filmmaking (even when I am not overly impressed with the final product), I was thrown a little off my game last year. With two Eastwood pictures out in one year and a tremendous amount of anticipation/adulation for both, I began to doubt the potential of the films, dread the possibility of my being disappointed; stupid, I agree, but it's just the way I felt (my experience with Scorcese's "The Departed" is a resounding one, a movie I was so disappointed in - especially because of the overwhelmingly positive attention it got BY NOT HAVING the power and majesty that his films like "Kundun" and "Age of Innocence" had, but by returning to his hard-boiled style, but this time without the humanism, without the quiet moral voice - just grit, grit and mean-spiritedness; an entertaining visceral experience with Matt Damon's best performance ever, one I had no clue he had the authority to create and command, yes, but moving no - the last decade had seen him moving into new territory as a director, even if his older films are still the most soulful, but "the Departed" felt like a step backwards, despite the fact that I was blown away by the staccato, beyound cocaine editing and that deeply ugly and honest opening monolouge). Long story short, I never saw "Gran Tarino," but at the midnight hour, right as it was slipping out the last back wings of the cineplex, playing for small audiences huddled together around a screen that some home theatres can rival, I pushed myself to the box office and got a ticket for "Changeling," with much trepidation. And then I saw one of the greatest crime dramas ever made. Rarely have I been so stunned by the sheer prowess skill on display. It was a story that not only juggled a convoluted case, but chronicled an entire period when authority was questioned and the true evil that was festering inside a self-righteous facist police state was revealed; by the police not doing their jobs, human acts of monstrous proportions were flourishing. Few films can make such riveting entertainment around a central thesis of personal responsibility, and the results of allowing one's vices and past sins to rule one's actions (holy shit, to have that child quaking in the interview, approaching his involvement in a situation he truly had little or no control over). All the human damage. A stunning and bravura accomplishment of filmmaking; a film as impassioned with justice as it and it still was able to address that great moral ambivalence that underscores much of human action and interaction, one of Eastwood's great themes, and one of his greatest contributions to modern filmmaking. Well, due to this, I was looking forward to Straczynski's filmic construction of this concept. I have not read the novel, but after listening to so much of the comments and criticism (much of it positive, even reverant) of what is apparently a very detailed and complex (not to mention exciting) meditation on human response to cataclysmic events, I was truly excited about Straczynski writing the screenplay for this film, and all the possibility that pairing promised. Sort of like Romanek's attachment to "the Wolf Man." Well (cue the title), too bad.
-
I said it before and I'll say it again, movies ruin books, you gotta do them in long form to tell the whole story. The mass migration to the north to avoid the zombies in the cold and the starvation that follows! The apartment building for rich people out on Long Island! I could go on, but each chapter could be it's own hour long episode.
-
I said it before and I'll say it again, movies ruin books, you gotta do them in long form to tell the whole story. The mass migration to the north to avoid the zombies in the cold and the starvation that follows! The apartment building for rich people out on Long Island! I could go on, but each chapter could be it's own hour long episode.
-
This dojo may be next.
-
I do think it will exist longer than STATHAM FLYING SIDEWAYS HOLDING GUNS tho.<p> No offense Subtitles.
-
Methinks the mods shouldn't ban too many people. Now that the majority of ads at this site are from Sideshow Collectibles, they probably need all the hits and posters they can get.
-
While I agree that bannings are trivial, and probably actually do little outside of actually promoting the opinion-maker, or giving platform to those who do so for some odd reason, be it for vitriol-sake, or from some compulsive need to advertise what is obviously an offensive statement (too some, and when you do it a lot, and at an irritating frequency, that minority rises to a majority) or one that causes a degree of controversy. But why repeatedly plaster the site with something designed merely to arouse attention or disdain (and its emotive equivalents) - if your arguement is made cogent enough to stand up to antagonism, why continuously state it? If it is worthwhile, others will take up the fight, and not out of bipartisnship and its requiste commradirie. But maybe then you are just making a point about banning to begin with...? And, maybe, your stated objections to the matter-at-hand are merely to serve at the purpose of confronting what is obviously not the best strategy for dealing with hecklers. But I think there is a better way to do it. But, yeah, Subtitles_Off (where'd you get that handle from?) you shouldn't get banned for the seemingly innocent statements. But I think you know that the statement itself is not "ban worthy." It's fun to be polarizing, but at the risk of derailing the talkback at hand...? Maybe else so. Maybe you are just looking for a good arguement. Your's is a good one, but is it worth alientating others over by sticking to self-sameness? Maybe so... Maybe not.
