Home Cool News Coaxial Reviews Zone Chat Contact Us Sign in

Talkbacks

Bam!
by iamnicksaicnsn
Aug 4th, 2008
02:10:41 AM
I'll give him a chance
by Lukecash
Aug 4th, 2008
02:14:31 AM
He sounds like a stand up guy. I kinda wish he actually made the Superman Movie....it might have been fun, instead of what we got. Which I didn't see....
And why I didn't see it...
by Lukecash
Aug 4th, 2008
02:15:03 AM
I heard the plot and ran. I knew it was going to suck.
Sounds good
by preconcussion
Aug 4th, 2008
02:17:27 AM
Almost sounds like he's hitting too many right notes. I'm still suspicious of the movie, but this certainly puts more faith in me. At least I can appreciate that he's honest and he's trying really hard.
I'll give him the benefit of doubt
by bongo123
Aug 4th, 2008
02:19:53 AM
I still don't get the "rapper" like name though..
by bongo123
Aug 4th, 2008
02:23:22 AM
whats with that, he seems like a totally normal guy, loves what hes doing, admits people get hung up on his fucking name.... so then why not change it and give yourself some crediblity? i mean, can you imagine the opening to T4, with the terminator music and all sorts of cool shit going on and then POP! directed by McG.. wtf!?
Nah
by lord_zedd
Aug 4th, 2008
02:25:05 AM
This movie will not be something anyone will write a book about. Casting Christian Bale in a film is not a vote of confidence about anything. I know you're reading this, McG, but I'm not pumped. Nothing personal.
It'S CALLED: TRON 2
by Earthquake WestCoast
Aug 4th, 2008
02:25:25 AM
So after reading... Yeah, he sounds sincere.
by iamnicksaicnsn
Aug 4th, 2008
02:25:26 AM
I thought We Are Marshall was a decent flick for the genre. And it's awesome that he got Christian in and Nolan to write. I like how he gushes in regards to Robert Patrick. And cool that he got Winston, and a lot of feedback from Cameron. And hell, would I love to see the 3rd pic in this series where they actually have the tech and the capabilities that were only alluded to.

So the ball's in your court McG. Let's see what you got.

what a faggot!
by Loosejerk
Aug 4th, 2008
02:26:05 AM
I mean, what kind of guy hits his mother and sister. A BATMAN, that's who!
It doesn't need to be rated R
by Earthquake WestCoast
Aug 4th, 2008
02:26:26 AM
btw...my previous post was a mistake.
I'll give it a chance
by polyh3dron
Aug 4th, 2008
02:26:42 AM
It's just a good thing that Warner is behind this, because if it were Fox it would DEFINITELY be another AVP.
He seems quite earnest....
by Kefrif
Aug 4th, 2008
02:26:47 AM
and this is good. My opinion FWIW is that if he screws it up, then it won't be because he didn't try his hardest. I say let him get on and make the film without our fanboy "mauling" and see what film he and his teams make. Judge him after the fact, cos I reckon it'll be worth the wait.
As for the PG13 rating, yeah i watched T2
by bongo123
Aug 4th, 2008
02:29:17 AM
on fri night with a mate, she had never seen it before (late getting into geekdom) and if that movie was released today it'd be a PG13, so i wouldnt gwet to hung up on the rating, the terminator movies weren't exactly bloodbaths
They're all
by The Brains
Aug 4th, 2008
02:29:55 AM
robots. All of 'em. Connor. Marcus. Sarah. Kyle. Common. The Moon Bloodgood chick (fembot). Bryce (always suspect). The sniffer dogs. The fridge.
Re: Rapper name
by lord_zedd
Aug 4th, 2008
02:31:20 AM
I agree that while McG might have been a good alias during his music video making days, it looks silly on feature films such as this.
He may sound serious but he's still McG and not Cameron.
by Motoko Kusanagi
Aug 4th, 2008
02:32:39 AM
Plus it still may be a teenie-pleasing PG-13 crapfest.
well...i gotta give the guy some props...
by LabattsBleu
Aug 4th, 2008
02:33:38 AM
he comes off sounding like he actually gives a damn and it ain't simply a paycheck for him - mentioning Joseph Campbell can't be a bad sign! The film stock point was really interesting too. As for the name thing, dude, just go by your real name...everyone you are close to will still call you McG...you're not a kid anymore (Laurence Fishbourne used to be called "larry" after all)... I hope the studios see that a dense, "adult" film like The Dark Knight, can still make a boatload of money... I guess we'll have to wait and see...And He LOVED T2, so that is a damn, Damn good sign in my mind!

by The Brains
Aug 4th, 2008
02:34:00 AM
McG has said that it's not a "rapper" name but a name since childhood as there were three Joseph's in his household. Or something like that. (Robots)
Oh, and T2 = masterpiece.
by Motoko Kusanagi
Aug 4th, 2008
02:34:10 AM
To all those kids that *heart* T3.
Rated "R"
by Earthquake WestCoast
Aug 4th, 2008
02:34:18 AM
It's fine if the movie is rated "R", but if it happens to be pg-13, that's o.k. too. After all, blood, guts, and bad language doesn't make a film any better. (Unless it's axel foley...then he NEEDS TO SAY THE F-WORD EVERY 2 MINUTES). As long as the terminator film is intense and epic-like, then it should do good. Btw again....who cares if the director has a stupid name . What if James Cameron name was "Jimmy buttfuker"? Would his films be any less awesome? Btw part 3....I want to see the cute terminator babe from the t.v. series in the film dammit!
The results is all that matters
by aversiontherapy2
Aug 4th, 2008
02:34:22 AM
A lot of people are here to prejudge and try to be clever or insulting. I don't see the point, personal insults aren't going to make any difference to whether this film hits the mark or not. I agree that the first two films were soft 'R's, a PG13 wouldn't condemn this.
EVERYBODY loved T2
by lord_zedd
Aug 4th, 2008
02:35:40 AM
even the people who made T3.
Interesting...
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
02:38:06 AM
at first i was like, ok i'll watch purely coz of Bale. Then, holy shit jonah nolan is involved, definitely gonna watch this, hope it's good. Now, knowing McG seems to be at least trying ("the old McG is dead", that is so good to hear), this might have some chance to be pretty good. At least McG isn't clueless to what people think about him and tries to better himself from others' criticisms, unlike say... Bay or Lucas who just say 'fuck the critics, i'll just keep doing what i do'.
poor guy
by NedNederlander
Aug 4th, 2008
02:39:03 AM
I kinda feel sorry for McG, I really do. He's gonna work his balls off trying to please everyone. I have no problem with anything he's made before, not my kinda thing, so I why should I be bothered. But this IS my kinda thing, and I really do hope it works out for him, because God forbid it doesn't, he's got enough people givin him shit as it is.
He's lost weight.
by MaxTheSilent
Aug 4th, 2008
02:39:18 AM
Sorry, that's about as far as my interest in this article goes.
let's keep wheeling out tired franchises
by Prossor
Aug 4th, 2008
02:39:23 AM
and forget any new concepts and ideas being thought up and brushed away by studios. i mean, we can take existing series to NEW places and events OH YEAH!
"Lots of conversations with Arnold Schwarzenegger"
by Rupee88
Aug 4th, 2008
02:39:31 AM
uhh...why??? Was Arnold a huge creative force behind the past Terminator films? McG just seems like he is saying whatever he has to to try to get asses in seats...he seems like an overly slick politician...just like he is pimping Jonah Nolan as THE writer of the film when he isn't even listed on IMDB as one of the MANY writers. And of course he knows what rating he is going for...he's bullshitting. I think he is probably better than his goofy name, but maybe not much better. And I hope I'm wrong about all this and he hits it out of the park, but it is unlikely.
I'll give him a chance? - Lukecash
by CarbonGhost
Aug 4th, 2008
02:40:05 AM
fuck you dude he doesn't owe you a chance. it's his movie, let him fuck it up if he wants to.
where is CHICKEN GEORGE VII?
by Sir Loin
Aug 4th, 2008
02:40:35 AM
His McG tirades were poetic, I miss the guy.

It does sound like McG is stepping up, so will give him the benefit of the doubt. This could be awesome.

Hmmm...
by TheDark0Knight
Aug 4th, 2008
02:40:43 AM
Ive never liked McG but I also never disliked him...He's like Brett Ratner that way. He sounded legit in this interview...Terminator 3 was the softest R Ive seen in years...I really dont care if Salvation is Pg 13 I just want it to be great.
I thought he seemed pretty cool
by Brody77
Aug 4th, 2008
02:47:15 AM
And isn't he one of the guys who makes Supernatural? I'm a big fan of that show. Fair play to him, but T3 was still a horrific bag of shite & Arnie CANNOT let that be his last big role.
I think McG has a ton of potential
by Rindain
Aug 4th, 2008
02:47:43 AM
Charlie's Angels was a really well put together film despite the light subject matter. With the Terminator future war material he could make something amazing. Plus the Comic-Con footage was fucking great...Bale and Worthington are intense...can't wait to see more of their scenes together.

by The Brains
Aug 4th, 2008
02:49:15 AM
I watched "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle" to get a sense of McG. In the commentary he's really proud of the play on the word "ass" scene and Drew's facial expressions during it. But then lately he's been saying how he made a crap sequel in the past and how he's a new man. He is obviously feeling the heat and wants to prove himself.
Fans don't understand...
by Darth Fart
Aug 4th, 2008
02:50:44 AM
...how difficult it is to make a film. They really don't. Good luck MCG. I disagree with you on the prequels, they are good films but most of the fans don't understand what Lucas was doing. The film is rich with symbolism. The dialogue is fairy-like, it's meant to be.
T2 is a piece of SHIT
by BauerJackBauer
Aug 4th, 2008
02:55:38 AM
Just rewatched it for the first time in years. It's an insult to the original. FUCK you.
yeah, change your name McG
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
02:56:49 AM
Doesn't really bother me much, but it's better for your sake, hope you're reading these talkbacka. It's a good way to indicate to audiences that the old McG is dead, and the new one is named... whatever your name is.

by The Brains
Aug 4th, 2008
02:56:53 AM
Yeah, I remember when T2 came out. People came out of the theatre blown away. My friend was in shock, he didn't think it was going to be that good. I remember people cheering when Sarah hit that hospital face-licker.

