One of the things I like about the Internet is that I am able to reach people who I would otherwise never get to talk to or meet. Discussing movies, in my physical space, limits me to a very focused number of individuals who already share my taste in film. Those who don’t share my opinion, and this one goes out to my sister and my brother-in-law who abhorred BRING IT ON when I mentioned it would make a great rental, and who can now suck-it because I still know I’m right, regardless of their dry white toast taste in movies, are rare. Discourse with regard to movies is hard to come by unless you’re a webmaster for a blog and even then you’re doomed to an existence of shouting into a hole where other voices are clamoring to find out why Britney Spears has left yet another rehab facility. Having a voice is only as good as those hearing it.
That’s why I love to run Viewer Mail.
Every person has a story and for every opinion I have I like it when someone wants to mix it up. However, one of the biggest pitfalls I see on other sites where those with differing ideas are treated with a bit of amusement and ridicule. I understand that not everyone with a web page went to school and missed the lesson about rhetorical strategies and that the most important part of learning is listening. Like the site implies, Quick Stop, I am open for business and if you don’t see something here to your liking write in and let me know about it. It’s nice to get schooled every once in a while and that brings us up to the following piece of e-mail I received. Have an opinion, people, and sack-up when the mood strikes. So, if you have a thought, disagreement, JOB OFFER (I work fairly cheap) let me know. atr0018@unt.edu wrote in and had this to say:
I would like to comment on one of your Trailer Park articles, particularly the review of the trailer for Superman Returns in the “top trailers of 2006.” I understand that people travel in different circles and therefore hear different opinions but, I must say you seem to have exaggerated the reaction to this film in your article. I hate to see a movie’s reputation become clouded just b/c of a few internet bloggers blowing this or that out of proportion and misinterpreting a supposed “consensus” in the media. You really sure you read that many “piss poor reviews?” I dont know what you’ve read but over at RottenTomatoes Returns has a 76% tomatometer. Not too shabby if you ask me. Not only that but the film, while not a uber-blockbuster as expected, had decent legs at the boxoffice (similar to Batman Begins, a film that you probably would have referred to as a big hit b/c that’s what the media decided it was). These legs mean it couldnt have been received that badly. My own personal experience found more ppl who liked SR than the highest grossing movie of the year, Dead Man’s Chest. Sure, these articles of yours cater to a certain movie-geek (and therefore to an extent comic-book geek) crowd who have been the ones harping on this film for simply straying from the source material and not living out their “vision” of what it should have been. But there are also common moviegoers who read this, and that is why it is my belief that maybe you should do a little more research into a movie’s media “consensus” instead of simply writing based on how you read the vibe that the movie-geek community gives off. You wrote part of this article as if Superman Returns is one of the biggest flops of all time, when in fact it is far from it. It got decent reviews from critics and recouped most of its budget at the box office. In fact, there’s even a sequel on the way.
I, in turn, wrote back the following:
Anonymous, (I would formally recognize you by first name but I think you would take umbrage with me if I wrote “Dear atr0018”)
Thank you for your note.
I think you’re close in saying that I exaggerated the national consensus with the film. Where I think your and my blue and red electrical wires are crossing is that I was speaking wholly from the fanboy P.O.V. and the fact that, at the box office, the yields from this movie didn’t justify the amounts that were spent on it. In fact, just after a few weeks after the movie came out, and the financial projections were all but final, Singer was at Comic-Con to talk about the film and even he conceded that the film wasn’t the success he hoped it would be. (I’ll be honest, I would send you the audio of that discussion but I have yet to get to it. There’s an interview I still have to run from that time which may see the light of day in March. I suck, I know that.)
I also am taking the side of Ebert who put it best when he said the movie was, “a glum, lackluster movie in which even the big effects sequences seem dutiful instead of exhilarating.” I get that. I understand exactly what he’s saying. After I played it and watched it again on my home theater system it reinforced the diametric differences between what the trailer promised and what the movie delivered. It was a good movie. It was a solid movie BUT it just wasn’t what Superman SHOULD have been. There should have been more POW where there was deep introspection.
