General Movie Discussion

Here's the new trailer for Sony's Peter Rabbit movie.



I'll say this much. This trailer is bad, but at least it did 2 things right.

1. It has a good theme song.

2. We didn't see Peter crap out jelly beans like that one Easter Rabbit in Hop did...

I am not a violent person. But that goddamn teaser trailer made me want to hit the director over the head with a blunt instrument and shove it up his arse for what he did! This is Peter Rabbit, classic children's literature we're talking about. Smurfs and Chipmunks are TV animation classics, to be sure, but they can be given a new lease of life in other mediums. But get Peter Rabbit wrong, deliberately no less, and there's no chance of wiping that stain off any time soon.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

I am not a violent person. But that goddamn teaser trailer made me want to hit the director over the head with a blunt instrument and shove it up his arse for what he did! This is Peter Rabbit, classic children's literature we're talking about. Smurfs and Chipmunks are TV animation classics, to be sure, but they can be given a new lease of life in other mediums. But get Peter Rabbit wrong, deliberately no less, and there's no chance of wiping that stain off any time soon.

If Sony is this stupid to know that 'modernizing' classics rarely work, then they deserve to go down.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

I am not a violent person. But that goddamn teaser trailer made me want to hit the director over the head with a blunt instrument and shove it up his arse for what he did! This is Peter Rabbit, classic children's literature we're talking about. Smurfs and Chipmunks are TV animation classics, to be sure, but they can be given a new lease of life in other mediums. But get Peter Rabbit wrong, deliberately no less, and there's no chance of wiping that stain off any time soon.

I don't even understand why this is called Peter Rabbit. Is that name actually going to get people in seats for this garbage?

I sincerely doubt it.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

I didn't really care for his last movie but I still thought it was really well made. Thanks for Sharing. Looks interesting

Troyal1 wrote:

Sickle_Claw wrote:

I didn't really care for his last movie but I still thought it was really well made. Thanks for Sharing. Looks interesting

I would highly suggest reading the book. Theres a trilogy but you can get away with just reading the first book. Under 300 pages so most people should be able to get through it in a day or so. Let me just say that there is a lot going on in this movie, and I dont think you guys will be disappointed.

It looks like 2019 is the 'do-or-die' year for Paramount.

I only see the upcoming Terminator movie as the one that people will go to. Mainly because of how James Cameron has the rights back and how he's making it a proper T3 movie. Top Gun is too much of a wild card and Transformers is far to toxic.

Transformers could have a smidgeon of a chance if Michael Bay is booted off as director and someone else is brought on board to essentially reboot the franchise and focus on telling a simpler story without any of the added bullcrap the sequels added. If it gets an over 50% score on RT, I'll even volunteer my cash to see it. But that's a huge "if" and a very unlikely one.

Top Gun may be a wild card, but I could see it coming off thanks to Tom Cruise's star power. And then there's Spongebob. No comment there. I think the real sad part is that, as the article stated, its almost impossible to launch an original franchise that can appeal to a wide number of people and still be considered quality entertainment. Something like that would be a boon to Paramount, as Pirates of the Caribbean was to Disney back in 2003 when they were really struggling. When they allowed Disney to buy Marvel Studios, they may have signed their own death warrant.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Transformers could have a smidgeon of a chance if Michael Bay is booted off as director and someone else is brought on board to essentially reboot the franchise and focus on telling a simpler story without any of the added bullcrap the sequels added. If it gets an over 50% score on RT, I'll even volunteer my cash to see it. But that's a huge "if" and a very unlikely one.

Top Gun may be a wild card, but I could see it coming off thanks to Tom Cruise's star power. And then there's Spongebob. No comment there. I think the real sad part is that, as the article stated, its almost impossible to launch an original franchise that can appeal to a wide number of people and still be considered quality entertainment. Something like that would be a boon to Paramount, as Pirates of the Caribbean was to Disney back in 2003 when they were really struggling. When they allowed Disney to buy Marvel Studios, they may have signed their own death warrant.

With Transformers, I think that it's progressed so far, that Paramount really can't boot off Michael Bay. Spielberg can, since he's barely done anything to help the franchise since the first movie, but not Bay. Besides, what's left after Unicron? I don't see much else and fans are getting sick of it.

