Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Moriarty’s One Thing I Love Today! An Exclusive Clip From SON OF RAMBOW!

First! by Err	Apr 8th, 2008 07:49:36 PM

Be Kind Rewind 2: Son of Rambow by Err	Apr 8th, 2008 07:50:10 PM
yeah, i went there.
I've been looking forward to this for quite some time. by TheTornadoKid	Apr 8th, 2008 08:04:08 PM
Frankly I think it looks excellent. I am just hoping it doesn't get completely lost with the flood of blockbusters this summer.
Nothing Like Be Kind Rewind by terrytips	Apr 8th, 2008 08:05:11 PM
It is actually a great little film. If you've seen it then you'll realise there is very little comparison that can be drawn between Be Kind Rewind and this.
That one boy could have been killed! by Bobo_Vision	Apr 8th, 2008 08:07:39 PM
Thats not very nice...innit?
hello by apple001	Apr 8th, 2008 08:24:44 PM
I have seen a similar discussion onM a r r y M i l l i o n a i r e . C o m.It is hot!
Okay by kungfuhustler84	Apr 8th, 2008 08:32:57 PM
I was actually interested before but now I'm kind of...not.
Guitar Hero for DJs...I think... by earthlingdave	Apr 8th, 2008 08:36:27 PM
http://www.mywckd.com/wckd_dj_ gold/
HELP STOP UWE BOLL!!! by The Devlinizer	Apr 8th, 2008 09:36:32 PM
He announced if the following online petition reached one million signatures he'd stop making movies!!! Lets kick his ass!!! Petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/ RRH53888/petition.html Source: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStor y?cId=3167288
It's great... by TroutMaskReplicant	Apr 8th, 2008 09:59:05 PM
...that we can blame the tediousness of The Hitchiker's Guide To The Galaxy movie more on the script than the directors. Futurama did more with the scifi theme in 20 minutes than that film did in 100. It'd be nice to imagine it never got made and Edgar Wright had a whack at it. Oh well...
Wow stopping Uwe boll... by kungfuhustler84	Apr 9th, 2008 12:19:13 AM
is gonna take a lot more signatures than what's already on there. the cocky bitch should have said 500,000. I seriously doubt a million people even know about his shit career
Son of Rambow by Chilli815	Apr 9th, 2008 01:52:35 AM
Wasn't particularly impressed. For me, the film just seemed particularly mean and treated its characters like crap for the entire running time, something which never sits well with me personally. I don't mind characters going through the ringer, but here it just seemed to be a case of 'life is crap, and these characters must suffer' rather than a true artistic statement. The film within a film elements were great, but I'd wager I'm the wrong era for this. Born in 85, so it's hard to get into the timeframe of a film set to specifically in the early 80s.
WOW,I WANT THAT 45 SECONDS OF MY LIFE BACK!!! by sns	Apr 9th, 2008 01:57:35 AM