I really like this cast. I saw Anton Yelchin in "Alpha Dog" and that took away some of my concerns about him. He was great in it. I'm interested in what Sam Worthington will do with Bale. I'm looking forward to this.

drturing
by kwisatzhaderach
Aug 4th, 2008
02:56:58 AM
I agree. I was watching the T2 DVD with Cameron and Bill Wisher's commentary last night where he is talking about the themes of the movie and how the two films dovetail. T2 is such a perfect companion to the first film and it is such a brilliant piece of filmmaking. I've no interest in seeing this new one. And I thought The Dark Knight script was terrible, one of those films where everybody stands and says politically/idealistically naive generalities (especially Michael Caine) so not exactly holding my hopes up for a Terminator script from Jonah Nolan. The end of T2 is where it ends for me, on that shot of the highway.
take him up on the visit!!!!
by javery56
Aug 4th, 2008
03:01:13 AM
get him to show you some clips!!! dont insult the guy. id jump at the chance to see terminator salvation clips.
All the fanboy stuff...
by 11dayempire
Aug 4th, 2008
03:02:52 AM
"explaining where Resse got his string holster from" is a little worrying; we don't need fan-pleasing in-jokes. T2 did that to an extent ("I'll be back") but it invented *new* gags - Arnie twirling the shotgun, flicking the grenade launcher closed and so forth. And for my money, the important question is: will Brad Fiedel be doing the soundtrack? Or will they at least get someone with an electronic music background (Trent Reznor?) to work with Fiedel's themes? Because that's why T3 felt like a shitty TV movie; all that fucking orchestration.
drturing...
by depalma25
Aug 4th, 2008
03:04:00 AM
He's just giving an example of Bale's interest in every aspect of filmmaking. Stanley Kubrick could give a shit about his actors. He called them "sheep" at one point, and we wouldn't refute his greatness. Woody Allen gives little direction to his actors. Different directors work with actors in different ways. I think you're reaching a bit.
drturing
by kwisatzhaderach
Aug 4th, 2008
03:04:09 AM
Remember the T2 laserdisc boxset? Man, that was the greatest thing ever.
"I just might take you up on that."
by Shan
Aug 4th, 2008
03:09:55 AM
There's no shame in saying you'd be there at the earliest opportunity once the footage is ready. We know we all would be too if we had the opportunity.
Cameron is the heart and soul
by kwisatzhaderach
Aug 4th, 2008
03:10:17 AM
of the Terminator movies. Take him out of the equation and you're left with an empty action movie, like T3.
McG - I get that your feelings are hurt dude -
by Brundlefly
Aug 4th, 2008
03:11:12 AM
- if you're being insulted over a family nickname but my best advice would be to NOT read this site. Just make the films and let us do the geeking. That said, I really want you to make a cool 'Terminator' film - hopefully better than the last piece of shit they tried to sell as a Terminator flick...but if I hear you try to justify your name again, I'll fucking scream.
Quint - yeah, take him up on the offer
by Rindain
Aug 4th, 2008
03:11:34 AM
We all want to hear more about it, so why not?
Joseph Campbell
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
03:13:07 AM
I do hate when people religiously follow "The Hero Myth" as if a step-by-step template, especially when Campbell details the thousands of VARIATIONS on the common theme.

But, just for the record, Sarah Connor's journey fits into the hero myth template EXACTLY. Both T1 and T2.

But the point is... those movies are within a huge scope of other themes and characters details, so it works organically.

I do hope they nail this. John Connor has been a hugely underdeveloped character to me and I'm ready to see him kick ass instead of brooding about becoming a hero he's not ready to be.

Look, T2 wasn't that good a movie ..
by MorpheusTheSandman
Aug 4th, 2008
03:14:38 AM
it was one long - very well filmed - chasescene, and that's it. And Cameron gave us Piranha too, before he stepped up and made other things. And don't forget that McG gave us Supernatural too, so I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.
viva la Old McG
by Vern
Aug 4th, 2008
03:15:42 AM
I don't see why the old McG has to be dead. The Charlie's Angels movies are enjoyable goofiness and I'm pretty sure nobody else could've or would've made them like that. I know people don't like them but so what, people didn't like Frankenstein's monster either, they tried to burn him, but they were wrong. That is very un-Full Throttle for McG to be giving in to those pussies. Fuck 'em.

As for Terminator I hope he does a good job, and he better not fuck up the history of Kyle Reese's gunstrap or whatever it was, that is some important shit.

Robot apocalypses aren't
by comedian_x
Aug 4th, 2008
03:19:17 AM
for thirteen year olds. Period. I've never seen someone whose is thirteen fear robots; they all think they're ASIMO or Furby -- benign. Seventeen is when you realize what those motherfuckers can do.

Seriously, though, they should just do away with PG-13 and lower the age limit to 15 on R movies. That's the age studios want anyway -- teenagers -- not some 6th grader who started a year late because of lupus.

drturing
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
03:19:30 AM
We all know James Cameron directed "Piranha 2: The Spawning." And Curtis Hanson started with "The Hand that Rocks the Cradle" and "The River Wild." And Peter Jackson's movie before LOTR was "The Frighteners," etc.

So I'd like to see him step up. He certainly has a kinetic visual style, unlike, say, Ratner.

On the flip-side... what sequel or remake director HASN'T gushed about the original movie or game they are sequelizing, adapting, or reimagining. I mean, Singer worshipped Superman 1 above all else. Didn't quite hit the mark, though.

But do we really need 4 pictures of a guy talking?
by PoweredUpPacman
Aug 4th, 2008
03:22:16 AM
That's what I wanna know AICN. Do you really think that we'd forget what the guy looks like every 4 paragraphs or so? "Damn, now what did this McG guy look like again? Let me scroll back- wait a sec! There's another picture! Thanks a bunch AICN, for saving me the trouble of having to scroll all the way back up due to my lack of short term memory after a lifetime of drug and alcohol abuse! You're the best!" Ok I might be overreacting a tad, but still, 4?? And what's up with tha armband McG-guy? You nearly convinced me on the name issue and then I noticed that rag on your wrist (on the third picture, so I guess there's use for at least 3, but still, 4??) and you made yourself look like a dick. Again. Nah, I'm just jealous that you get to work with cool guys like Bale and Winston, god rest his inmmortal soul, and get to play with Terminator dolls and shit. Damn my own inadequacy!
One small step to getting the fanboys on his side....
by LHombreSiniestro
Aug 4th, 2008
03:23:10 AM
Change your "stupid fucking name". You admit it, then why keep it? At least go with Raoul McGee or something.
"I get it, I’m not the natural choice to make this film"
by DocBosch
Aug 4th, 2008
03:25:24 AM
An with that, he's won a chance from me. Actually, the trailer gave me confidence in the movie, but that bit of admission allows me get behind him. He's pretty much saying "I know the work I've done, i know how I've come across, I know what everybody thinks of me... but now I'm TRYING to do something different." I can at the very least respect that attitude and allow him a chance to prove himself. You'll never find somebody like Brett Ratner doing that, admitting their short comings and less then stellar public opinion. Those types thrive on self delusion, and until now everybody just assumed McG just fit into bunch. I was one of those that made his name a point of derision. "The biggest problem is that the movie is being directed by a grown man who calls himself McG" i believe was an argument of mine. But at the time, the apparently self given stage name just seemed indicative of the work he had done and the work he would continue to do and the type of person he chose to be within his career. Now I get that it's a family nickname, but it wasn't our job as audiences and fans and ticket buyers to know this. We were reacting more or less toward his track record. McG just seemed like the name of a guy that just wanted to make music videos and two Charlie's Angels movies in a row, and nothing worthwhile after that (for the record though, i think it was the second Angel's movie that actually solidifies people's opinion of him as a filmmaker). He brought it on himself; his name could've been John Smith and people would still cringe after Full Throttle. McG is just easier to make fun of and sounded like something that was a conscious choice by somebody that had made other bad choices already. That said, somebody's name, even a self appointed one, shouldn't be the basis of criticism towards their work. I remember that i really hated when Moriarty made explicit fun of Tarzam's name in his The Cell review, especially after it was revealed that his real name was McWeeny. (That said, i don't see the harm in attempting to have a semi-professional stage name. The credits still read James Cameron and Robert Zemickis, even though everybody calls them Jim and Bob. ) Anyway, in the end, i think I would just hate to be pigeon hold into something, not allowed to work on particular projects, just because some people out there think they know what I'm capable of. If anything, now I'm rooting for McG mainly because of that. He doesn't sound like the guy who thinks he DESERVES it (like Ratner and his "I made 'Family Man' so obviously i can make 'Red Dragon', duh" reasoning), but the guy that knows he needs to EARN it.
Memories-of-Murder
by kwisatzhaderach
Aug 4th, 2008
03:27:02 AM
I'm glad you liked The Dark Knight dude. I kind of liked it, it just felt as if something were missing for me, and i'm a big Chris Nolan fan so you're preaching to the converted here. I hated the Gordon reveal and the whole last 20 minutes of the film which really sent it south in my opinion. And after all the comparisons to Heat and Godfather Part II I guess I was setting myself up for a fall. Maybe I will learn to appreciate it more in time. But you need to know, I never post an opinion on here to appear cool, or contrarian. They're my honest opinions. I appreciate The Dark Knight is a minor masterpiece compared to the other summer shit, it just has a lot of flaws in my eyes. I didn't care about the characters, particularly kooky Rachel, whose death left me cold. But The Dark Knight did have one awesome image, The Joker hanging out of the back seat of the police car. That was an amazing moment.
Charlie's Angels was good, but...
by JT Kirk
Aug 4th, 2008
03:28:06 AM
the guy has very little else under his belt that says "I know what I'm doing", and Charlie's Angels was a totally different thing - a reinvention, a stylization experiment, a way to say something fun and fresh and light in movies at the time without sacrificing action. And when they came back to it, that sequel was crap, too much style, too much money, too many ideas not well-delivered. Everything else I've seen of McG has been stylized, right down to his "I'm hip!" goatee - which I see is missing here - Fastlane, The OC, Chuck, that stuff all carries the Hollywood "made xtreme for young people!" stamp of approval which speaks against its value, since now it's a corporate marketing tool to a demographic more than an honest piece of cinema. Maybe that isn't entirely fair to shoehorn McG into that, but that's the reality of the situation, it's walking and quacking like a duck, and you don't give the duck keys to the Bentley.
Don't know...
by DocPazuzu
Aug 4th, 2008
03:28:11 AM
...He talks the talk for most of the time, but then gets into worrying things like Reeses's "string shoulder holster". I mean, who gives a shit? Would any of you have been less happy if it indeed turned out that the string shoulder holster from T1 was just an improvised, spur of the moment thing on Reese's part? Finally we will learn why it is Reese fashions shoulder holsters from string!