If Paramount goes down for good, it's really going to be interesting so see who gets what. WB getting bought out by AT&T got rid of their debt, but who knows if they want to buy something from Paramount so soon. I can see Fox buying Terminator and maybe Top Gun. Disney, who knows. I just think they're waiting for Sony to go under so that they can get Spider-Man and probably Ghostbusters.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Transformers could have a smidgeon of a chance if Michael Bay is booted off as director and someone else is brought on board to essentially reboot the franchise and focus on telling a simpler story without any of the added bullcrap the sequels added. If it gets an over 50% score on RT, I'll even volunteer my cash to see it. But that's a huge "if" and a very unlikely one.

Top Gun may be a wild card, but I could see it coming off thanks to Tom Cruise's star power. And then there's Spongebob. No comment there. I think the real sad part is that, as the article stated, its almost impossible to launch an original franchise that can appeal to a wide number of people and still be considered quality entertainment. Something like that would be a boon to Paramount, as Pirates of the Caribbean was to Disney back in 2003 when they were really struggling. When they allowed Disney to buy Marvel Studios, they may have signed their own death warrant.

With Transformers, I think that it's progressed so far, that Paramount really can't boot off Michael Bay. Spielberg can, since he's barely done anything to help the franchise since the first movie, but not Bay. Besides, what's left after Unicron? I don't see much else and fans are getting sick of it.

If Paramount goes down for good, it's really going to be interesting so see who gets what. WB getting bought out by AT&T got rid of their debt, but who knows if they want to buy something from Paramount so soon. I can see Fox buying Terminator and maybe Top Gun. Disney, who knows. I just think they're waiting for Sony to go under so that they can get Spider-Man and probably Ghostbusters.

I'm not saying Sony has any idea what they are doing, but Ghostbusters under Disney would be awful. Don't get me wrong, GB can be an adult property and a kids property, but watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2, a movie I adore, I feel like it was held back just a bit, just to appeal more to everyone. I'm not implying it needed to be R or anything, but I think Disney likely still sets a limit to what can happen in their films. While Disney acquiring GB MIGHT get us a proper sequel in the vein of Force Awakens (minus somewhat remaking the first film. Gozer's come back like 10 times in the comics, and was back in the video game.), if the acquisition happened within the next year or two, I just feel like we'd lose something. I know a lot of people like to hate on the GB reboot, but I still felt like those were working people, especially Leslie Jones. Going the corporate angle with GB to branch off the originals was always a fine idea, and passing the torch can work, but they have to be real people. It's not a superhero franchise, it doesn't need to be treated like one.

TheDreamMaster wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Transformers could have a smidgeon of a chance if Michael Bay is booted off as director and someone else is brought on board to essentially reboot the franchise and focus on telling a simpler story without any of the added bullcrap the sequels added. If it gets an over 50% score on RT, I'll even volunteer my cash to see it. But that's a huge "if" and a very unlikely one.

Top Gun may be a wild card, but I could see it coming off thanks to Tom Cruise's star power. And then there's Spongebob. No comment there. I think the real sad part is that, as the article stated, its almost impossible to launch an original franchise that can appeal to a wide number of people and still be considered quality entertainment. Something like that would be a boon to Paramount, as Pirates of the Caribbean was to Disney back in 2003 when they were really struggling. When they allowed Disney to buy Marvel Studios, they may have signed their own death warrant.

With Transformers, I think that it's progressed so far, that Paramount really can't boot off Michael Bay. Spielberg can, since he's barely done anything to help the franchise since the first movie, but not Bay. Besides, what's left after Unicron? I don't see much else and fans are getting sick of it.

If Paramount goes down for good, it's really going to be interesting so see who gets what. WB getting bought out by AT&T got rid of their debt, but who knows if they want to buy something from Paramount so soon. I can see Fox buying Terminator and maybe Top Gun. Disney, who knows. I just think they're waiting for Sony to go under so that they can get Spider-Man and probably Ghostbusters.

I'm not saying Sony has any idea what they are doing, but Ghostbusters under Disney would be awful. Don't get me wrong, GB can be an adult property and a kids property, but watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2, a movie I adore, I feel like it was held back just a bit, just to appeal more to everyone. I'm not implying it needed to be R or anything, but I think Disney likely still sets a limit to what can happen in their films. While Disney acquiring GB MIGHT get us a proper sequel in the vein of Force Awakens (minus somewhat remaking the first film. Gozer's come back like 10 times in the comics, and was back in the video game.), if the acquisition happened within the next year or two, I just feel like we'd lose something. I know a lot of people like to hate on the GB reboot, but I still felt like those were working people, especially Leslie Jones. Going the corporate angle with GB to branch off the originals was always a fine idea, and passing the torch can work, but they have to be real people. It's not a superhero franchise, it doesn't need to be treated like one.