Also, look at the box office figures. Straight from Box Office Mojo the movie cost $270 to make (Lord knows the advertising and marketing budget wasn’t cheap, either) and only raked in 200 at the domestic box office. Sure, the foreign markets helped to make up the difference but if I’m a multi-national corporation I don’t see a movie that is limping to break even as a successful tent pole picture. It’s not a failure, either, but it’s hovering in that quasi-limbo arena of success or stinkbomb. So, I agree that it had “decent” legs but they weren’t the kind of legs that I am sure Warner’s were hoping for.
And no, I wouldn’t have rated Batman Begins as high as I did, I loved that film, plus it got trailer props for last year’s list because it had a strong trailer that represented the movie well and not because it was “a film that you probably would have referred to as a big hit b/c that’s what the media decided it was.” Come on, now, play nice. The movie did as well as it did because it crushed the previous incarnations completely and totally; it deserved its success on its own merit. My opinion came in a long time before the movie ever came out so there’s no way I could have played favorites based on media bias, it’s the kind of position I’m in. I said the trailer for The Queen sucked and look how well that movie has done. I said the trailer for Superman Returns looked great when I reviewed 2 different trailers *before* its release so it sucks for me when I have to end up eating crow by admitting that I was fooled by the trailer.
And, you’re right, a sequel IS on the way and, you know what the best part of that is? Singer has established everything he needed to in the first installment to pave the way for a more “popcorn” film, like X-2 was, for the sequel.
I really appreciate your note. I hope this letter doesn’t come off snarky or anything less than trying to trade information back to you…even though you didn’t even sign your name like the coward philistine you probably are! It’s not often anyone writes in so I dug being able to write back….
See? I didn’t threaten to punch him in the cock for being an asshole in disagreeing with the way I chose to interpret things, I took it as an opportunity to actually have a conversation of sorts.
Regardless of what’s going on everyone has a unique view and I don’t know how to address the very audience I’m writing to unless you speak up.
Enjoy the weekend and apropos of absolutely NOTHING but my own shameless self-indulgence in the sport, and for the life of me I can’t explain that for every cinephile who enjoyed MAJOR LEAGUE, with a MEN AT AT WORK Charlie Sheen gearing-up for his brother’s greatest filmic achievement and who would’ve thought all these years later it would be Dennis Haysbert, aka Pedro Cerrano, who would be the real star of that flick, hates to even think about real baseball, I’m fully engorged that Spring Training for The Chicago Cubs, straight representin’ yo, has finally started. There is a world beyond the silver screen and it is the hope that this team finishes a few notches above last place that keeps me coming back year after year.
LUCKY YOU (2007)
Director: Curtis Hanson
Cast: Eric Bana, Drew Barrymore, Robert Duvall, Debra Messing
Release: May 4, 2007
Synopsis: In Lucky You, a professional poker player (Eric Bana) gets a lesson in life from a struggling singer (Drew Barrymore) as he collides with his estranged father (Robert Duvall) at the World Series of Poker in Las Vegas.
View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)
Prognosis: Negative. When will this collective fascination of Texas Hold’em just die as I believe the fifteen-minute expiration has long since passed.
I say this because, one, I can’t play and, two, this movie feels like a knee-jerk reaction to the populist fervor that has built-up around every Tom, Dick and Harry looking to cash-in on the moment.
I will, note, however, that this movie seems perfect in every sense of the word with regard to thinking about movies that will make perfect rentals come the summer when dudes are inexorably trapped in the aisles of their local Blockbuster and trying, desperately so, to find a film that won’t incite domestic violence.
That said, this trailer plays every moment by the numbers, even giving us the Idiot’s Guide opening of how to play the card game whilst Barrymore and Bana are tableside in a casino; this is the oddest combination, Vegas cool with a cotton candy presentation.
I like and appreciate that the trailer makers here went with a soundtrack that is completely devoid of any Gwen Stefani love jangle, any K.T. Tunstall estrogen infused jingle and actually manages to walk the line of staying right in the background as we try to get our footing for why we’re following these two people. It seems, at the start, that this is just a story of a guy who likes to gamble and the woman who digs that in someone with a lot of potential as a mate. I’m not sure this is exactly where you should drop that this love fest is being directed by the guy who did 8 MILE and L.A. CONFIDENTIAL as we really haven’t seen anything that would warrant proclaiming it so but that’s just me.