That kind of stuff smacks too much of Lucasian BobaFettism, that is, paying so much attention to the ephemera of the mythos that you forget to tell a smashing story.

I hope I'm wrong, needless to say.

ok mcg, you've won me over
by ironic_name
Aug 4th, 2008
03:29:02 AM
don't fuck up.
Memories of murder
by Fortunesfool
Aug 4th, 2008
03:30:05 AM
The Dark Knight was a very over written screenplay. It left the whole film feeling dry and clinical. Every set piece was a 'clever' moral dilemma and everyone stood about and discussed their motivation for what they were doing. I didn't give a shit about anyone in the movie apart from Jim Gordon. As a Batman movie - Fail.
how do you shoot without a rating????
by angrykirby.tk
Aug 4th, 2008
03:30:24 AM
lets say a terminator rips off john conors arm or something badass like that, how the fuck dont you know what rating your gonna get? pg13 apologist bullshit. who cares about ignoring pain, kyle's a badass that's how he gets through it. darth vader, the less backstory we know, the cooler he is, don't ruin this movie, please.
no one will say "fuck", and no gory deaths
by JimmyJoe RedSky
Aug 4th, 2008
03:33:07 AM
watch - i bet im right - its the future, a battle is raging, us against robot war machines - but no cussing beyond "hell, damn and crap" and no human bodies being ripped apart by robots (like in the animatrix cartoons, r rated combat) - im sure this will look amazing and ill see it, but i agree with a poster above... no new concepts? - how many original screenplays and ideas get shelved or never even read nowadays?
McG for president
by theplant
Aug 4th, 2008
03:33:15 AM
suspicion is correct these days, we've been burned so many times. But I like the honesty in the first Charlie's Angel, and I'm willing to give this guy a chance. Even if all the trailers sucks, I'll be there on first day, due to that interview. I hope fingers crossed, you did right Mr Mac
dark knight would have been exactly the same
by ironic_name
Aug 4th, 2008
03:33:21 AM
story wise, spaz.
A master salesman
by David Cloverfield
Aug 4th, 2008
03:33:26 AM
ladies and gents. The name dropping, the fond memories... The guy should sell timeshares. That said, I enjoyed the fuck out of Charlie's Angels, so he didn't need to sell me.
And Fincher was right...
by palimpsest
Aug 4th, 2008
03:34:02 AM
If you haven't seen the alternative ALIEN 3 cut on the Quadrilogy box set, you really should.
Miller's "Dark Knight" was an R rated comic
by JimmyJoe RedSky
Aug 4th, 2008
03:34:15 AM
there were no "fuck"s in T2
by ironic_name
Aug 4th, 2008
03:35:39 AM
and there were no gory deaths in either. unless you consider bill paxton being lifted up or t1000 exploding.
No one has yet talked about how the action is shot
by IndustryKiller!
Aug 4th, 2008
03:36:52 AM
Will he use quick cut style techniques, that's just as important as the rating or anything else. The action has to be steady, well planned out, easy to see, but visceral. Like Saving Private Ryan. I, of course, am not expecting Saving Private Ryan from a movie about killer robots, but merely as a template for how the action is shot and sequenced. As far as I'm concerned no action film ever shot in that modern MTV style has ever been even near worthwhile. Bourne Supremecy was tight on a story and acting level but the action was such a fucking mess as to rob the film of any dramatic weight. Greengrass cleaned it up with Ultimatum but even that level of shaky would kill a Terminator film.
there was a "fucker" in t1
by ironic_name
Aug 4th, 2008
03:36:54 AM
big deal.
Drturing
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
03:39:25 AM
"Lando's Aunt who was raised as an orphan by Jar Jar Binks and Han Solo lost his virginity to her. " Ha! That encapsulates it perfectly.

The upside is T4 will have swirling ass.

Oh, and...
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
03:42:16 AM
It's not called TERMIN4TOR, is it?
It's got the ATM Hacker thing from T2?
by Boba Fat
Aug 4th, 2008
03:47:38 AM
I'm sold! It does sound OK though like T3 was OK. If it was Cameron we'd have a right to be foaming at the mouth with excitement but it's not so, maybe this is the closest were gonna get? Without Bale though I doubt I'd be giving it much of a chance which raises the question, how much can one actor raise the quality of a movie?
vern
by Prossor
Aug 4th, 2008
03:48:30 AM
need kill switch analysis plz. thx.
McG...
by V'Shael
Aug 4th, 2008
03:48:44 AM
I don't hate him because of his name. Truthfully, I don't hate him at all. But he has been in charge of some movies where the script has absolutely sucked. So it's gotten to the point where his name is associated with crap, regardless of his skill as a director, simply because directors have more visibility than the ever-ignored writers.
Rating
by javery56
Aug 4th, 2008
03:49:57 AM
id say they just dont know which way the MPAA will swing... who does? the mpaa has lost it. how could anyone know what rating they are shooting for these days.
Mc G is the shit
by theplant
Aug 4th, 2008
03:52:14 AM
I don't see anyone else doing it. If he fucks up, then I guess people will come to him with laserguns and kill him. Do you think a guy like him wants to live ? Yes he does. He will not disappoint because he doesn't want to see his life terminated by a Terminator fan. Trust him.
PS : T3 sucked
by theplant
Aug 4th, 2008
03:53:37 AM
And T2 is great apart from the sold out preachy "don't kill people" "hastalivista" shit. Cameron sold the franchise out way before and further Mc G will ever do.
drturing, Gordon's trick not making sense???
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
03:53:59 AM
It made a lot of sense. Joker would've targeted him or maybe his family, and he wouldn't have been able to do his job of trying to stop the Joker because of his fear of Joker's reprisals. He only revealed himself to be alive after they captured the Joker.
Eh, yeah, the string holster thing has me worried
by caruso_stalker217
Aug 4th, 2008
03:54:57 AM
We don't need a bunch of fuckin' callbacks to the other films. That's movie geek bullshit. We don't need to hear "Come with me if you want to live" yet again. It was wrong in T2 and it's still wrong.

Aside from that I'm looking forward to this. Just about anything is better than T3 and at the very least we'll get to see some nice robots and shit.

When he referenced Cormac McCarthy I burst out laughing
by Riley Martin
Aug 4th, 2008
03:56:18 AM
And then I stopped reading the interview. Did I miss anything else as hysterical as that?
"Eluded" and "Alluded" are two different words, Quint
by Steve Rogers
Aug 4th, 2008
03:56:30 AM
Just a heads up. Nice interview. I agree, PG-13 would be bullshit.
TDK script was weak...and T2 is classic
by Rupee88
Aug 4th, 2008
03:57:06 AM
Don't even compare the two and bring T2 down to TDK's level. TDK has Health Ledger being incredibly charismatic and that's it. T2 had tons of cool shit and action and was so much better of a film.
And in the UK this franchise has wimped out since T2
by palimpsest
Aug 4th, 2008
03:58:53 AM
where the UK release was cut to gain a 15 certificate. The US cinema release was then used as the first home video verion, but was rated at 18. It was followed by a differently edited version for home video in the UK, again to gain a 15 certificate. Since 2000, weirdly enough, uncut versions have passed the BBFC at 15 rating. Funny old world; though it shows that the franchise has a history of compromise ratings-wise.
THE ROAD should make an awesome film
by palimpsest
Aug 4th, 2008
04:00:28 AM
if handled right. John Hillcoat directing, and Viggo Mortensen in the lead - a good start...
I disagree, Rupee
by caruso_stalker217
Aug 4th, 2008
04:02:54 AM
T2 never made me go back to the theater again and again to see it.

And not because I was only five years old at the time. Actually, I watched it a shitload of times on video.

Anyway, THE DARK KNIGHT has Nicky Katt and that's a problem, but no bigger than the "hasta la vista" shit and John Conner being annoying in general. High-fives and shit like that. The thumbs-up at the end, etc. The two films are totally comparable.