To be fair, they didn't exactly hold back on Spider-Man Homecoming.

As for the Ghostbusters franchise, if Sony goes under, then who do you trust with the franchise? Because the only 2 movie studios I see are Fox and Warner Brothers.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

TheDreamMaster wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Transformers could have a smidgeon of a chance if Michael Bay is booted off as director and someone else is brought on board to essentially reboot the franchise and focus on telling a simpler story without any of the added bullcrap the sequels added. If it gets an over 50% score on RT, I'll even volunteer my cash to see it. But that's a huge "if" and a very unlikely one.

Top Gun may be a wild card, but I could see it coming off thanks to Tom Cruise's star power. And then there's Spongebob. No comment there. I think the real sad part is that, as the article stated, its almost impossible to launch an original franchise that can appeal to a wide number of people and still be considered quality entertainment. Something like that would be a boon to Paramount, as Pirates of the Caribbean was to Disney back in 2003 when they were really struggling. When they allowed Disney to buy Marvel Studios, they may have signed their own death warrant.

With Transformers, I think that it's progressed so far, that Paramount really can't boot off Michael Bay. Spielberg can, since he's barely done anything to help the franchise since the first movie, but not Bay. Besides, what's left after Unicron? I don't see much else and fans are getting sick of it.

If Paramount goes down for good, it's really going to be interesting so see who gets what. WB getting bought out by AT&T got rid of their debt, but who knows if they want to buy something from Paramount so soon. I can see Fox buying Terminator and maybe Top Gun. Disney, who knows. I just think they're waiting for Sony to go under so that they can get Spider-Man and probably Ghostbusters.

I'm not saying Sony has any idea what they are doing, but Ghostbusters under Disney would be awful. Don't get me wrong, GB can be an adult property and a kids property, but watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2, a movie I adore, I feel like it was held back just a bit, just to appeal more to everyone. I'm not implying it needed to be R or anything, but I think Disney likely still sets a limit to what can happen in their films. While Disney acquiring GB MIGHT get us a proper sequel in the vein of Force Awakens (minus somewhat remaking the first film. Gozer's come back like 10 times in the comics, and was back in the video game.), if the acquisition happened within the next year or two, I just feel like we'd lose something. I know a lot of people like to hate on the GB reboot, but I still felt like those were working people, especially Leslie Jones. Going the corporate angle with GB to branch off the originals was always a fine idea, and passing the torch can work, but they have to be real people. It's not a superhero franchise, it doesn't need to be treated like one.

To be fair, they didn't exactly hold back on Spider-Man Homecoming.

As for the Ghostbusters franchise, if Sony goes under, then who do you trust with the franchise? Because the only 2 movie studios I see are Fox and Warner Brothers.

That is a fair point on Homecoming I suppose. Right now, probably FOX of the two. At the very least they've made better decisions lately (minus with the main X-Men franchise, as Apocalypse was not very good.), and I could see them handing over some creative freedom, while still keeping some control, and not letting things spiral like Sony did with Feig, though Pascal was very much to blame there as well. FOX has only recently made better decisions and still not all are home runs, but I'd still say lesser of two evils.

Warner Brothers seems like they want to do good things, but at least regarding their DC properties, seem to want to rush into things. I haven't seen Wonder Woman yet, but I imagine WB themselves had less to do with it's success.

The 'nice guys' movie (yes the one that literally just came out in 2016) is getting a TV reboot with 2 female leads..... wtf Hollywood???

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/female-nice-guys-tv-reboot-1044053

who gets in trouble for sidelining movie references, me, or you?

What's, the fastest approach to understanding culture, aside from, losing subtitles so babies just get used to a world without them, and learn to translate for us, like, their Mexican or Russian parents, you know?

jericho wrote:

who gets in trouble for sidelining movie references, me, or you?

What's, the fastest approach to understanding culture, aside from, losing subtitles so babies just get used to a world without them, and learn to translate for us, like, their Mexican or Russian parents, you know?