-
...and yet you follow up with a second and third post, neither of them with any actual argument, only attempts to insult. Well done. I'll take that as you turning your tail and sloping off in defeat, apparently. You state me saying people here are pissed off with Neil has 'no proof' yet there's copious proof of it in virtually every thread the dingus posted in. You ignore the central issue of the whole SG debate and are now even mystifyingly stating it has 'nothing to do with it'. You make up a definition of 'spamming' that is mind-boggling, simply to fit your own attempt at an argument, and you resort to throwing out ridiculous insults as a final word. If that says anything, D, it's not saying it about me. But hey ho. As to the hypocrite crack, you might want to look at yourself there. DennisMM postulated posting in every thread about not having you about - and your response is you'd try and ignore it, or else if annoyed would contact the moderators and have someone who did it warned or banned. Uhhh, what? What happened to all that free speech? Think about this. Perhaps Neil had been warned already - there have been enough people annoyed at him trying to get an article they either liked or were even ambivalent about thrown just because he wanted it gone - some who also dislike the SG features also don't like Neil - perhaps people have been contacting Harry about it. You don't like it happening to him because it is apparently an infringement of free speech (coincidently, you don't like SG either) but you admit you'd resort to trying to get someone banned yourself if they didn't want you about... That's hypocrisy, old son. You're done, alright.
-
and it was damned irritating. It was my favourite posting name.
-
Chauncey, out of interest was it Memories-Of-Murder?
-
the Feral Kid.
-
You're not Portugese then?
-
Whenever I hear that a particular Novel being transformed into a Movie..especialliy one that I enjoyed reading so much like WWZ...I get veryyyyy wary of just how bad whomever it is making the Movie fucks it up. Five words that always send a chill of dread down my spine is when I see on the screen..."Based on the novel"... I also get wary...i.e.."scared" when I hear that a soon to be made movie is going through a re-write or someone else is taking over the "reins" of production from the original team. So! My question is...should WE the fans of this novel, fans of excellent Zombie stories and ideas and loyal followers of such artists and Romero and Keene...be afraid of these rumblings? Are we looking at a total and complete fucked up piece of crap that is nothing like the book, that is so gawd awful it makes the Return of The Living Dead and Resident Evil series and such "gems" as the recent shitty re-make of Day of The Dead look like Shakes-fucking-spere?
-
I think we're bound to be disappointed in it, even if it's quite good. The problem I see is that I don't see how they can fit the entire book and it's scope into a single film, unless it's a 3 hour spectacle, and even then it will be chopped. Add to the the structure of the book would have to be heavily modified, the film is bound to be very different from the book regardless of whether they find a great way to film it. The books fans are very keen on it, so even if we quite like it, we won't like it. I think it's inevitable.
-
July 17, 2009, 6:55 p.m. CST
How is SG's stuff not ok for aicn? Only Harry can judge that.
by Warcraft
She's brings cleavage and movie news to a movie website, and her webshow is posted by the very person who owns the site. Who the fuck is d.vader to state she doesn't belong here? Oh that's right, just another random internet douche.
-
If soembody had taken care to shoot them well. as it is, the fucking action scenes in the movie look like parodies. They reach such a silly extreme that it's as if somebody had a switch and sudently it's shaky-cam time! You get this lovely well composed shot, but if something becomes action, it's all shaky-cam all of a suddent. It's completly absurd. It's official now, the only directors who know how to use shaky-cam are Spielberg, Christopher Nolan, Fincher and Paul Greengrass, and nobody else. Not even Ridley Scott, who entertained the use of that stuff for a while and is harldy among the worst.<br><br>For my opinion of Quantum Of Solace, and specially it's use of the shaky-cam, i make mine the words of Vern, he completly hit the nail in the head in his review.
-
I liked the movie, i did, but the action sequences really pissed me off!