I Think that If I had only read
by D o o d
Aug 4th, 2008
04:04:09 AM
that interview, it would've come across sincere. However, if you listen to the soundbites and especially the ones where he's talking about making a movie on parr with Bladrunner or Star Wars. It was at that point I lost the whole sincerety in him. It does feel to me like he wants to be a successful director like Nolan, Fincher etc, but it has so far eluded him. I can't knock a man for wanting to do well, but I just feel that sometimes it's a gift and some people have it whilst others don't. Who knows, he may pull this out of the bag but I have a distinct feeling that he won't.
TDK needed more action and Cool Shit
by pokadoo
Aug 4th, 2008
04:05:34 AM
...less dumb acting and stuff. And a kick-ass Rock soundtrack. And Boobies. Huh-huh. that would be cool!
Hell, why not go all the way?
by DocPazuzu
Aug 4th, 2008
04:05:52 AM
Show Reese stealing pants from hobos in the future.
I say give McG a chance
by photoboy
Aug 4th, 2008
04:07:13 AM
He does sound like he wants to be respectful of the source material and he's definitely done that with what we've seen so far. As long as the leaked ending is false (if you really do read the site McG, seriously, don't do that ending) then I'm eager to see what he's got.

I mean it's not like he's done a Michael Bay and changed everything about the story and re-designed the Terminators to look like shitty scrap heaps with flames is it?
I love how Quint Anti-Lucas editorializes every interview
by TallBoy66
Aug 4th, 2008
04:08:35 AM
Actually, wait, I don't. It's annoying, predictable, and repetitive. Stop being a douchebag, douchebag.
Too soon...after McSpaced
by pokadoo
Aug 4th, 2008
04:10:40 AM
But he does sound sincere. I hope he has the talent and vision to pull this off. Also, he produces Supernatural, so that's one thing he's involved with that I enjoy.
Lucas does still blow, though, right?
by caruso_stalker217
Aug 4th, 2008
04:10:41 AM
The spoiler...
by SunTzu77
Aug 4th, 2008
04:18:18 AM
All I've got to say is if there is still any validity to that past spoiler...T4 sounds like a major letdown.
But...
by SunTzu77
Aug 4th, 2008
04:23:02 AM
McG did say the spoiler was b.s. right? He sounds sincere...time will tell.
Comparing T2 and Dark Knight
by kwisatzhaderach
Aug 4th, 2008
04:23:48 AM
Cameron shoots his action scenes beautifully in T2. The action scenes in Dark Knight (and Begins) were a bit of a mess, Nolan is a cool director, but he's not an action director.
"MCG's" Big Chance. DON'T FUCK UP MAN.
by A G
Aug 4th, 2008
04:23:59 AM
Terminator, like so many that have gone before it, takes EFFORT to make BAD. Die Hard 4.0 was crap, AVP 1 and 2 were crap, Terminator 3 was average at best. Christian Bale is in this which has given it so much credibility but it could still fail. I for one am now looking forward to it and will attend the opening weekend. And MCG if you do read this, don't even MENTION The Transformers in an interview about your new movie heh.
Pretty compelling testimony
by pax256
Aug 4th, 2008
04:31:24 AM
He likes what I like. Not shying form the interesting ethical issues... the truly great summer flicks. Sure the studio can come in and muck it up but somehow Im not worried about that here. He has me halfway convinced. Lets see another cool trailer...
T2 is a bit cringe now
by the_scream
Aug 4th, 2008
04:32:21 AM
Great effects and action but the relationship between Arnold and Furlong is really contrived. "I know now why you cry". Give me a break.
Why T2 vs. TDK talk?
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
04:36:48 AM
Seriously. Both were kick ass and can kick ass simultaneously in the same universe. Both had the most memorable villains. Both had flaws that didn't bring down the awesomeness of the overall aesthetic. And both were critically acclaimed and rewatchable summer blockbusters.

CELEBRATE THIS SUMMER, because soon we will be back to stupid, mindless, condescending Summer bullshit.

has anybody watched PIRANHA 2 recently though?
by Vern
Aug 4th, 2008
04:37:47 AM
It's actually pretty fuckin good. I mean yes, it's cheap as hell (van with red tape on the side becomes an ambulance) and it's about flying piranhas, but Lance Henriksen is GREAT in it. One of the few full-on leading man roles he got to do, and the female lead is like a less scary Adrienne Barbeau. I like that Cameron had a chance to make this movie and really tried to make it serious, with classy credits and this family drama going on and everything. I was pleasantly surprised when I watched it again recently.

That said, T2 is better in my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

McG directing action...
by Ghostball
Aug 4th, 2008
04:53:20 AM
He did some pretty sweet kung fu / chain fights in Charlies Angels 1, where he was aping Matrix pretty much wholesale but for a girly audience.

The less said about CA 2, the less said. But McG is clearly pushing himself here to take T4 'Empire Strikes Back' levels of goodness... Terminator 1 & 2 levels of goodnes... which is obviously impossible, crazy... but God bless the dude for at least wanting to aim that high.

Next year we are getting an already-intriguing looking Bale Terminator movie, a Watchmen movie that promises to largely deliver on requested copious amounts of chocolate covered pussy juice, and... Ava...fucking...tar. Then in 2011 Battle Fucking Angel! James Cameron, with not a speck of water around either picture!

We really don't deserve to have things this good right now. Yeah, we all know what happened the last time we allowed ourselves to get excited about anything... but at least lightning can never strike again with Phantom Menace levels of franchise-killing severity. Can it..?

Give him a chance, yawl!
by Mr Gorilla
Aug 4th, 2008
04:53:46 AM
His modesty and self-awareness in that interview were pretty amazing. He respects this site, and deserves a similar respect. By the way, for someone who believes in chaos, the Joker seems to be very organised - getting his teams to rig up those ships etc. And anyway, who would want to work for him? The beginning of the film showed that he kills his employees. And how does Two-Face talk properly when he only has half a mouth??
comparisons to Walter B anyone?
by Crewman Number Six
Aug 4th, 2008
04:56:50 AM
C'mon! How quickly we forget the crap Bruce fed us about making Die Hard 4 a gritty PG13 motherf*gunshot*r. He's obviously trying to appease the target audience
Gotta disagree with you, Memories...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
05:04:20 AM
That shot of Joker with his head out the window was great all right (who was driving the car by the way?) - but the movie should have ended there. Everything that followed was just dead weight in my opinion: the whole 'sonar-mobile phone' thing (where a boring, pointless gadget actually becomes a subplot in its own right: WTF?); the irrelevant ferry boat dilemma; the completely nonsensical and illogical way Harvey Dent suddenly goes bad (WTF? Afer one poorly-constructed, nihilistic speech from the man who murdered his fiancee? WTF?); And that final, ridiculous, pointless decision by Batman to take the blame for Harvey's murders. WTF? Er, wouldn't it have made more sense to pin it on the Joker.? After all, HE's the homicidal maniac in this scenario; also, HE's the one that set in motion all this mayhem and murder. If you have to pin the blame on some one, than he's the number one candidate by a mile. And lastly, that appallingly written epitaph from Commissioner Gordon that closes the movie, leaving a sour taste in the mouth...?

I don't understand all this uncritical praise for TDK. Take Batman and the Joker out of it, and you would get bored of the story after ten minutes.

Mr Gorilla
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
05:05:27 AM
First, they emphasize that a lot of The Joker recruits are mentally ill. A lot work for other gangs that are forming under the Joker and some, like the cops, are just threatened or paid off.

As per organized chaos... look at Osama Bin Laden. He is highly organized... asks his followers to kill themselves for him yet grows in popularity... and yet... what does he want, really? I would say even if the Middle East becomes a Muslim state, he would still be searching for something to rebel against, something to bring down... He is simply an agent of chaos, which makes him so scary to a "rational" warfare mentality. There is no compromise or negotiation b/c his demands are irrational.

I'd say TDK raises some relevant themes.

I'll buy that pitch for a dollar!
by JADSTERSDAD
Aug 4th, 2008
05:09:01 AM
Seriously...I'll give him a shot. Good interview. We'll see...
agreed JimBobCooter
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
05:12:27 AM
also, joker says a lot of things that contradict, that's part of his being a psycho/schizo. Like his origins, about wanting to kill the batman ("kill the batman", "why would i wanna kill you?"), etc.
Finally
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
05:13:53 AM
TDK is NOT "Godfather" or "Heat" because it is a COMIC BOOK MOVIE. So, for the same reason Iron Man couldn't survive G-forces at high speeds or Gamma ray exposure doesn't make you superhuman and you can't curve bullets... Two-Face couldn't survive the burns and Sonar phones wouldn't work.

But the POINT is it is STILL FANTASY and it's about THE BROADER THEMES.

It isn't critic-proof... I agree about not liking Batman to take the fall in the end... but geez. Suspend the disbelief for a couple hours.

Wall-E...overrated?
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
05:21:14 AM
I'll tell you about a GREAT little movie: A box-shaped robot is the only inhabitant of an empty, desolate planet. Trundling across the surface of his lonely world, his task is to keep the place tidy, a job which he tackles with the utmost diligence. But he's not just a soul-less automaton: he has dreams of a better life that are shown through a crackling old TV screen. But all this changes the day a rocket ship lands with a strange occupant on an exploratory mission to bring back a piece of the planet's surface material. The little robot's life will be forever transformed by the ensuing encounter.

Yes, you guessed right: I'm describing 1989's Oscar-nominated Wallace and Gromit's Grand Day Out.