“I could’ve played it safe…that’s not who I am.â€
Never mind the fact that Duvall comes into this trailer way too late but that there’s a palatable feeling this seems to be a movie not about one dude’s struggle to get a grip on his life but that Duvall is going to be schooling his absent son about the finer points of living one’s life with a lady. Bana makes the above quote and I feel the blood reeling from my retinas as I cannot believe The Hulk has went all squishy for a paycheck.
Cue crying Barrymore, set things up to have their eventual dénouement at where else but the World Series of Poker, have events set in motion where Bana will (GASP!) have to probably choose between his love for the cards and his heterosexual need for some of that crazy Drew action.
Ooo, and I almost didn’t stick around until the end of the trailer, but it seems that not only is it the last table at the WSOP but that Duvall and Bana are the LAST people at that table. Hence, making the choice of what to do at the end all the more Hollywood-ish; it makes me sick that some wag got his mortgage paid writing this crap.
I just saved every single one of you $10 and an excruciating night at the movies.
Director: Todd Field
Cast: Kate Winslet, Jennifer Connelly, Patrick Wilson, Noah Emmerich
Release: Now Playing
Synopsis: Loosely based on the acclaimed Tom Perrotta novel of the same name, LITTLE CHILDREN centers on a group of young marrieds, whose lives intersect on the playgrounds, town pools and streets of their small community in surprising and potentially dangerous ways.
View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)
Prognosis: Positive. Much like an author who I would admire enough to follow for a few works because I enjoy their voice (Charles Baxter, Ted Rall anyone?) Todd Field is a surprising addition to those whose work I choose to take an interest in if for no other reason than he has more acting credits to his name than he does directing jobs.
I mean, Drippy? Aqua Teen Hunger Force, Drippy? Yes, one and the same and it’s amazing that he captured the claustrophobic lives of a couple who find their own lives closing in on them with IN THE BEDROOM. If that film doesn’t rock your parental core then there isn’t anything out there that will. The mood, the emotional weight and depth of the characters played by Tom Wilkinson and Sissy Spacek are well represented with sharp acuity and, to top it all off, we get Tom Cruise’s cousin getting the kind of send-off I wish would happen to a lot of people who slip through the justice system’s fingers.
With this trailer we get a lot of what I loved about IN THE BEDROOM compressed into this damn-near wordless, music-less, voice-over-less representation of lust, betrayal and family gatherings.
As things open I’m not sure if I’m watching a movie or an advertisement for the latest and greatest in genital herpes protection. I’m quickly able to downshift the smartass after a lone train’s approach sufficiently smothers the Good Morning America tableau with Connelly and Wilson playing people who obviously would like nothing more than bash one another’s temples with wooden meat tenderizers.
And, please, if you haven’t already figured out that as Wilson lets that glistening water drag slowly down his well-defined spinal column as he extricates his soggy, albeit tight, ass from the community piss pool, myself I find it never looks that sexy when I drain water down my leg from the pockets inside my board shorts because it looks like I’m urinating on myself, that Winslet is imagining anything short of hot monkey love you need to go back to school. Seriously.
With great earnestness I say that the moments that follow where, unless you’re an unfeeling troll, Wilson is with his kids, putting on that happy daddy face, and Winslet talks about her needs as a woman I can absolutely sense the pain and misery that is about to roll right though these people’s lives in ways, I believe, would rival FATAL ATTRACTION, a movie that was forgone in its conclusion because of the craziness of its antagonist.
Huge fan of whatever woman fills the red swimsuit. Huge fan. Don’t know who it is and I don’t care. No additional comments here, just wanted to make that known.
There’s also a lot to be said about the ending for this trailer where bells are ringing, the train that’s lingered there for a while in the soundscape is now “passing†by on the tracks, the anguish that’s on full-display, all of it. I am thankful that I don’t really understand what is happening. There’s just wonderful composition of the moments that were chosen here to be included.
