Messages

I think everyone - Left or Right - need to cool it a little with the whole films-as-political-statements thing, you can take it too far someti- oh no, film-related political commentary coming on... must... resist... compulsion... musn't... give... in...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/9405999/How-the-Dark-Knight-Rises-reveals-Batmans-Conservative-soul.html#...

...aw hell, sorry about that, I tried my best not to , enjoy all...

Probably not box-office wise, I think it's safe to say.

I probably should have specified it'll give TDKR a run for it's money in terms of overall CBM quality, there I've done it now, better late and all that...

Those new pics are just SO cool, this movie is going to give The Dark Knight Rises a run for it's money... and it would appear increasingly likely that it's simply impossible to take a bad shot of Olivia Thirlby, ANY shot, even exhausted and morose, she is still absolutely radiant; tough but vulnerable... she IS Anderson!

[Rush Limbaugh's Whacky Conspiracy Theory About THE DARK KNIGHT RISES]

One for the Beakster:
Rush Limbaugh's Whacky Conspiracy Theory About THE DARK KNIGHT RISES
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=64040

, cheers Joe, but it would seem the whole U.S. election thing has taken a turn for the "whacky" already!!!

[...Rises]

Looks like reviews for ...Rises are (almost) universally positive, save for the Daily Mail and Huffington Post voicing dissenting opinions, which really says it all... Empire even managed to shoehorn in a gratuitous (not to mention downright offensive) swipe at Dubya into their otherwise positive review!  Other than those mere blips, it looks like Sir Christopher of Nolan has done what no other trilogy director has thus far managed to do; finish the triumvirate with a finale that equals it's two predecessors... God bless 'im.

There was a Stallone film?

I'd like to see whether 3D could be dispensed with and the money from that used on the rest.
Without the slo-mo conceit is 3D really worth it?
It's certainly not in as strong a position as when Dredd was being greenlit.

Considering that Dredd secured financing at the height of the post-Avatar 3-D craze, it's likely the stereoscopic requirement was a prerequisite of getting said financing, and whilst the slo-mo effect certainly justifies the 3-D in Dredd, circa 2012, by the time the sequel comes around in 2014 or 2015 - the latter more likely - the public's love affair/tolerance for 3-D in films may have expired by then.  I agree that should a Dredd sequel be greenlit, contractual obligations notwithstanding, they should ditch the stereoscopic images and throw the full weight of whatever budget they eventually secure on production values... when people watch Dredd ten years from now, the fact it was shot and released in 3-D won't even be mentioned, the quality of the film, however, will be.

 

'his' interpretation of the Bible is entirely incorrect.

Sez' you, which isn't much granted, forgot you earned a doctorate in theology, exile dude, or are you just talking nonsense again, lifetime habit I guess ...

How could Jackson turn two films - already in the can - into THREE?  He would need to spend another hundred-odd days filming a new installment, or alternatively he could stretch out two three-hour films into three two-hour ones, which could certainly work if he has the time to both tidy and tighten the footage already shot into three separate films, not to mention shoot additional footage to smooth over the greater narrative breaks between films... or he could just release 'extended editions' like the ...Rings  trilogy, and stick with the two-films plan currently in place, which would be my preference.

Learn the lessons of the Matrix sequels; what could have been a single epic, spectacular, and intelligent sequel par excellence of about two-and-three-quarter hours in length ended up being two films with an incomprehensible narrative that were clearly and painfully padded out in order to fit a predetermined trilogy format...

Has anyone considered the possibility that if Dredd is only a modest success at the box-office, say around the $120m mark worldwide (give or take a few mill either way), we'll definitely get a sequel, but it may not have the budget needed to pull off an epic narrative like the 'Origins'/Cursed Earth story that Alex Garland has in mind. 

If Dredd does decent but not gangbusters (which I hope and pray it does, don't get me wrong) business, and DNA Films get, say, a $60m (3-D cost included) budget for the sequel, would it make sense, both practically as well as commercially, to make the Dark Judges script that Alex Garland was working on for a whole year, for the following reasons;

1) Having already gone through something like sixteen drafts of the Dark Judges script, it could be turned into a full shooting script relatively quickly.

2) If the Dark Judges script could be written relatively quickly, the sequel could be turned around in equally decent time, maybe even quick enough for a production start next summer or autumn/fall, meaning a tentative release date of September 2014, just two years after the release of Dredd, to strike whilst the iron is hot, so to speak...

3) Even casual comic and sci-fi fans not overly familiar with 2000 A.D. and the minutiae of Dredd's world and mythology have heard of Judge Death, and the prospect of having one of the most widely-known and iconic comic-book villains finally realized on the big screen would be a compelling commercial prospect, dare I say more than the 'Origins' idea, if you're the powers-that-be at Reliance and IM Global, what would YOU think has the better box-office appeal; Judge Death in all his grisly glory, or Fargo and Rico in a backstory....?

Don't get me wrong, I sincerely hope we get a full Dredd movie trilogy, but I think we need to consider 'what if' scenarios, a bumper box-office for Dredd is not guaranteed, but enough for a sequel with a slightly larger budget and featuring the Dark Judges will do me just fine, my opinion anyway...

Who, Roger's mum?

Beaky I despair fella-I really do. I showed you a citation that showed that some jewish politicians agreed with carter in his analysis. are you seriously suggesting that they are virulent anti-semites? You may have said your piece but you ignore clear counter-arguments when they are presented to you mate.

Do I?  Certainly not my intent, I state my piece and usually respond to other's response, but after that, I'm not entirely sure what else to say (I let other folks put their two-cents in), and in answer to your above question; no, they're not anti-semites, I stated about one page back or so there are Israelis who disagree with some of their government's security policies, and that their views are politically motivated not racial, does that clear it up, cheers dude!?

...is it getting a little warm in here or is just me , there, that's better...

You're going to hell. You're all going to hell

No, just me probably... and rightly so (hope John Wayne's there)!

Curly

Larry

Moe

... how many's that?