-
...I've read the first two JMZ drafts of this thing and it really IS the zombie epic you've been hoping and wishing for...especially when the zombie attack the last escape ship...*shiver*...really thrilling imagery and unsettling, haunting, personal stuff. Man, they better not muck it up with another writer. JMZ's work was damn good. Between this and casting Denzel for "Book of Eli," I'm not having a good summer.
-
He'll ban you if you talk enough shit about him, his wife or McWeeny but he doesn't mind when I unload on Don Murphy.
-
Seriously Subtitles_Off, when I read your handle, the first thing that came to mind was that you prefered to leave the subtitles off - even when watching a foreign language film. I'm not shitting you. I thought it was more of a political statement, like you were part of a movement - like Von Trier's Dogme 95. But instead of endorsing reducing films to pure performance, you were encouraging us to watch foreign films sans the subtitles (which, weirdly enough, I've done twice, "Babel" and "Cyclo" - but I wouldn't necessarily encourage it, definately not a rule). Man, this imagination of mine... I can be way too literal sometimes, like Amelia Bedelia. (And if somebody out there suddenly gets the wise idea to turn that wonderful series that into a movie, they need to realize, first off, there is only one Amelia Bedelia: Emma Thompson. Now I relinquish the pulpit - sorry been thinking of children's books a lot lately, what with those great pictures from "the Fantastic Mr. Fox" breaking and all, and all this anticipation I've gone storming around in me to finally get to see "Where the Wild Things Are"). But yeah, thank you for explaining. And you're right, sometimes this site becomes a little battleground for what films are site-worthy: namely, Black-and-White that is being remade (of course, THEN, the original is automatically "CLASSIC"), and those who see this as a pulp-only club. But, on the other hand, I guess we get to bitch about the world is coming to these days, these youngsters and their "Transformers 2: Battle of the Alien Robots." So all is peaceful in the valley, relatively speaking.
-
He probably deserved it though if he's posting his whining rant in every TB.<p><p> But I have a lot more sympathy after all of the bans to people posting about Supernatural in other threads the night it aired, as Hercules refused to give them a TB since it doesn't fit into her 13 year old girl tastes.<p><p> Being a lurker of the B5 moderated group I was aware of this a week ago, so they can't even get timely news.<p><p> With that being said, I didn't have high expectations for the JMS script, I wasn't a fan of Changeling or any short form work of JMS. He's basically very talented at epic ongoing stuff, but two hours of compelling material is generally beyond his talents.
-
I'm disappointed. As a fan of the man, I love coming to see how he gets bashed every time his name comes up on this site. Come on, losers, you can do better!
-
Well I'm coming out of retirement for a little bit longer, an act no doubt that Smegma will claim as some small victory bc I came back despite saying I'm done with him. And he can claim it, if it makes him feel better. <p> Now Smegma, down to business. I'll go through this point by point and be extra clear so hopefully you'll be able to understand all my points- because so far, you've failed to grasp hardly any of them. <p> "yet you follow up with a second and third post" <p> Well, I didn't realize I needed to label them as "ADDENDUMS", or "ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS", considering they were posted within 5 minutes of the previous one; I had thought it would have been rather obvious. <p> Also, were those last posts an attempt to insult? I don't know. You still never even attempted to answer my question from waaaay up above, and I quote... "You make it sound like he ruined every talkback he was in bc you were forced to read past his post. Was it really that hard to continue scanning down?" <p> You never answered, so I thought I'd poke and prod a little more. Because its strange to see someone's little post get you so "pissed" and annoyed. <p>"You state me saying people here are pissed off with Neil has 'no proof' yet there's copious proof of it" <p> Uhhh, no, stop trying to twist the facts little man. Here's what you said "(he was) annoying the majority of people here..." THE MAJORITY. Yes, I said you're pulling facts out of your ass because you have no proof of a "majority" (your words). There were a total of 5 pple who agreed he was annoying before I made that post. Hardly a majority. I don't know how your math skills are, but perhaps you should go back to school on that one. Point to me. <p> "You ignore the central issue of the whole SG debate..." <p> Yes, and HERE is why you fail- SG is NOT THE DEBATE. No matter how many distractions you toss around here and steer the conversation in that direction, this was NEVER about ScriptGirl. It was ALWAYS about NeilF posting the same thing in every talkback and getting banned for it. <p> You try and