I'm sorry, but how does this have anything to do with the previous post about The Nice Guys?

At any rate, I'm less than thrilled by this news and frankly see it as the film equivalent of trying to resuscitate someone by hitting them on the head with a wrench: wrongheaded and guaranteed to harm the property.

http://deadline.com/2017/09/men-in-black-spinoff-may-17-2019-steven-spielberg-walter-parkes-laurie-macdonald-matt-holloway-art-marcum-1202179483/

Men in Black Spinoff is still happening, its going 'Global'. No crossover with 21 jump street though.

Apparently that film is still in development

"According to Deadline, Sony Pictures is in development on a new Men in Black spin-off which will not feature Will Smith or Tommy Lee Jones, but will expand on the world of the original trilogy. This will be a different project from the aborted 21 Jump Street franchise mashup, MIB 23, which Jonah Hill admitted last year was “too complicated” in terms of the deals needed. That film remains in development, however."
Read more at http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/891861-men-in-black-spin-off-gets-writers-release-date

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

jericho wrote:

who gets in trouble for sidelining movie references, me, or you?

What's, the fastest approach to understanding culture, aside from, losing subtitles so babies just get used to a world without them, and learn to translate for us, like, their Mexican or Russian parents, you know?

I'm sorry, but how does this have anything to do with the previous post about The Nice Guys?

At any rate, I'm less than thrilled by this news and frankly see it as the film equivalent of trying to resuscitate someone by hitting them on the head with a wrench: wrongheaded and guaranteed to harm the property.

I'm not exactly sure what he's asking.

But yes I agree. The thing is though I understand trying to cash in on popular stuff like Ghostbusters. But this a film that came out last year, and its hardly a mainstream phenomenon. I just don't get why this would be profitable.

The Flatliners reboot bombed and Lego Ninjago has underperformed.

Meanwhile, Kingsman: The Golden Circle is still first place at the box office with the It! remake at a very close 2nd.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

The Flatliners reboot bombed and Lego Ninjago has underperformed.

Meanwhile, Kingsman: The Golden Circle is still #1 at the box office with the It! remake at a very close 2nd.

I actually liked Kingsman, thought it was very entertaining, and worked well for being a popcorn movie.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

The Flatliners reboot bombed and Lego Ninjago has underperformed.

Meanwhile, Kingsman: The Golden Circle is still #1 at the box office with the It! remake at a very close 2nd.

I actually liked Kingsman, thought it was very entertaining, and worked well for being a popcorn movie.

Maybe it's just me, but I feel that this is a stronger start for fall/autumn movies then it has been in recent years.

Flatliners was a remake?

it looked bad in any case. doesn't help that practically every ad i was getting on YouTube was a trailer for it.

Oshronosaurus wrote:

Flatliners was a remake?

it looked bad in any case. doesn't help that practically every ad i was getting on YouTube was a trailer for it.

Yes. The original one came out in 1990.

Harvey Weinstein hit with a New York Times report that details 30 years of reports of sexual harassment of woman.

And yet, Hollywood lectures the common man about decency and morals.

I have to ask: Why now? Do women really hold enough power in Hollywood nowadays to take him down?

Oshronosaurus wrote:

Flatliners was a remake?

it looked bad in any case. doesn't help that practically every ad i was getting on YouTube was a trailer for it.

No, it's classed as a sequel because Kiefer Sutherland's character in the original is in this one as well.

Jackie Chan Confirms Rush Hour 4 is Happening
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/893601-jackie-chan-confirms-rush-hour-4-is-happening

Saw Blade runner 2049. I am not a big fan of the original.

2049 is my favorite film of the year. I liked it that much. Wow is all I feel. IMAX is a must.

James Woods, the voice of Hades in the 1997 animated Hercules movie as well as the animated TV show, has announced his retirement from acting.

Dead2009 wrote:

Oshronosaurus wrote:

Flatliners was a remake?

it looked bad in any case. doesn't help that practically every ad i was getting on YouTube was a trailer for it.

No, it's classed as a sequel because Kiefer Sutherland's character in the original is in this one as well.

Jackie Chan Confirms Rush Hour 4 is Happening
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/893601-jackie-chan-confirms-rush-hour-4-is-happening

He plays a different character in this one. 99% sure it was a remake after all.

It looks like the Blade Runner sequel is going to bomb/flop.