See, I oftentimes am amazed by the money shots that are used by any number of trailer makers when they decide a preview. Most of the time I am completely complicit in advocating a trailer to have just a disconnected ending when it comes to action films. This doesn’t translate well to dramatic pieces but this trailer here, though, managed to have great shots while being able to string them together with great passion while imbuing it all with an elevated sense of dread.
There’s no way this movie could have slid so far underneath the radar but it has and I hope the Oscar nod helps to get people out there in seeing whether this movie can manage to do what the trailer is selling.
Director: David Fincher
Cast: Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, Robert Downey Jr., Anthony Edwards
Release: March 2, 2007
Synopsis: Based on the actual case files of one of the most intriguing unsolved crimes in the nation’s history. As a serial killer terrifies the San Francisco Bay Area and taunts police with his ciphers and letters, investigators in four jurisdictions search for the murderer.
View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)
Prognosis: Positive. Okay, come on, who is on the Robert Downey Jr. bandwagon?
Does his shit not stink that much where everyone who considers themselves a fan of film forgive all his indiscretions? Yeah, I’m in that camp.
Somehow it’s easier to look beyond drug abuse than it is if this guy was convicted of diddling 15 year-olds, his face pasted on network TV as he’s busted by Chris Hanson and Dateline NBC.
I also happen to be a wagon bander when it comes to David Fincher. Yes, PANIC ROOM was a little absurd but you can’t take away the precision that Fincher possesses when it comes to composing a shot. He’s special and there’s no way I would trade one Fincher flick for a handful of Chris Columbus’. What’s so great, then, about this trailer is that we finally are allowed to get a small taste, an effervescent smell of what is to come out of THE ZODIAC.
I absolutely love the beginning of this thing. You’ve got a majestic cityscape, the 4th of July, with fireworks all bursting in air, and you’ve got the pop-pop-pop of gunshots. People fall to their death inside their cars as the unseen assailant slowly walks away from his crime. It’s beautiful to look at as you realize this just FEELS like an important entry into Fincher’s oeuvre.
I know it would be easy to take umbrage with the heavy-handed rolling out of facts with regard to this movie’s plot, Jake G. walking into the San Fran Chronicle as someone reads herr Zodicac’s letter to the editor, confessing to the killings of a couple of teens.
The obsequious tone of the letter, eager to please with the information of who he killed but not enough to say why or who he actually is. You can actually feel the tension through the moments that follow. Even though I cannot claim to be eager at wanting to see more of Chloe Sevigny’s morose mug, it’s Jake that really pulls the weight here.
Also, and this is important to note, The Zodiac himself is wonderfully positioned here. You get a great sense for the kind of confusing terror he inflicted on the people of San Francisco; the paranoia, for one, is a great place to start and you get a palatable dollop here.
What’s more is that as we get further and further into this Jake becomes a small, yet important piece into the kind of devilry this killer possessed and how the ciphers he passed along to the papers were, in effect, notes that may or may not have been blatant pleas for someone to stop what he felt compelled to do.
The small facts of this case, the sketches of what the killer looked like, the admission that there were no usable fingerprints, the ballistics, every little portion of this case is couched to us in a way that fascinates and doesn’t bore.
“Killing is his compulsion, it is in his blood…â€
The funk-tastic soundtrack, the eeriness of how deep Jake gets with this case and how involved in it he becomes is all cause for rejoicing because this looks like a film that hopefully sees Fincher doing what he has done best: put you in a moment that feels tense, is tense, and make you believe that you’re hip deep in it.
It can’t be worse than PANIC ROOM, right?
Director: Luc Besson
Cast: Jamel Debbouze, Rie Rasmussen, Olivier Claverie, Gilbert Melki, Kate Nauta, Serge Riaboukine
Release: May 25, 2007
Synopsis: A man meets a woman in Paris… Down-on-his-luck petty criminal Andre (Jamel Debbouze) has reached the end of his rope. Irreversibly in debt to a local gangster, with no one to turn to, his only solution is to plunge himself into the Seine. Just as he is perched to do so, a fellow bridge-jumper beats him to the water. Diving in, he saves Angela (Rie Rasmussen), a beautiful, statuesque and mysterious woman. As they pull themselves out the water, the two form a bond and venture into the streets of Paris determined to get Andre out of the hole he has found himself in. As Andre will find out, not all debts are financial, and sometimes the solutions to life¹s problems are found in the unlikeliest of places. Is Angela simply repaying Andre for his kindness, or are there other forces at work beyond his comprehension?