Wall-E is VERY polished and very cute, and benefits from the best technology and resources the modern world can offer. But I'll take A GRAND DAY OUT's low-tech craftsmanship and personal vision any day of the week over Pixar's designed-by-committee slickness.

you know something....
by ragingdrunklove
Aug 4th, 2008
05:23:36 AM
i like a man who sticks to his name. he could easily change it to uh...whatever it really is, but he's like "no, fuck you, my name is McG and so it shall remain"....there's balls in that. too bad it's such a stupid name. but still, i admire it.
walking the talk and fantastic flying fish
by TurdontheRun
Aug 4th, 2008
05:24:37 AM
well, McG says all the right things, but will he deliver? he sorely needs to inject some personality into his work if he's to stand out from brett ratner, len wiseman, and all those other bland hacks. when you see a james cameron film you KNOW its a cameron film. compare and contrast the colourless t3 to the original two and you'll see a distinct difference aesthetically and thematically. and let's have some classically composed action setpieces in this movie, instead of this atrocious mtv coverage that is the bane of modern blockbusters. by the way, cameron only worked on piranha 2 for a week, and replaced another director, so it hardly qualifies as his work. apparently the producer tried to make up a story that cameron was blowing the production money on coke and hookers in order to fire him and take over. then the producer went and filmed loads of gratuitous topless scenes and put them in the film without cameron's consent. the director's credit should really be alan smithee for that film.
Why Not JOSEPH NICHOL?
by topaz4206
Aug 4th, 2008
05:26:58 AM
He insists that "the old McG is dead." So really, why not reinvent yourself by using your birth name?

Personally, I think Joseph Nichol is COOLER than "McG."

And seriously, who outside of the geek community has any fucking clue who "McG" is anyway? Ask 1000 non-geeks from the street, and 1001 of them won't know.

P.S. "We Are Marshall" was a lovely film. That's all I got.
Fuck my old boots...
by Ghostball
Aug 4th, 2008
05:31:19 AM
What's with all the Batman talk? Bale aside, it and Terminator couldn't have less to do with each other if they tried.
M-O-M
by JimBobCooter
Aug 4th, 2008
05:37:56 AM
Last point about TDK... sorry... I also loved in the Ferry Scene how the "normal" boat democratically voted to blow the other boat up. Yet... when it came to one person pressing the button... their morals got in the way. When it was a "mob" mentality and anonymous votes, it was easy to kill. But when the man stood up and found himself alone and visible, he resisted. Says a lot about human nature. And it was the exact flip-side to drama in the prisoner's boat.
Osama Bin Laden Vs The Joker?
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
05:39:43 AM
Mr Gorilla, you couldn't be more wrong. You could NOT be more wrong. I'm saying this because I've heard quite a few people trying to give TDK extra credibility by saying it is a referring to Al-Qaeda and Islamic terrorism. This is complete NONSENSE and needs to be nipped in the bud.

First and foremost, Islamic terrorists such as Osama Bin Laden HAVE AN ETHOS AND PHILOSOPHY. They are carrying out their attacks in the name of God. They believe that THEY ARE THE GOOD GUYS. They see themselves as striking out at a GREAT EVIL. They believe their cause is not only justified but that it is JUST. They have other reasons besides religious ones, but rest assured, they think they are trying to defeat Evil. They see the West as THE GREAT SATAN - and we've also given them plenty of excuses to claim that.

This is not what the Joker is about at all. He doesn't care for Good or Evil, he is not striking out to avenge historic grievances. He's just causing mayhem because he enjoys it. Sure, in TDK he initially describes his reasons as being anarchistic. Later he seems to claim that his reasons are nihilistic. But, since he changes his story so often, you can't really believe any justification he gives. The most likely explanation is the one offered by Alfred: "Some men just like to watch the world burn. That is completely the opposite of Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda. They think they are SAVING the world.

He's talking the talk, but..
by DiamondJoe
Aug 4th, 2008
05:47:00 AM
..ultimately, does this film have any real reason for existing, other than printing more money? I'm not buying it - The franchise ended with T2, as Cameron intended. T3? Get that rehashed bullshit the fuck out of my face. That crappy tv series? Don't make me laugh. Pale, superfluous imitations. I will see this movie and reserve judgement, and I do hope its good, but as yet I'm not convinced (particularly if that leaked ending is actually what happens - I mean wtf??) And Quint - knock off the "even Indy 4, to an extent" bollocks. We all know what a colossal piece of worthless cinematic shit that film is, so have the guts to actually give the beards the finger for it.
Thanks for the response, M-O-M..
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
05:53:29 AM
And respect to you too - I've read elsewhere the list of movies that you like - and it almost exactly co-incides with my own (Picnic At Hanging Rock is AWESOME).

Just a couple of short points 'cause trying to change some-one's mind is pointless...

By 'nihilism' I was referring to the Joker's speech to Harvey in the hospital. No one can make me believe that Harvey's sudden conversion was convincing. It was totally out of step with how the character was established in the rest of the movie. Yes, and that includes the 'interrogation' scene.

Trying to put 'adult' ideas or themes into a movie does NOT make it a good movie. And my feeling is that philosophical lessons are not behind the Nolans' desire to make this movie.

To me this movie was made as a series of 'impressive' or 'cool' kick-ass events. And then they tried to tie it together loosely with flimsy motivations and logic. I don't buy that there is any serious attempt to comment on human nature here. I've already explained the completely stupid and unnecessary decision to make Batman 'take the blame'. That decision was made solely for the purpose of gaining the audience's sympathy for Batman - without any consideration for how illogical it was. They could easily have pinned it on the Joker.

I give him a chance, BUT....
by SpencerTrilby
Aug 4th, 2008
06:00:36 AM
calling the Comic-Con people a "literate discriminate crowd" is not only a blatant case of buttering up the fans, but also a brave statement on its own right: I have no doubt that there are respectable individuals among them but as a group they truly look and sound like the stupidest mob on earth.
Hooded Justice
by VegasRon
Aug 4th, 2008
06:03:12 AM
Congrats on saying the most inane thing I've ever read on this site: "Take Batman and the Joker out of it, and you would get bored of the story after ten minutes." Really? Idiot.
Blame the Joker?
by VegasRon
Aug 4th, 2008
06:05:03 AM
For murders he didn't commit? No, that was never an option for either Batman or Gordon.
Vegas...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
06:11:14 AM
Well, I've written on this before and am just using shorthand now. You haven't seen my other posts so it explains your knee-jerk reaction (to an extent). What most people would understand by my post is:

Take Batman and the Joker out of it and REPLACE THEM with Special Agent X and Super-terrosist Y and you would have a mediocre clone of a Mission Impossible/ Die Hard/ Speed/ True Lies/ etc anti-terrorist action film. And just for you, VegasRon: in this HYPOTHETICAL (it means we're using our IMAGINATION) scenario you can assume that the NAMES of Gordon, Fox, Dent, Gotham city would by changed too.

TDK
by PrincessLeias_Poohole
Aug 4th, 2008
06:12:19 AM
I keep seeing people asking why didnt they pin the murders on the Joker. I think the main two reasons are that the Joker was already caught when Harvey was killed, so thats a no go, but another reason was that earlier in the film the mob boss told Batman that they knew he had rules so they were not intimidated by him anymore. By having the murders pinned on him it not only served the purpose of saving the hope of the city, but to make the criminal fear Batman once again.
Hooded Justice and Memories of Murder.......
by Chewbaccalypse Now
Aug 4th, 2008
06:14:49 AM
Looks like we got a love connection. We'll be back in 2 and 2 and see if you guys want to go on another date.
okay, VegasRon...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
06:15:56 AM
Thanks for your posts because it makes your position very clear. My position is I don't reply to people who require every single point to be explained to them with qualifications, eventualities, sub-headings, annotations, step-by-step clarifications and foot-notes - and ALL IN LARGE TYPE. It's nothing personal - I just don't have the time.
the most inane comment of all time
by TurdontheRun
Aug 4th, 2008
06:22:55 AM
take batman and the joker out of the film, take away the intelligent script,christopher nolan's direction, the terrific supporting performances, provocative moral dilemmas, great cinematography, music and editing, and you're left with a very poor film indeed. (disclaimer: this is sarcasm, for those slow on the uptake)
HJ
by VegasRon
Aug 4th, 2008
06:24:33 AM
Sorry I missed whatever epic treatise you wrote that explains how bad TDK is.

The only thing I can be fucked to even semi-respond to the percieved suddenness of Dent's turning. His "turning" starts earlier, and is a culmination of the tragic events surrounding him. Eckhart did a great job protraying a man who is at the beginning supremely confident and totally loses everything by the end. I thought his final standoff was a bit talky, but his motivation wasn't contrived, IMO.

I don't know wtf you're ranting about in the last post, I just simply stated that neither Batman nor Gordon would frame someone for several murders, even if it IS the Joker. Had he died, maybe.

M-O-M
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
06:30:08 AM
Memories, I'm afriad it's getting difficult to have a proper discussion with you because it's clear that you're commenting on my posts after only half-reading them. This is the second time I feel obliged (and embarrassed) to have to refer you to a point I've already addressed. But here goes again:

As I said, The Joker at first explains his actions through the philosophy of ANARCHISM. Later on he seems to subscribe to NIHILISM. I said that in my post.

BUT, given that he seems to change his story all the time (as well as the origins of his scars), I would say he's making it up as he goes along and doesn't particularly care. Probably the most accurate explanation is what Alfred says: "Some men just like to watch the world burn."

But even if his philosophy is anarchism or nihilism, neither of them compare to Bin Laden's Islamic extremism. They are not even remotely related.

As to TDK, I don't hate it: it's got some 'cool' moments - but I require my action movies to have a minimum of logical progression and a minimum of plausibility within the context of the worlds they create. I am saying 'MINIMUM'! I'm not expecting anything unreasonable! And to be fair, most good actioners manage to do this. TDK doesn't though. I can admire the craftsmanship that's gone into it - and enjoy the setpieces - but it's a forgettable movie. There's much better examples of this kind of movie out there.