Therer was a feature on this on MTV... by drwilliamweir	Apr 9th, 2008 02:57:27 AM
Sadly looked horrendous from what one saw, all comedy music straight from Benny Hill and off-tone humour that didn't quite work.
this film was awesome by thinboyslim.	Apr 9th, 2008 02:58:30 AM
and the main reason is the kids being able to act, unlike Narnia where you get jolted back to reality everytime you try and enjoy it coz one of the little brats stumbles over their lines, oh no Son of Rambow has a school sized cast of kids and each one of them is superb and individual.
slightly over rated by Affleckwasthebomb	Apr 9th, 2008 02:59:56 AM
I saw this on Sunday(i live in the UK) it was ok, not as funny or as good as I'd been led to believe. There were some nice touches, some things most people will regognise from their own childhoods but it just didn't amaze me. it was just alright. aintitcool seems to be way overhyping this. 3 out of 5 movie for me, 6 out of 10 if you prefer that scoring system.
I agree by Affleckwasthebomb	Apr 9th, 2008 03:01:24 AM
with thinboyslim, the performances from all the kids are top notch.
Saw this last friday... by arco2002	Apr 9th, 2008 05:09:50 AM
This film is, to put it simply, the best film about childhood since The Goonies. It isn't "real" in the sense that, to me at least, it is a fantasy film. And looking back at my childhood that is what it was like for me. The things that happen to the two main kids are dangerous but they are playing at being Rambo, it is like the director is looking back on his own childhood through rose tinted glasses. For example the scene in the 6th form common room... when I was ten I can remeber having romantic notions about what it would be like in there. And the fact that it is like a night club in the movie just serves to add to the feeling of it being from a childs point of view. The Goonies certainly isn't a realistic film but it is a realistic interpretation of what it was like to be a kid when looking back on ones childhood. Son of Rambow (for me at least) was a real triumph and one of the best films I have seen in years, simply because I was able to relate to it and it reminded me what it was like when I was a kid. Skills on toast indeed.
My review: by seppukudkurosawa	Apr 9th, 2008 05:38:50 AM
THERE WILL BE SPOILERS! Will’s family have been members of a mysterious religious cult called The Brethren (kind of like an Anglo-version of Catharism) for several generations. They believe, and perhaps with some substance, that media is the Devil! Unfortunately for Will, this means that he has to sit out in the hall every time his teacher puts on an educational video (perfectly recreated, complete with dodgy ‘80s graphics). Here he meets school miscreant Carter, who within minutes ends up landing the two of them a visit to the principle’s office. This movie hinges on the two young first-timers. Not only do they feature in almost every scene in the movie, but they also play characters who turn out to be completely different to our first impressions of them. Carter, the over-confident bully, turns out to be a lonely kid just looking for a friend, while Will, the mousy Bible-basher, ends up hanging around with the God-like six-formers. In an age where every freakish, puppy-eyed dwarf with the ability to remember lines is hailed as the next big thing, it’s refreshing to see two kids who’ve never acted before pull off such a difficult feat. Apart from the two leads, another one of Rambow’s discoveries was Jules Sitruk, who played Didier, a 5ft Jean-Paul Belmondo...if he had Boy George for a stylist. Didier’s a French exchange student who might as well have been an alien as far as these blazer-and-tie English school kids are concerned. Think of him as Son of Rambow’s Jack Sparrow. He totally steals this movie. And he even gets one of the most touching scenes to boot, when, after being treated as a rockstar in England, we find out his fellow exchange students look at him as a total dork. I can see why this movie’s getting compared with Be Kind Rewind, but tonally they’re completely different. Son of Rambow is far more like a British Stand By Me. The whole Sweding of Rambo thing isn’t really the point; it’s about two pre-teen kids finding a perfect conduit for their excess zeal in a pre-sexual world. When I were a lad, I wrote little plays with a friend of mine (who looked exactly like Carter!), which we acted out in assembly. Time’s running short, so I’ll quickly give Spaced’s Jessica Stevenson (now Jessica Hynes) a shout out as, funnily enough, the straightest character in the movie. She plays Will’s mum, torn between following the strict Code of The Brethren and raising a well-rounded son. It’s a pretty thankless role, but she pulls it off brilliantly. Also, there’s a scene with Will, where he Ramblows up the countryside in the form of a bunch of pencil-drawn explosions. Tell me I’m not the only one who’d do this during really long car journeys when I was a tyke?
Gotham by seppukudkurosawa	Apr 9th, 2008 07:02:43 AM
You're either a really good troll, or a really bad human being. Probably both.
I wanted to love this... by Mosquito March	Apr 9th, 2008 08:29:26 AM