View Trailer:
* Large (QuickTime)
Prognosis: Loved Every Moment. Two things about this trailer:
1) Since it is directed by Luc Besson it gives me the chance to stump for one of his best directorial outings well before Gary “EEEEEVEERYONE!†Oldman’s performance in THE PROFESSIONAL: THE BIG BLUE. Amazing, amazing movie with a delicate score.
2) This looks like a return to good filmmaking for the man who punched me twice without asking with THE FIFTH ELEMENT, the worst film, next to THE JERKY BOYS, ever made.
This opening’s smoky, jazzy feel is undeniable. It’s like everyone involved is caught in molasses, with our protagonist calling out to God and asking Him if this is what He wants as he contemplates throwing himself off a bridge.
Beat, two beats, slowly pan over to a woman with mascara running down her face as she makes the leap before he has a chance to say “STOP.†Cymbal crash, beat, beat, beat. The woman has extricated herself from the drink and holds a lit cigarette in her hand, forget about the fact she’s drenched and how could she light a match when…she just looks like a woman who you’d like to treat poorly for a night. This woman makes smoking look like not such a bad thing. Nice.
Beat, beat, beat guitar slide. Not since Madonna used an air dryer to blow-dry her pits (and I really hate those things because your hands are all wet when you have to touch that metal thing and so you think that other dudes have pushed it as well and their hands were probably dirty and so you feel like your hands are still dirty even as you stand there twisting your palms over again and again) has being dried off by an appliance looked so sexy. It’s hot and not just in a Paris “Spunk Sponge†Hilton sort of way. She’s intriguing.
I love the way the cards explaining who Luc Besson is come sliding in; they’re slick looking, it’s not ostentatious and they are riding the same cool wave our players are.
“You have until midnightâ€
Things just get going from here as we find our protagonist hanging over the edge of the Eiffel Tower. What’s amazing is that we don’t know what this guy did or needs to do by midnight but he has our sympathy. He could be completely rotten, and we may wish for his demise when we actually see the film, but this trailer is brilliant and garnering emotional support for the man.
Now, the moment when Angela is spreading her legs in a way that Sharon Stone only wish she could have done well? That’s when I am on board for this train. I don’t know how this fits into the narrative but the moment here in the trailer is spot-on as we glide away from here and get a better understanding of how Angela is going to help our threatened man from getting whacked. The shot of her head as the shot is layered with it seemingly attached to a headless statue of, ta-da, an angel is a nice touch.
These two share a few moments together as they make their way through this landscape, sharing a few laughs, getting stopped by thugs with machine guns, but you’ve got to catch this one moment in the trailer where they kiss. It feels so right but Angela’s eyes flash up at us and it looks like those vampire eyes so reminiscent in films right before they devour their prey. I so do not know what to make of this and why it looks so macabre but I’d be lying if I didn’t say it would be pretty sweet if she did take a nip out of his jugular.
So many unanswered questions about this film remain at the end of this thing but I am delighted that’s the case because this movie looks ripe for viewing completely cold; the trailer does just enough to sketch the outline and now all that’s left is to see how it all fills in.
Wonderful trailer.
Comments: 1 Comment
One Response to “Trailer Park: Luc Besson Still Directs? For Reals?”Leave a Reply |
April 19th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Hello everyone…I was searching all the web to find the way to contact movie producer Luc Besson.Its looks like I found two,and they are only for the members.Is there anyway that I can find easy way to send him an email?
Im writing a historical-novel base in my live events.How can I pass my Synopsis to the producer?
Thank you
Regards,
Camilia
P.S.if you have any idea,please feel free to contact me on my address nahida_2404@hotmail.com