JimBobCooter
by Mr Gorilla
Aug 4th, 2008
06:33:45 AM
Hey mister! Your points are all well-made, but, but but.... I would have suspended disbelief in TDK, except I had just watched BATMAN BEGINS, which pretty much told me NOT to suspend disbelief. Every gadget was explained and reasoned. Very carefully. In long and boring detail. ('Here's a car that we developed for bridge making'.) Also you are right about Bin Laden - except that his example shows just how hard it is to rig somewhere with explosives (something that happens 5 times in TDK, I think) - that's why his outfit resorts to brainwashing agents into suicide attacks. And finally, your point about the Joker's sidekicks being mentally ill. Would that be 'mentally ill, but not so much so that they cock up any of the Joker's complicated plans?' ANYWAY. Listen, TDK was a very very good movie. I enjoyed it - as much as it is possible to enjoy something with such dark themes. I was gripped throughout, and I completely applaud its ambition. (But as far as films about grinning madmen causing chaos go, I'll plump for V FOR VENDETTA any day.)
I liked DH4
by Dazzler69
Aug 4th, 2008
06:43:53 AM
And that was R rating to PG-13. I think it will be fine as a PG-13.
Riley Martin
by nukethefridge
Aug 4th, 2008
06:47:02 AM
I laughed when he mentioned the road too!!!
TDK fans...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
07:02:02 AM
Look, I know where'e you're all coming from.

I remember back when Tim Burton's Batman came out (1989 I think). Everyone was saying it was a huge EVENT. That it was iconic. That it depicted two archetypes locked in a symbolic struggle against the background of a corrupt and and decaying urban nightmare. That it completely revamped the comic-book genre. That Nicholson's joker was a groundbreaking, landmark performance, the definitive interpretation of the character.

Nowadays it's generally recognised for the laughable piece of crap that it is. People are embarrassed to admit that they ever praised Nicholson's Joker. And it's clear that Burton's whimsical, romantic sensibility was ill-suited to the Batman franchise.

But at the time it was the IN thing. It captured the 'zeitgeist.'

So I understand that people are going apeshit for TDK. It's been a very bad summer for blockbusters: Indy 4 was a crushing disappiontment - and here we have a comic book movie that tries to take itself seriously. And we're falling over it in relief. And for extra points it makes some vague, half-baked attempts to jump on the post-9/11 bandwagon. So yeah, it's FLAVOUR OF THE MONTH.

It'll be forgotten about by Christmas.

And you guys will be back here in a couple of years saying it's a pile of crap.

Cameron did Pirahna 2!!!
by bigj1124
Aug 4th, 2008
07:02:55 AM
People should get a grip, there is so much positive news on this project that there really shouldn't be an issue!!Visually even from the trailer this thing looks interesting, McG, is the directors name, deal with it!!There is reason behind it, and it's not him trying to be cool!There have been conversations with Cameron, Arnold, there is amazing talent behind the cameras in ILM and Winston Studios and many others and a cast that looks amazing!!I for one will go see this film because of these factors.Plus I believe in not prejudging McG.I watched T2 recently and found it suprisingly lacking in excitement!!There were moments but there were in T3 also!!So cameron did Pirahnna and look where he is now!!McG did Charlies Angels, good light entertainment with some very good action sequences!!!Dam scene Charlies 2 especially!!!Love to hear some more positives!!!!
For the last time, BATS TOOK THE BLAME
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
07:16:25 AM
because: 1. Joker was already caught. Pinning the blame on him could get troublesome as others knew this, and a cover-up scandal would be bad. 2. Criminals no longer feared batman. as maroni said "they're onto you." Saying batman kills people will put the fear back in them. (someone else pointed this out). 3. batman realized the influence he had on gothamites (copycat batmen) as a hero was not what he hoped for, and is actually causing more harm. no hero worship means no copycats and more lives are saved. obviously, they can't say it was dent's fault. clear enough?
McG is white?
by Kizeesh
Aug 4th, 2008
07:18:55 AM
I thought he was like a rapper or something. Seriously I'm not trolling I actually thought he was an ex-rapper.
Hooded Justice
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
07:20:39 AM
i watched batman 89 (and batman returns) as a kid, and i thought it was crap and i felt my intelligence was insulted. honestly, not trying to be smart or anything. i never thought the burton films were great. but bb and tdk... different movies but both amazing.
McG vs Cameron
by Kizeesh
Aug 4th, 2008
07:29:45 AM
Interestingly, I actually think moving away from Cameron is a good idea. Cameron is a visual genius and a very competant director of actors and action. But he's also a bit of a schmaltzy hack. I mean Terminator 2 is vastly inferior to Terminator, purely in terms of character and hard hitting story telling. T2 is so mired in it's own anti-nuclear war message and Sarah Connor's pithy soliloques that it slows down to a halt.

That's because T2 is sarah's story. Terminator was Reece's story, T3 was no-ones which is why it failed.

Hopefully Salvation will be John Connor's story.

The pain from movies that suck
by Abominable Snowcone
Aug 4th, 2008
07:31:15 AM
can be controlled--you just disconnect them
Re: hooded justice
by Kizeesh
Aug 4th, 2008
07:34:47 AM
I can't imagine what comic-book movie you would enjoy....oh wait.

TDK is justifiably a good film, while it may be riding the crest of it's own hype right now, that doesn't mean that it isn't worth at least some of it. Also I like how you wax lyrical about Batman capturing the zeitgeist of it's time and being loved, and then in the next breath say you didn't really like it. You're zeitgeist was soemwhere else I imagine.


by bigj1124
Aug 4th, 2008
07:36:28 AM
T3 even had some stunning imagery, the hunter killer sequence at the very beginning was stunning, if T4's LA scenes are anything like that scene it would be worth the price of admission solely for that!
Sorry, Shadow Warrior...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
07:36:40 AM
...but the reasons you've given were all thought up...

by you.

They were not in the script. They were not in the movie.

Your explanations are pure conjecture on your part. But that's all they are. If ithey're not in the movie it's because they weren't put it in - and no amount of explaining by you, me or anyone CAN put them in.

I could just as easily say that Batman took the blame because it's part of a masterplan he has which will be revealed in the next movie. Or because he is actually planning to commit suicide so it doesn't matter. Or that the Devil made him do it. Or that he heard voices from Outer Space through his sonar device that told him to do it.

None of that makes it so.

'Cause it ain't in the movie.

I mean the reasons you give are pretty plausible. But they're your ideas. Not Nolan's. You say that Joker was caught? I say pin the murders on one of his henchmen. The Joker clearly has dozens. Say they did it on his orders. Say it was a henchman who wasn't identified (he was wearing a clown mask) and got away. End of story.

I can come up with any imaginary refutation to your imaginary justifications. It doesn't matter.

'Cause none of it is in the movie.

It's called a plot hole. A piece of silly logic that the film-makers hope you won't notice because you're letting the 'coolness' of the scene wash over you.

But if you're going to start explaining this particular plot hole, you might as well explain the many others in the movie. How much time have you got? Good luck!

Plot hole?
by Kizeesh
Aug 4th, 2008
07:44:54 AM
Did you fall asleep during batmana nd Gordon's conversation at the end? or Gordon's voice-over? Heaven forbid you might need to use your noggin to tie together why something was happening and not have it underlined in idiot-speak. Seriously, you started out sounding vaguely intelligent, now you sound like a brainless hater desperately clawing for reasons to back up his own opinion.

Why don;t you try going to see the movie again and try paying more attention.

also excuse me for earlier, I misread a comment by Shadow Warrior as yours.

And about his name...
by Bleakseason
Aug 4th, 2008
07:45:03 AM
There was a while where John McTiernan wanted to be called McT... I remember reading one of Harry's reviews or interviews where he mentioned this, and that name was subsequently used for a while. Let's face some facts... McTiernan may have made a couple lemons in the past few years (Rollerball...shudder) but he's still the fucking man... and no one took him to task for wanting to be called McT. So... does a name like that look silly on a credit roll? Well, yeah... but who cares... that's his problem, and has nothing to do with his ability to make a decent film. And anyway... Diablo Cody is an even stupider name (whether real or fake) and no one bitch-slapped her for it. McG, slight word of warning... trying to please EVERYONE will only fail you in the end. You put the right elements in place (Bale, Winston, Nolan, etc, etc)... now go and make YOUR movie.
Mc Tiernan is not the man
by Kizeesh
Aug 4th, 2008
07:48:28 AM
he made about 2 admittedly amazing movies, and he's utterly failed to make anything better than slightly above average ever since.

by bigj1124
Aug 4th, 2008
08:01:55 AM
Lot of chat about Dark Knight, isn't this the T4 talkback?lol
Blade Runner
by Mr Gorilla
Aug 4th, 2008
08:06:56 AM
is a BORING movie. Just for the record. Someone mentioned it - so I thought I should put them straight. The Duellists is much better.
Hood Justice...
by RorschachTest
Aug 4th, 2008
08:10:18 AM
...has one of the more logical and rationalised opinions of TDK I have seen on any 'movie nerd' forum in a while. So it makes sense that most of you passive fanboy douchebags automatically disagree...
M-O-M. yackbacker...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
08:10:24 AM
I don't mind a difference of opinion in the least. You rightly point out that this is what talkbaking's all about. I do get alarmed when I am accused of faulty logic on something I HAVEN'T said - or something I've said (clearly, I think!) that has been misunderstood (often deliberately on TBs, alas!).

I also get irritated when people can't deal with someone who neither LOVES nor HATES a movie - which is where I stand on TDK. I get mightily puzzled by people who are unable to aknowledge obvious faults and plot holes in a movie. At least say, 'yeah I know it's silly, I know it makes no sense - but I can get over it because it's BATMAN and I love that character! I can forgive the film-makers a little fuzzy logic because the character's so COOL."

That's a stance I can respect because it's honest. But I would also expect you to admit in that case, that without Batman in it, you would have little or no interest in the movie.

I enjoyed TDK. It's craftsmanship is highly professional. Everyone involved seems to be trying to do a serious job - and more power to them. But I don't see anything in this movie that will stand the test of time. In other words, I don't see it as the second coming.