try to say "you can ignore SG" and blah blah blah, but statements such as those have nothing to do with the core issue here: Was what NeilF did *really* a bannable offense? You and I disagree on that answer, hence this debate. <p> But still, you try to bring SG back into the discussion. Why? I have no earthly idea, except to think you really are trying to distract everyone away from the real issue. <p> What's funny though, is that you fail to realize you could just substitute "ScriptGirl" with "NeilF" and it'd be the same thing. Which goes allll the way back to that question I asked earlier- was it really that hard to ignore Neil's posts? <p> "You make up a definition of 'spamming'..." I didn't make up anything. I offered my interpretation of the word in this case. I never thought of what Neil did as spamming, but I can completely see why you and others would. I just don't in this case. Discussion over. <p>"As to the hypocrite crack, you might want to look at yourself there. DennisMM postulated posting in every thread about not having you about - and your response is you'd try and ignore it, or else if annoyed would contact the moderators and have someone who did it warned or banned. Uhhh, what?" <p> The difference there is that what Dennis would be doing in that case is personally attacking me, following me around thread to thread and verbally abusing me without cause. He can do it all he wants, but that sorta thing is frowned upon around here. Its DEFINITELY different than what NeilF does, or what Motoko does with his "AVATAR" posts. He'd be attacking me without cause, which is why the banning would be, I believe, justified. Not hypocritical at all. I said he could do it all he wants and I'd ignore it all I could. But if it gets out of hand or gets worse or escalates... well that's when the mods might start noticing. <p> "What happened to all that free speech?" <p> Where the fuck did I ever say anything about Free Speech? Another big mistake on your part. <p>" You don't like it happening to him because it is apparently an infringement of free speech (coincidently, you don't like SG either)" <p> Again, where is this Free Speech thing coming from? Someone else brought that up. Not me. Stop making assumptions about me and maybe you'll start winning arguments. <p> ScriptGirl is neither here nor there (so, coincidentally, is your point that I also dislike her), as I've mentioned NUMEROUS times. I don't think Motoko should ever be banned for his "AVATAR" posts, and I don't think Neil should be banned for his anti-SG posts. <p> "... but you admit you'd resort to trying to get someone banned yourself if they didn't want you about..." If someone was continually personally attacking me without cause, I might do something about it. But focus on the first things I said in that post- Dennis can do whatever the hell he wants. I don't care if someone went around saying I suck in every TB. I'd find it quite charming. It'd only get annoying if it gets out of control or escalates into full on assaults anytime I appear. Its not hypocritical at all because they are two totally different situations. <p> Okay, whew, that was fun. Do you have anything here to add? I'll bring it back down to basics here: NeilF did the same thing numerous other Talkbackers do, or have done, on a regular basis. You were annoyed by it, I was not. You think the banning was justified, I do not. I think his posts were EASY to ignore (as I ignore them everytime I see them). You did not. <p> Did I miss anything? Or should we continue to argue over something so pointless?
-
neil sucked.
-
I'm curious whether the fractured narrative will really work as a successful movie. Anyhow... I'm probably there, regardless.
-
...is not only to they block a particular user from posting under their old name, but they'll also REMOVE EACH AND EVERY POST EVER DONE UNDER THAT USERNAME. It makes reading any talkback over a year old almost pointless, as you've suddenly got users answering questions posted by people who NO LONGER EXIST. If Harry wants to ban people, fine (hell, he's banned me twice over the past decade), but KEEP THE OLD POSTS, for Christ's sake.
-
The posts disapear? Why?
-
And no tits out for attention girl this week please.
-
But the novels characters were the predictable cardboard racial/national stereotypes through out. Personally I'd run with the premise (how mankind would survive a Zombie apocalypse), but dump the entirety of the story. I'd also go with the idea that given the scope of the story a mini-series would make a lot more sense than a 3 hour film.
-
Where did you get that WWZ script from? Would you email it to me, mate? <p>wezza_boy@yahoo.co.uk Cheers
-
You could do some seriously epic global shit here, in terms of acclaim and box office. This could be for zombie movies what TDK was for comic movies.
-
yes, yes it does and you agree w/ me.
-
He should be punched for what he did with Quantum.
-
I have no fucking clue why AICN does this, but this has to be the ONLY forum I've ever been a part of where every single post by a banned member gets erased.
