TODAY I WATCHED (TV-series, Movies, Cinema Playlists) 2013

Everyone's least favorite Spiderman movie. While weakest of the three in this series, it's really not that bad. You just have to have patience as it is a tad too long.

SpectreFate wrote:

Martyrs is waaay out there.

tohostudios wrote:

Martyrs is way out there

Yeah. I was with it until about half-way. I can't deal with violence on women (in a realistic sense). Not something I'll watch again.

Last night a few episodes of Elementary and CBS Sunday Morning

SpectreFate wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

Martyrs is way out there

Yeah. I was with it until about half-way. I can't deal with violence on women (in a realistic sense). Not something I'll watch again.

And apparently Hollywood is going to ruin yet another good foreign horror movie. From Wikipedia:

Quote :

Laugier has confirmed in an interview that he is currently in the middle of negotiating the rights for Martyrs to be remade in America.^[13] It will be directed by Daniel Stamm, director of The Last Exorcism, and written by Mark L. Smith, writer of Vacancy. The film comes from the producers of Twilight. The producer of the film has said he would like Twilight actress Kristen Stewart for the film,^[14] though her presence in the film was later denied by Stamm.^[15][16]
Stamm has said "[The original film] is very nihilistic. The American approach [that I'm looking at] would go through all that darkness but then give a glimmer of hope. You don't have to shoot yourself when it's over."^[15]

tohostudios wrote:

SpectreFate wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

Martyrs is way out there

Yeah. I was with it until about half-way. I can't deal with violence on women (in a realistic sense). Not something I'll watch again.

And apparently Hollywood is going to ruin yet another good foreign horror movie. From Wikipedia:

Quote :

Laugier has confirmed in an interview that he is currently in the middle of negotiating the rights for Martyrs to be remade in America.^[13] It will be directed by Daniel Stamm, director of The Last Exorcism, and written by Mark L. Smith, writer of Vacancy. The film comes from the producers of Twilight. The producer of the film has said he would like Twilight actress Kristen Stewart for the film,^[14] though her presence in the film was later denied by Stamm.^[15][16]
Stamm has said "[The original film] is very nihilistic. The American approach [that I'm looking at] would go through all that darkness but then give a glimmer of hope. You don't have to shoot yourself when it's over."^[15]

*sigh*

Quote :

The film comes from the producers of Twilight

tohostudios wrote:

Quote :

The film comes from the producers of Twilight

I tried to give Twilight a fair shake because I like Kristen Stewart (just watch The Messengers or Adventureland), but everything you've heard is true about that shit-fest.

Saying a film comes from "the producers of..." means essentially nothing, there were 9 credited producers on the first Twilight film. Aside from securing funding and hiring personnel, producers have minimal creative input.

Happy Gilmore

S.D. wrote:

Saying a film comes from "the producers of..." means essentially nothing, there were 9 credited producers on the first Twilight film. Aside from securing funding and hiring personnel, producers have minimal creative input.

In the movie world, aren't those the folks who put up the money?

SpectreFate wrote:

So which of those "In" movies is better, the original or the remake? I haven't seen either one because I'm not a big vampire movie fan.

chewie wrote:

S.D. wrote:

Saying a film comes from "the producers of..." means essentially nothing, there were 9 credited producers on the first Twilight film. Aside from securing funding and hiring personnel, producers have minimal creative input.

In the movie world, aren't those the folks who put up the money?

Not necessarily put up the money themselves, but secure financing. They also hire the technical personnel, secure studio time, hire post production facilities, hire the director, oversee casting, assist in securing distribution, etc., all integral parts of the process but not strictly the creative side.

Blaming and/or praising a producer for how a film came out is like going to a restaurant, getting a bad meal and then blaming that on the person who co-signed the bank loan instead of blaming the chef.

tohostudios wrote:

So which of those "In" movies is better, the original or the remake? I haven't seen either one because I'm not a big vampire movie fan.

I prefer the Swedish version but honestly they are both very well-made films and I would have no problems recommending either version.

S.D. wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

So which of those "In" movies is better, the original or the remake? I haven't seen either one because I'm not a big vampire movie fan.

I prefer the Swedish version but honestly they are both very well-made films and I would have no problems recommending either version.

this, except I prefer the US version. It explains a lot more than the Swedish version.

Personally I didn't think anything needed to be explained in more detail, I love the ethereal nature of the original. US films have a tendency to spell everything out completely, I prefer having elements left up to the interpretation of the viewer which creates a more personal connection with the film. I'm usually happier with a film that leaves me wondering about some things.

I also saw the Swedish version first, in the theater and it was only about a year later that the remake came out...I think if there had been a longer time in between I might have enjoyed the remake more. The original was too fresh in my mind at the time.

S.D. wrote:

Personally I didn't think anything needed to be explained in more detail, I love the ethereal nature of the original. US films have a tendency to spell everything out completely, I prefer having elements left up to the interpretation of the viewer which creates a more personal connection with the film. I'm usually happier with a film that leaves me wondering about some things.

That's usually my 2nd biggest complaint about American remakes of foreign films. My number one complaint is the "tone it down" factor necessary to bring the American version in at PG-13. I can't wait to see how the American version of Martyrs tries to come in at PG-13 without totally gutting the original concept.

Chloë Grace Moretz really makes the American version shine along with the very androgenous Kodi Smit-McPhee. I liked Oskar and Eli in the original, but they left me cold on occasion; mainly because of the language barrier. But I can't really say a bad thing about either version.

I don't see anything in that write-up about Martyrs to suggest they are shooting for a PG-13 rating. Sure, it does happen sometimes but R is still the most common for horror films. Let Me In is an R-rated film and isn't toned down from the original (aside from one shot of genitalia that was left out of the remake).

Martyrs is so violent that a PG-13 rating would have to be impossible to keep the original story in tact. Heck, I think they wouldn't get a R rating if they remade the original story. A very brutal movie. I can't imagine what Morjana Alaoui had to go through on a daily basis to get in the right frame of mind to be beaten to within an inch of her life shot after shot.

SpectreFate wrote:

Martyrs is so violent that a PG-13 rating would have to be impossible to keep the original story in tact. Heck, I think they wouldn't get a R rating if they remade the original story. A very brutal movie. I can't imagine what Morjana Alaoui had to go through on a daily basis to get in the right frame of mind to be beaten to within an inch of her life shot after shot.

That's my point. Even if the American remake is "R-rated" it's going to be a lot tamer than the original. "Martyrs" as originally made in France would never get made in the US IMO.

The most recent thing I watched was an episode of Family Guy.

exact33 wrote:

Happy Gilmore

One of my favorite comedies ever!