I see TDK as THE LATEST THING, the NEWEST thing. So it's natural that people are excited at the moment. I don't think they will be in a year's time.

Example: Ledger's Joker. I've heard the most exaggerated, ridiculous claims about his performance. Oscar-worthy etc etc. Well, that's just hype. His performance is good. It's professional, it works. He did what he was asked and fit in with Nolan's vision. But if you want to grade the good performances in this movie, then I'm going to have to hand it to Gary Oldman's Commissioner Gordan - a study in retraint and dignity. Or Eckhart's Dent (pre-bizarre conversion to evil) - convincingly dedicated and driven as the DA. These roles are much more difficult to play than the Joker. They're more subtle, more nuanced.

But the villian is always the most fun character. And the Joker is an iconic villian. Personaly I think he's easy to play and any professional actor could do a decent job. People are lauding Ledger, but I think his recent death has a lot to do with it. I think the attractiveness of the character has a lot to do with it. I think our positive reaction to this performance has as much to do with the re-imaging of Alan Moore and Frank Miller as it does with Ledger's portrayal.

But in the long run, will he stand up against the great screen villians of the past? Will he be in the same bracket as:

Volonté's El Indio? Reed's Bill Sykes? Helpmann's Child Catcher? Seymour Hoffman's Davian? Guiness' Fagin? James earl Jones' Darth Vader? Bogart's Dobbs? Welles Harry Lime? Brando's Kurtz? Kinski in anything?

Personally, I don't think so. It'll be interesting to see what happens when some one else plays the Joker. What happens if that actor's performance is more subtle, more nuanced, more charismatic, scarier, funnier than Ledger's? That will get confusing for a lot of people!

What if Ledger hadn't taken the part in the first place? Would the movie have crashed and burned without him? No. They would have got some one else just as good (or better?) and THAT is the performance everyone would be nominating for an oscar today.

''big shot in the ass''
by FILMFUNK
Aug 4th, 2008
08:11:41 AM
How do we know the guy can't do serious big action movies if he don't get a chance? - Oh yeah, Charlies Angles!

His name is still lame and he chats some serious Bullshit ALL the time like he's constantly trying to sell himslef but T3 wasn't exactly amazing, just enjoyable although my mate thinks it's the best one!?

Anyway No inflating T-titties or lady shades or pet robot or bad 80s hair just plenty future warstuff and it might just work!

It's not him....
by Stormshadow4life
Aug 4th, 2008
08:17:05 AM
It's just that I have little interest in a 4th Terminator movie. Maybe I'll be more interested next year though. But for now, Watchmen is the only 2009 movie I care about.
yeah, lotsa TDK talk in a T4 tackbalk
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
08:24:06 AM
well to summarize... Bale = good, nolan = good, Winston's people = good, McG seems sincere and is self-aware of what people think of him, and seems to want to make a really good effort to improve himself and make a good T4. So T4 has a chance of actually being good. All in agreement? I guess there's not much else to talk about. Continue with the TDK talk then...
Just one more thing...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
08:26:20 AM
M-O-M, thanks for your comments again - I'm not saying TDK is bad - and I fully aknowledge that there's a LOT of quality in there. I can also see why people are getting enthusiastic about it. It's just that I'm looking for something a bit different in order to love a movie. Case in point:

You mention Alfred's story about the Burmese 'warlord'. Now this story TO ME is an CLASSIC example of the faulty logic and lack of consistency in the movie.

"Some men just like to watch the world burn," says Alfred. And then by way of example he tells the story of the Burmese 'warlord'. But the Burmese warlord WASN'T INTERESTED IN BURNING ANYTHING! He wasn't interested in destroying anything! From what Alfred told us, he liked STEALING JEWELS FOR FUN! Criminal behaviour certainly, but hardly world-shattering! Hardly terrorism! And a million miles away from what the Joker was doing!

And it was ALFRED's regiment WHO BURNED THE FOREST - NOT THE WARLORD. I repeat, it was Alfred and his men who were happy to watch the world burn! And why? Because they could not suffer a single man to be making a mockery of them.

So what on earth is the point of the story? It's actually Alfred and his regiment who come across as the 'greater evil'. And the story itself has no relation to what is happening to the Joker. Do you see my problem with it?

Because, the film-makers are not intending for us to LISTEN to what's being said or to THINK about it. It's supposed to sound COOL and we're supposed to let it wash over us.

Interesting that nobody's mentioned Supernatural
by Manos
Aug 4th, 2008
08:26:40 AM
It's managed to grow into a very good series. Granted, its small screen, but its still good, and for that alone, I'll give McG A chance.
Who care about the rating ?
by m_prevette
Aug 4th, 2008
08:27:14 AM
That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard on this site...a PG 13 or R rating makes ZERO difference in the quality of the movie. It's the script, the direction, the acting, th e staging of action scenes, the editing, the score...it's not how many F bombs or how much gore is allowed that makes a movie...a PG 13 can be just as intense as any movie for Heaven's sake. Look at all the bad horror and action movies rated R ...oh ummm...they should be good because they're R rated then? The MPAA rating IS NOT A FACTOR in the quality of the movie. All the outcry last year over the Die Hard rating was just ridiculous...it's not about saying "fuck" or spraying blood or more extreme violence.
TDK is rated #1 on IMDB
by Rupee88
Aug 4th, 2008
08:28:33 AM
ahead of the Godfather, Shawshank Redemption, Star Wars, Pulp Fiction, etc. In other words it is INCREDIBLY OVERRATED. It was an ok movie, but you people who think it is such a masterpiece are just dumb...sorry to be so blunt, but you can't have high IQs. Heath Ledger was great and the rest of it was just ok.
And the rating does matter to some degree
by Rupee88
Aug 4th, 2008
08:31:27 AM
It is a war movie and do you think war is PG-13??? No it is a hard R with people getting blown in half, etc. Terminator 2 didn't even have people getting killed in it...it was robots fighting other robots for the most part. This is a war when people die and to PG-13 the fighting is lame. Of course they do it to make more money at the box office, but they do so with a lesser film.
TDK and BB are classics, you'll see
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
08:33:37 AM
Some movies, you just know are gonna be classics, and BB and TDK are clearly made to be classics by nolan. Iron man, i don't think will age well. It's similar to T2, you watch it today and the action is still awesome, though the effects don't look as good anymore. But TDK and BB don't have that problem, everything looks pretty much real, and the stories told are great. The music, classic. cinematography, style, there are no stylized shots that look cool today that will look stupid in the future, nolan keeps it simple and gritty, and that's gonna stand the test of time. When you're not trying too hard to 'modernize' your movie, the less chance it has of aging badly.
Hooded Justice
by Rupee88
Aug 4th, 2008
08:34:38 AM
you are right about Ledger...he did a fine job but it wasn't that challenging of a role. Oldman was even better and he's a consummate true actor...one of the best.
TDK is a masterpiece
by mefrog
Aug 4th, 2008
08:38:29 AM
It's a vast and epic film, especially when compared to its predecessor, with univversally outstanding performances and masterful direction that also happens to b an incredibly complex study of heroes and villians and their similarities. Is it better than something like The Godfather? I wouldn't say so, but I think it deserves all the praise its been getting.
*universally
by mefrog
Aug 4th, 2008
08:39:10 AM
fucking edit button
The forest burning thing
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
08:40:03 AM
the way i see it, they burned a forest to catch a thief. so yeah it was extreme, but the point that the nolans were making is that alfred and his men had to resort to extreme measures to catch the thief. nobody said about anyone dying from the fire anyway. so batman does the same thing, he burns down the forest to find a criminal. forest = Gotham, fire = sonar technology. Well, that's how I understood it.
And as for this interview...
by mefrog
Aug 4th, 2008
08:41:12 AM
McG sounds sincere enough, and like a cool dude. He's right about anyone can cut a good trailer especially when it's that choppy. But I'm still warming up to the whole thing, albeit VERY slowly. Quint's right about his comparison to TDK's PG-13 rating though... there are some things in Terminator that should be done that simply can't with PG-13.
Joker is not so hard to play
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
08:46:13 AM
but Ledger still deserves the praise he gets for giving a fantastic performance. We could've gotten a mediocre joker, but he gave us the perfect one. Forget about his death, his joker was excellent dead or not dead. enough about how people say he was good just because he's dead, it's stupid. I watched TDK 3 times and no matter how hard i try to see or imagine ledger behind the makeup and costume, i have a very hard time seeing him. he's unrecognizable. Btw you know who i think could play a Joker as good as ledger's. christian bale. yeah he could do it.
No F bombs or gore in T2?
by Lucidz
Aug 4th, 2008
08:46:29 AM
Um. There are 8 F-bombs just in the IMDB quote page for T2, and I remember quite a few more. Terminator 2 had at least 7 brutal kills. Massive knife through face of John's foster dad. Pick through eyeball of the guard by his twin. And don't even forget about a gutted, slaughtered Dyson trying to hold the trigger up while his guts were on the floor. Lots of stuff in that movie would have never flown in pg-13.
Seymour Hoffman's Davian?
by Lost Jarv
Aug 4th, 2008
08:47:22 AM
are you joking?
Sure, Shadow Warrior...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
08:49:21 AM
but again, that's NOT how the film-makers presented it. Are you saying that when Alfred said, "Some men like to watch the world burn' he was actually referring to himself in that story? No. He was referring to the Joker. And he was drawing a comparison with the Burmese 'warlord'. Except that in the story it is ALFRED who 'burns the world' - therefore the story makes no sense (and Alfred had no knowledge of the sonar system at that time - if ever).

Because scriptwriting is like making a jigsaw or a patchwork quilt - you work on different parts at different times and stitch them all together. The danger is that these discrepencies automatically crop up as a result. And IF YOU DON'T RE-READ your work you won't spot them.

