'Bring On The Night'
A place to talk about movies--Old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
It doesn't sound like a Catwoman or League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen level atrocity.
That would be difficult to match. Though I am feeling lucky that I have no attachment whatsoever to the source material -- I suspect I'll enjoy the film more that way.
One of my cow-orkers--who hasn't seen the film yet--was complaining today about how it deviates from the comic.
Though I am feeling lucky that I have no attachment whatsoever to the source material -- I suspect I'll enjoy the film more that way.
I suspect you will, too. I suspect my attachment to the source material is going to render me incapable of watching the movie.
And Hank Stuever in the Washington Post suggests that the movie ought to be called CSI: Revelation.
dying of laughter
One of my cow-orkers--who hasn't seen the film yet--was complaining today about how it deviates from the comic.
I'm far from a Hellblazer completist, but I've read enough to find Keanu's casting bizarre. Don't get me wrong, I like Keanu, but if you had given me a list of twenty possible Constantines I would have put him close to or at the bottom of the list. Maybe he's good in it, too, but judging from the trailers, if he is good it's because he creates a John Constantine of his own, not because he embodies the guy from the comics. That can be a valid approach, but if the most distinctive thing about a given property is the main character, and you really change the main character, why acquire the property? Odd way to build a franchise.
but if the most distinctive thing about a given property is the main character, and you really change the main character, why acquire the property?
Because if you don't, someone else will get it first. It's Hollywood corporate logic.
That can be a valid approach, but if the most distinctive thing about a given property is the main character, and you really change the main character, why acquire the property? Odd way to build a franchise.
This reminds me of a bit in Monster: Living Off the Big Screen by John Gregory Dunne. A script that he and his wife wrote about Jessica Savitch was turned in Up Close and Personal. At one point, after Redford and Pfeiffer had signed onto the movie and the movie plot had been completely changed, Dunne asked the producer, what the picture was really about. "It's about two movie stars," the producer replied.
I was just over at IMDB, where the Movie of the Day is Erin Brockovich. I followed the links to the external reviews of the movie, and read the NYTimes review, which has one of their classic ratings blurbs at the end:
"Erin Brockovich" is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). It contains a scattering of obscenities and sexual references and displays of female cleavage in the service of a noble cause.
I just saw Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle.
I understand the love now. God, that was fucking hilarious. When's Harold and Kumar Go to Amsterdam coming out?
I think this may be my favorite review of Constantine yet -- Things We See Keanu Do In Constantine.
A few selections:
Be wet. A lot. Like, drenched. In something like half the film.
Straddle lots of people. Female people, male people, demon people, angel people, half-breed people. Usually he's grabbing them in some passionate fashion while straddling them. Yeah, baby.
Chant in Latin. (Once while drenched! Yay! Also once in unison with another slashable guy! Double yay!)
Lean into the faces of men he's talking to. Constantine is much with the heavy eye contact with men and the whole intimidating "I'm so close I'll either kiss you or punch you" vibe.
Hold a cat.