-
Talk about erasing the past, hem?
-
No personality, no fun, no suspense. Bounces all over the place with no real people to get attached to, describing situations you've already seen in a hundred zombie movies, just without the excitement.
-
Is it posted somewhere where I can read it and make mockery of it?
-
Yeah you may be right. Every time I pick the book back up I usually just read the pilot account again, and nothing much else. I need to revisit the entire book again. I don't know, I'm originally from SE Texas so I've traveled over that basin many times. Maybe that's why I like it so much!
-
the pilot, the Indian guy watching the one guy blow up bridges and the seas grow with the dead, the bounty hunter guarding the celebrity bunker with 24-7 webfeed, the South African guy who came up with the final plan, the US soldier who traveled around America doing clean up missions. Really good book, and absolutely nothing like what you would expect from someone with the Brooks name.
-
is how spotty the videos have been. It's almost like how a year and a half later she realizes a failed meme and that G4 or VH1 ain't exactly blowing up the phone lines. Better to quit while you're giving head-ahem, ahead.
-
is taking sooo damn long to come out that my credit got good again.
-
ABSOLUTELY, MAN. I've been saying that since the start to my friends. HBO should get this, and spread it out over 6 hour-long episodes, at least. You're right about the budget - Band of Brothers had Hanks and Spielberg money. But DAMN IT. That is EXACTLY how they should do it. It's really a shame, it has the potential to be a classic - it needs a fantastic director. I'm disappointed that they're looking at Forster. Quantum of Solace isn't exactly something that gives me hope he can pull it off. Could be surprised, I suppose. But I really hope Pitt's production company doesn't fuck this up.
-
Hope it is as good as many of you say.
-
Shit, I thought pre-production was further along then this.
-
I've been meaning to read it since it came out, here's hoping the movie rocks
-
i've ever been much of a fan of JMS as a writer in either comics or film. i'm actually looking at this as a possible step up. that said, as a huge fan of the book, it is a sticky thing to adapt.
-
I read World War Z a year ago, and loved it. Recently I was going on a trip and a friend tossed me an audiobook of world war Z to listen to on the flight. Turns out it was the "abriged: version. What struck me is that as awsome as the individual parts of that story are, the whole is much more than them, and when you cut out bits, you lose a lot. Given how short most of the segments are, I'd say... Webisodes, or something like Animatrix... give different directors different segments.
-
I'm just glad Michael Bay isn't directing it... I don't want this amazing book being turned into a 8 year old appealing action fest and making fantastic jokes about "THE ROBOT'S BALLS." Seriously... Transformers SUCKED
Top Talkbacks
- Nordling Reviews STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS! Spoilers Abound! You Are Warned! -- 946 total posts 714 posts
- UPDATE The Friday Docback Calls 'The Name of the Doctor'!! DOCTOR WHO's S7 Finale Arrives This Weekend!! Now With Glen's Ultra-Brief, SPOILER FREE MiniReview!! -- 234 total posts 169 posts
- Hey! Fat Face! Here's The New Teaser To ANCHORMAN: THE LEGEND CONTINUES! -- 154 total posts 154 posts
- The big screen adaptation of ASSASSIN'S CREED has been given a release date!!! -- 161 total posts 147 posts
- Mr. Beaks Reviews STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS! -- 1169 total posts 110 posts
- Harry gets seriously geeky on the very geeky cool STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS! Can't wait for the next one! & See this again! -- 1455 total posts 108 posts
- Capone reviews STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS and considers the art of messing with canon and why it doesn't bother him!!! -- 494 total posts 102 posts
- Harry dives into STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS' spoilers to reveal the truth behind the blockbuster we're seeing! -- 85 total posts 85 posts
- AVENGERS 2 might be filming in SOUTH AFRICA, does this mean that Black Panther is going to be a part of the action!?! -- 330 total posts 84 posts
-
HERCULES ON THE RADIO!!
Learn What Ain’t It Cool’s TV Critic Thinks About STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS, Next Week’s HANNIBAL, MAD MEN, GAME OF THRONES, The New Fall Shows And More!! Listen And Call In LIVE Saturday 8pm PT/11pm ET!! -- 54 total posts 54 posts