This is clearly a case where they wrote both halves of Alfred's speech at different times -and didn't spot that they'd actually created an illogical piece of writing that cancels itself out.

Again, we are NOT supposed to question the script or think about it. You're supposed to let it wash over you. If you stop to think, than you will just fall into these endless little logic loops. Also the reason why you shouldn't try to rationalize something that the film-makers haven't explicitly explained. Your rationalisation will inevitably raise more questions than it answers.

Are You Flirting With Me Jazz Terminator?
by LaserPants
Aug 4th, 2008
08:49:38 AM
Sorry, I don't swing that way. But I think thats great that you can express your homosexuality like a Spartan and let all the world know that you are proud to be a raging queen.

Unfortunately, I am unsure whether or not your father figure, your RoboDaddy, the Terminator as portrayed in the nadir of the Terminator saga -- T2: OLD YELLER -- would agree with me. I think that he may be upset that his newfound son isn't a futuristic military general, but a morbidly obese queen chronically masturbating all over his Terminator 2 action figures whilst listening to Guns N' Posers and teasing his hair in neon 80s hair metal spandex.
Hooded Justice I'm gonna counter your response later
by mefrog
Aug 4th, 2008
08:52:39 AM
But I gotta run out the door now. But I do wanna respond to that.
But, On Topic, This Does Sounds Cool
by LaserPants
Aug 4th, 2008
08:52:52 AM
Certainly it will be better than T2: WE WUV WOO ROBODADDY. It's written by the guy who co-wrote THE DARK KNIGHT! The guy who made it possible to make a bad-ass PG-13 movie! All hail the Nolans! Really looking forward. (Oh, but yeah, it should be R, but if its not, I am sure Nolan will be able to compensate and make it cool.)
HOODED JUSTICE
by Mr Gorilla
Aug 4th, 2008
08:59:12 AM
...has a good point. Shall we make this a DISCUSSION about TDK - which is what Hooded has done - and not have anyone claiming that the people who are asking questions about it, or making criticisms, are 'bashing' it in order to look cool. We're not. I enjoyed the film, I look forward to seeing it again, but do have reservations. Isn't it worth us all REALLY engaging with the subject matter (which includes but is not limited to: How many laws do you break in order to catch a bad man? What does it take to make a good person go bad? and so on) and chatting about the questions raised in the film, and whether it give us any answers. (Not that it has to, after all, it's a drama, not a lecture.)
As far as greatest screen villains: Hannibal Lector
by toadkillerdog
Aug 4th, 2008
09:02:19 AM
I cannot beleive someone failed to mention him.
Laserpants
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
09:03:05 AM
You're right, if there's anyone in the world who can make the darkest pg13s, it's the nolans. prestige was pretty dark too. BUT, Chris Nolan won't be directing, so hopefully McG can pull of the dark themes and moods well. However, when McG says he doesn't know what it will be rated, it's clear that he's not planning to go way beyond the pg13 limit. Obviously he's not thinking about ripping off limbs or headshots or some blood, so that's a bummer. I dont want a gore-fest, but T4 has to have some blood man. MCG, MAKE IT R RATED!!!
I thought The Dark Knight
by D o o d
Aug 4th, 2008
09:05:09 AM
Ran way over time. I started noticing that I'd been in the cinema way too long and that can't be good. It's a good film but I agree that it's very much over-rated.
Hooded Justice
by toadkillerdog
Aug 4th, 2008
09:06:15 AM
Excellent point on the Alfred speech. It seemed to me that the Nolans got caught up in giving Alfred a backstory and Caine a moment, and lost the plot point. Yes, we know what they were trying to say, that some men just don't give a patootie, but the way they did it made about as much sense as the Halle Berry Toad line in X-Men.
How can he not know the rating?
by C Legion
Aug 4th, 2008
09:11:23 AM
He's shooting the fucking thing, how can he not know if there are violent scenes in it or not? Also the fact that he compares it to a Batman film, films which have never been R rated, as opposed to the Terminator films, shows that he's full of shit

This will be PG-13, 100%.

Is he that guy in ST:Voyager?
by mothandrust
Aug 4th, 2008
09:11:52 AM
Looks like him...
Ah, McFuck off!!!
by spud mcspud
Aug 4th, 2008
09:13:09 AM
Just kidding. In all seriousness, McG does seem fairly keen to be taken seriously as a moviemaker, to shake off his past and get the job done. In that spirit, I'll respect that and judge him on the movie and not his background.

But you know, McG - don't entirely throw out your old style! I enjoyed the hell out of the CHARLIE'S ANGELS movies - once you understand they are basically live-action cartoons, anything goes and they are a hundred kinds of fun. Without the CHARLIE'S ANGELS movies going first, I doubt we'd have had a CRANK or SHOOT 'EM UP - which would have been a damn shame. They're kids movies made ofr adults, pure daft fun, and I'd love to see an ANGELS III, round off a trilogy there.

Oh, and about the name... you may have been called it since birth, but it comes off like you're a middle-aged ex-frat boy who still calls all his mates "dude" and talks about boning chicks half his age etc. It's your prerogative, but maybe a namechange would help you get that credibility you so obviously want. But hey - fuck us fanboys, we're basically whinging bitches, and if you aren't called McG I can't tell you to McFuck Off, and where's the fun in that?

Keep the faith, McDude, and make a fucknig good movie. All is forgiven - even that McFucking name - if you do that. Good luck, and bitch-slap Bale if he gets out of line. I hear he likes that shit ;D

THE PROOF IS NOT IN THE PUDDING
by BringingSexyBack
Aug 4th, 2008
09:14:09 AM
it's in the eating of said pudding!!!!!
about the running time again
by Shadow Warrior
Aug 4th, 2008
09:15:47 AM
it was fast-paced, like BB. One of the flaws of Nolan's bat films is that he doesn't seem to have enough time to really flesh characters out, there's so much story and it feels a bit rushed. I didn't feel TDK was long at all. one friend of mine did, though she wasn't really complaining i think. but to those who felt it was long, what about the lord of the rings movies? those were long too, same as king kong. were you complaining about those? or do those movies get a pass coz they're supposed to be epics? I'm not being sarcastic, i wanna know. those movies i mentioned were long right?
Good Interview
by Unlabled
Aug 4th, 2008
09:15:53 AM
And it's reassuring. This guy knows what he has to do to please the fans and it seems like he is going to do it.
Seriously, Quint
by SamuelLappDance
Aug 4th, 2008
09:19:38 AM
You're bad-mouthing the prequels and Indy IV to a guy who directed the fucking Charlie's Angels movies?! When McG can actually create an entire galaxy or an iconic action character and all his beloved foibles on his own, then he will be a legit player worthy of discussion. Until then, he's just an interpreter trying to piggyback on the greatness others (Cameron, specifically) forged years earlier. 99 percent of the filmmakers working in the biz today could not come up with something as good as "Revenge of the Sith."
The McG and Michael Bay connection...
by MCVamp
Aug 4th, 2008
09:22:51 AM
You get these guys who are technically gifted visual filmmakers, right? And they make some studio-influenced eye candy bullshit for their first few movies. Well, then they run into a project that offers them the biggest chance to mature. What they do with that movie could determine the rest of their career. Bay was given Pearl Harbor and could have given a mature, thoughtful undercurrent to the events surrounding the carnage of the attack. But Bay didn't put the thought of "I want to make a FILM, not a movie" into his effort. He just thought, "Fuck it...this is just a historical mini-Armageddon, what's the big deal" and proceeded to fuck it up and barrel on forward. Terminator, while not remotely close to a world event like Pearl Harbor (the real thing) is still something that could make or break a guy for decades. McG, unlike Bay, sees that and wants to take the opportunity to shake the reputation as a guy whose most famous contribution to film thus far is making Cameron Diaz's bony ass somehow look like the juciest piece of tail in the world (no small feat.) Fuck it. I'm 1000% behind him if he's sincere about it. Casting Bale alone is hope...think about it. When Bay got his big chance to show depth, who did he cast in the lead? Ben Affleck. I rest my case.
Shadow Warrior...
by Hooded Justice
Aug 4th, 2008
09:24:10 AM
I agree with you about long movies. I found TDK way too long. Same goes for the LOTR movies -and most especially the Pirates Of the Caribbean movies.

I don't see why a mainstream movie needs to be longer than an hour and a half. It is extremely difficult to keep a story going beyond that length. Many movies can't even sustain an hour and a half. A movie needs to have an excellent reason to be two hours. There are VERY few movies that can sustain more than that. And a three-hour movie? Only Lawrence Of Arabia springs to mind.

I wish dude well
by Darth Thoth
Aug 4th, 2008
09:26:42 AM
I will buy a ticket and give the film a chance.
McG has my vote...for now... ALSO, cgi Schwarzenegger rumor!
by ABking
Aug 4th, 2008
09:29:02 AM
By the sound of things, I'll reserve judgment. He has won me over...for now. Can't wait until the rumors of CGI Arnie pans out as next years biggest secret. Go here to read more http://www.thearnoldfans.com/n ews/1314.htm
SamuelLappDance
by spud mcspud
Aug 4th, 2008
09:32:38 AM
"99 percent of the filmmakers working in the biz today could not come up with something as good as "Revenge of the Sith.""

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!! !!

Oh, that is some FUNNY shit. Seriously, some fucking funny shit. Because I dropped a massive bog otter this morning, and you know, it was more entertaining than the entire prequel saga! With, like, better dialogue AND a coherent narrative. No trade sanctions bollocks, no taxation blah blah, no fucking awful Skywhinging, just a very streamlined turd that was waaaaaay more fun to sit through than those fucking excuses for entertainment were.

Man, you are a funny guy. Like you fuckin'