In theory, it hews extremely close to my own childhood, although my fascination was a little more skewed to Indiana Jones than Rambo. But, it's so outrageously cartoonish that it routinely pulled me out of any fits of nostalgia it aroused. If half the shit that happens in this movie happened to any one of us as kids when we were growing up, we'd all be dead. By the end of the film, it started to feel like a Wile E. Coyote misadventure. And, the whole religious subplot was handled poorly. It seemed like the screenwriter just felt like taking a cheap shot at fundamentalism. Ordinarily, I have no problem taking shots at religion in general, but the resolution of that subplot was far too pat to hold any real weight. Overall, the film felt like a British attempt at combining CINEMA PARADISO with NAPOLEON DYNAMITE. On a side note, I have to wonder exactly when, in the '80s, the film takes place. FIRST BLOOD was 1982, and YENTL was 1983, but a lot of the music the characters listen to in the film didn't come until as late as 1988. It's in the details, man - I hate that kind of stupid, avoidable anachronism. They have to know that if the movie is designed to play to people who grew up in that era, we just might know when "Close To Me" and "Peek-A-Boo" came out.
to me anyway... by arco2002	Apr 9th, 2008 10:16:02 AM
I liked the film so much because of the outlandish situations the boys get themselves into. When I was a kid I wasn't scared of climbing trees and was often in similiar situations to which the boys get into in the film. It was filmed almost as if from their point of view, we got to see what they see. And so for me the fact that it was cartoonish added to it because when I was a kid my imagination was as wild and untamed as theirs. It works on the level of nostalgia because it cherry picks different songs and fads from ALL of the 80's if it was an accurate slice of '82 it wouldn't be half as much fun and would certainly lack a lot of charm.
Yeah, our imaginations were big... by Mosquito March	Apr 9th, 2008 10:57:41 AM
...but, come on - they could have come up with dozens of precarious situations that weren't anywhere near as Loony Toons as what they put in there. The director just wanted to go broad and cheap with it - there's no other excuse. And, I don't see how you can say that setting it firmly in '82 would sacrifice "charm" and "fun". There was a little TV show called FREAKS & GEEKS that was as dead-on an accurate portrayal of our childhood as anybody could possibly have put to film. Was it lacking in "charm"? Was it lacking in "fun"? And, did it resort to ridiculous, insurmountable, slapstick pratfalls? Hell no. Paul Feig understood that the purpose of these nostalgic entertainments is to recreate that period accurately so that you can fully immerse yourself in a past that you have first hand experience with. This does not include getting blown 50 yards off of a ladder through the air by a firehose and not getting hurt. This does not include jumping out of a tree with an umbrella, slamming into half a dozen branches on the way down and not even being fazed. (For chrissake, even Rambo got hurt by that.) If a film-maker really wants to take me back to my roots, the least he can do is be faithful to the period that he's aping. AND, be faithful to physics. I'll cut him slack for the scarecrow shit, but when we're watching two kids from our perspective doing dangerous shit that doesn't hurt them, you can't excuse it by saying it's the kids' imagination. We're watching them do shit that would kill them. And, also, if it's not important to set it in '82, why put it in the '80s at all?
I agree... by arco2002	Apr 9th, 2008 11:49:05 AM
But I wished I could do stuff like they do in the film when I was a kid. So there is that wish fullfilment factor... it is a film about what it was like to be a child when simple things such as playing in the park at Cops an' Robbers was all we needed... it is a film it is all pretend. I agree with what you are saying, just for me it struck the right chord of ott sillyness and there is a real playfull sense of fun to film. Not that it doesn't have moments where the children do get hurt... i mean the whole ending, the kid nearly dies. I dunno. For me it just all clicked into place very neatly.
oh yeah... by arco2002	Apr 9th, 2008 11:55:25 AM
I think that they were truing to evoke a feeling of the 80's on a whole. It is a retrospctive film so why not cherry pick all the best bits about a decade that on the whole had more shit times than good. I know that for my childhood at least I can't put everything together o na straight timelime... the memories all mis up together and I remember some thinsg more than others, and I certainly exaggerate stuff and underplay other things. That is what I do in my own memory so why not do it in a film, makes it seem more emotionally realistic to me in an undeniably unrealistic way. So yeah the film is bloody good. It even had those smelly rubbers... anyone remember them? Cos I didn't untill I saw the film and then in it popped to my brain. That put a smile on my face it dids.
gotham_night by arco2002	Apr 9th, 2008 06:05:24 PM
Must be a massive prick. Not even seen it, honestly what a t**t.

Talkbacks

Moriarty’s One Thing I Love Today! An Exclusive Clip From SON OF RAMBOW!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks