well as the title says, theres something nice comming for us (the Sci-Fi nerds) in January:

Aliens vs. Predator - Requiem

thanks for the find Gavin

and i just found another quite interesting trailer about an upcoming movie called:

Cloverfield

its still in production and if you know the TV-Series "LOST" then you will get an idea about the movie since J.J. Abrams was and is (executive) producer.

You can find high quality trailers (same as on the website) here. For some reason the largest version was kind of buggy for me at the end (using VLC Media Player) but the second largest version worked just fine.

Cheers

Now that I've seen No Country for Old Men, the only movie I'm really dying to see is There Will Be Blood.

yup just checked the trailers, looks also very interesting. What do you think about "3:10 to Yuma"? Maybe a Mod could rename the thread into something like "Movies: what are You waiting for?" If you have a more proper name for it which could describe the purpose even better, please go ahead.

Yeah, i've been looking forward to "Cloverfield" (Has it been given this title now? it was only a working title before) since i read about it in the June/July copy of Empire, i can't wait .

Also really looking forward to the new AvP.

Two shitty action movies, and one of them's a sequel. Who said Hollywood's out of ideas? :rolleyes:

3:10 to Yuma was quite good, though I didn't really buy the ending.

Bale and Crowe were both great, though. Not to mention Peter Fonda.

Quote from GFresh :

Yeah, i've been looking forward to "Cloverfield" (Has it been given this title now? it was only a working title before) since i read about it in the June/July copy of Empire, i can't wait .

Also really looking forward to the new AvP.

yup, if its not been changed again meanwhile

Quote from DeadWolfBones :

3:10 to Yuma was quite good, though I didn't really buy the ending.

Bale and Crowe were both great, though. Not to mention Peter Fonda.

thought so too, it has this old school touch and is an instant classic

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Two shitty action movies, and one of them's a sequel. Who said Hollywood's out of ideas? :rolleyes:

Newsflash: Hollywood ran out of ideas when Jesus born and the paperback version was published.

AvP:R sure looks gory enough to be a proper Alien film.

Alien - nice
Predator - not as good, but still nice
- - - - - - - -
Alien vs Predator 1 - erm.. that movie was.. very very bad, I am absolutely sure the second one will be even worse
Cloverfield - Lost Season 1 was fairly enjoyable, but I don't think this movie will be good

I won't write further.
For the lazy ones who don't want to read my post:

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Two shitty action movies, and one of them's a sequel. Who said Hollywood's out of ideas? :rolleyes:

Just saw Death Proof, that was good for a laugh
Alien v Predator - bah. First one sucked, I don't imagine the sequel will be any better. If people aren't going to do a proper job, crossovers should be left to comic books (anyone remember the Batman/Judge Dredd crossovers? Too cool). The Alien saga should have ended with Aliens & Predator 2 should have been the last of that story. Seriously, there are so many good stories in the world to make films out of (or, god forbid, you could make a film which isn't drawn from a book, tv show or another film), why is Hollywood so quick to makes sequels to or trilogies from films that sucked balls in the first place?

The thing that hit home regarding Hollywood's creative bankruptcy happened about ten years ago when someone decided to remake Hitchcock's legendary Psycho. They didn't merely do a modern interpretation, they basically did a photocopy: shot for shot, line for line, exactly the same as Hitchcock did it. The lamest and most pointless goddam thing anyone's ever done with a movie camera (except maybe for Blues Brothers 2000 and episodes 1-3 of Star Wars). It isn't just that the idea was bad, it's that some retarded studio executive gave it the green light (it bombed in the box office and hopefully someone got fired)! Remaking classic films sometimes works (Cape Fear for example) but come on - Hitchcock always did it right the first time. Don't mess with the master.

/coffee-fuelled rant

Quote from Hankstar :

The thing that hit home regarding Hollywood's creative bankruptcy happened about ten years ago when someone decided to remake Hitchcock's legendary Psycho. They didn't merely do a modern interpretation, they basically did a photocopy: shot for shot, line for line, exactly the same as Hitchcock did it. The lamest and most pointless goddam thing anyone's ever done with a movie camera (except maybe for Blues Brothers 2000 and episodes 1-3 of Star Wars). It isn't just that the idea was bad, it's that some retarded studio executive gave it the green light (it bombed in the box office and hopefully someone got fired)! Remaking classic films sometimes works (Cape Fear for example) but come on - Hitchcock always did it right the first time. Don't mess with the master.

/coffee-fuelled rant

Well, Van Sant's idea was to remake a film shot for shot to see if it preserved the essence of the original. That the answer was no doesn't make that question any less interesting to me, just a little sad for ol' Gus. And the truth is, he's one of the least creatively bankrupt people working in/out of Hollywood today--aka one of the more inventive/oddball.

Quote from Hankstar :

Just saw Death Proof, that was good for a laugh
Alien v Predator - bah. First one sucked, I don't imagine the sequel will be any better. If people aren't going to do a proper job, crossovers should be left to comic books (anyone remember the Batman/Judge Dredd crossovers? Too cool). The Alien saga should have ended with Aliens & Predator 2 should have been the last of that story. Seriously, there are so many good stories in the world to make films out of (or, god forbid, you could make a film which isn't drawn from a book, tv show or another film), why is Hollywood so quick to makes sequels to or trilogies from films that sucked balls in the first place?

well i think you are currently comparing apples with bananas. AvP2:R will be different because of several important facts. Directors, writers and cast is different not to mention the hole rest of the crew. AvP of course was boring because the script was awful and it had none of the raw emotion or power of the Predator or Alien movies. It had some nice effects and it had true potential but the fact that the hole movie was located at a god forsaken place somewhere (where was it again, northpole or something? (Sector 14 :nod who cares...) made this movie even more worse.

So im looking forward and the trailer looks like we are getting something more "original" again, if not better (hopefully ).

@Deadwolf

The fact that Gus Van Sant is a pretty damn good filmmaker most of the time doesn't excuse the fact that his Psycho remake blew massively and was a ridiculous idea from the start. Everybody makes a crap film or two in their lives (for Spielberg, everything after Schindler, yes, even Private Ryan; for Tim Burton, Planet Of The Apes was a travesty - another expensive, pointless, wanky remake; I'm sure I can think of a Scorcese film that sucks...wait, no I can't) and Van Sant isn't immune just because of his other films. The whole Psycho idea was a giant jerk-off from the very beginning and I felt vindicated to see the film die at the box office.

Re: AvP2
AvP2 might have a bunch of different people working on it, but that may well turn out to be a negative. Could be that noone from the first film wanted anything to do with this cash-in sequel (Predator 2 comes to mind - good film, but Danny's no muddy, bellowing Ah-nuld). It's a rare thing indeed when a sequel outshines an original. Take Empire Strikes Back for example: with Lucas not directing, that film rocked. But Empire retained the core members from the cast & crew and was always meant as chapter 2 of 3. Aliens was arguably better than Alien as well, but as I said it's a rare thing. The thing is, Alien was awesome to start with and so was Star Wars. The fact is that AvP is not a good place to launch a sequel from. Might as well try to hang-glide off of your garage.

The best part about January? Shoot 'Em Up comes out on DVD on January 1st. That's what I'm waiting for

Anyone know when The Red Baron is hitting theatres, and if it will come to North American ones?

Quote from 510N3D :

AvP of course was boring because the script was awful

No film that pits two entirely unrelated fictional aliens against eachother for no good reason other than some fat stupid **** at the studio thought it would be clever is going to be turned into a quality script. Now imagine if they took that same bad idea and did it again. You think you'll get better writing?

Speaking of pointless Hollywood remakes, let's not forget The American... Sorry, Italian Job. Or The Ladykillers. I can't even bring myself to describe that piece of ****.

forgive me if i miss the point of your presumptions but when there are good movies and the sequel was crap then why shouldn't it happen the opposite way? Im afraid we have to find that out. I hate to prejudge a movie and yet even good/ crap trailers are not worth doing a safe judgement. Let me ask you something, have you ever had a situation where you thought that its going to be crap, or a book or movie or whatever would be boring but it turns out to be ok or even better?

:rolleyes: I already gave two solid examples where things did indeed happen the opposite way, with a sequel surpassing the first movie: Aliens and The Empire Strikes Back. I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying it's very rare and a woeful piece of shit like the first AvP movie is not a good place to start.

There have been plenty of times in my life where I've expected something to be bad and I was pleasantly surprised. However, after a lifetime of being completely anal about films/games/books I've honed a pretty good crap-detector. Sometimes it's easy to get it right with festering sores like Armageddon, the entire FnF series, anything with Ben Affleck (except Good Will Hunting) and other times I'm surprised by how good a film is. But not often. Most of the time my initial reaction to a preview, or to the first ten minutes of any film, is justified.

But I'm not completely dogmatic about this. If AvP2 turns out to kick ass on the original, I'll happily eat my words.

Kev makes a good point: AvP sucked, everyone knows it & any sequel to it is only ever going to be a cash-in. Gawd, they might even make a trilogy out of this shit! Why not? They made a third and then fourth Alien film. *vomit* Bastards.

And don't get me started on The Italian Job. The whole point of the original 60s film was that real Minis can go where normal-sized cars can't. Fast-forward to the latest version, where you have BMW Mini remakes, which are exactly the same size as normal cars (defeating the purpose entirely), in a half-arsed Hollywood remake, trying to replicate the fun and originality of the first film but really just shilling for BMW. Bah, blasted humbug. If they really wanted to re-make it properly, they would have used something tiny and hilarious, like a Smart FourTwo

Quote from Hankstar :

it bombed in the box office and hopefully someone got fired

doubtful ... its them bloddy pirates not the movies

with that in mind im surprised its the writers and not the directors who are on strike

I hope AVP is going to be better than the one a few years back....

And speaking of LOST, can't wait when it comes back on air..... I have my usual 100 million unsanswered questions

Quote from Hankstar :

If they really wanted to re-make it properly, they would have used something tiny and hilarious, like a Smart FourTwo

Peel P50 FTW.

Quote from Shotglass :

doubtful ... its them bloddy pirates not the movies

Pirates don't take very much money from the movie industry. Most people who buy pirated DVDs weren't going to buy the originals or go see it in theatres anyways. Same goes for music.

Quote :

with that in mind im surprised its the writers and not the directors who are on strike

Directors have nothing to strike about. They make a lot of money. Writers, on the other hand, get paid in peanuts and belly-button lint.

Quote from Hankstar :

:rolleyes: I already gave two solid examples where things did indeed happen the opposite way, with a sequel surpassing the first movie: Aliens and The Empire Strikes Back. I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying it's very rare and a woeful piece of shit like the first AvP movie is not a good place to start.

There have been plenty of times in my life where I've expected something to be bad and I was pleasantly surprised. However, after a lifetime of being completely anal about films/games/books I've honed a pretty good crap-detector. Sometimes it's easy to get it right with festering sores like Armageddon, the entire FnF series, anything with Ben Affleck (except Good Will Hunting) and other times I'm surprised by how good a film is. But not often. Most of the time my initial reaction to a preview, or to the first ten minutes of any film, is justified.

But I'm not completely dogmatic about this. If AvP2 turns out to kick ass on the original, I'll happily eat my words.

Kev makes a good point: AvP sucked, everyone knows it & any sequel to it is only ever going to be a cash-in. Gawd, they might even make a trilogy out of this shit! Why not? They made a third and then fourth Alien film. *vomit* Bastards.

And don't get me started on The Italian Job. The whole point of the original 60s film was that real Minis can go where normal-sized cars can't. Fast-forward to the latest version, where you have BMW Mini remakes, which are exactly the same size as normal cars (defeating the purpose entirely), in a half-arsed Hollywood remake, trying to replicate the fun and originality of the first film but really just shilling for BMW. Bah, blasted humbug. If they really wanted to re-make it properly, they would have used something tiny and hilarious, like a Smart FourTwo

fair enough, i think ill blame it on them usual language barriers (or maybe at the laziness that emerged after i felt a slightly taste of a generalisation ) that i wasn't able to figure that out of the context. Anyhow im rather confident about the second part but when it turns out to be crap as well then heck there are plenty of other movies around at the time i presume. Not to mention the proceeding of LOST

Quote from Hankstar :

@Deadwolf

The fact that Gus Van Sant is a pretty damn good filmmaker most of the time doesn't excuse the fact that his Psycho remake blew massively and was a ridiculous idea from the start. Everybody makes a crap film or two in their lives (for Spielberg, everything after Schindler, yes, even Private Ryan; for Tim Burton, Planet Of The Apes was a travesty - another expensive, pointless, wanky remake; I'm sure I can think of a Scorcese film that sucks...wait, no I can't)

I actually don't like Van Sant most of the time, but I do give him credit for trying new things. That's all I was trying to say.

I disagree with most of the rest of what's quoted above. I think Munich is a great film, and I think the only truly bad film Spielberg has made (that I've seen, so we're not counting 1941) is The Terminal. I don't think Tim Burton has made a decent film since Ed Wood although Mars Attacks was at least entertaining. Scorcese, on the other hand, hasn't made a truly good movie since Casino (and even that one's kinda iffy and, as everyone has said, just Goodfellas but longer and a few time zones west).



Gotta love having opinions on things.

Also, you guys are missing out on the fact that the first AvP is a camp comedy classic. I laughed so hard seeing that one in the theater, and I laughed pretty hard at the trailer for the sequel. I'll download it, at the very least.

well i think Scorcese's "Gangs of New York" and "the Departed" where two very nice movies actually. Havend seen the rest since casino exept these two but i believe they have simular quality...

regarding DBW last comment, i agree that it was a funny movie but not actually something i did expected. I have seen worse and its truly not one of my favorites. Matter of taste i guess.

Judging Scorcese's films against each other isn't really fair, but then judging them against other peoples' isn't fair either A Scorcese flick which isn't quite as good as another Scorcese flick is still going to mash most other directors. Put Kundun and Taxi Driver next to each other and one might destroy the other, but put either of them next to anything by Michael Bay or M Night Shyamalan and watch the blood fly.
Look at the horrors Spielberg's inflicted on us since Schindler: The Terminal, AI (started by the great Stanley Kubrick and Disney-fied by Spielberg, what an utter waste), Minority Report, War Of The Worlds. It's a shame because for a while he really was one of my favourites! The Indy Jones films are awesome, DUEL is still one of my favourite films ever, Jurassic Park (don't start me on the sequels) & Schindler's List were brilliant, Close Encounters Of The Third Kind still stands the test of time as a SF classic (never saw ET but I'm told it's very heartwarming ), but there just seems to be something missing from Spielberg's recent stuff. Haven't seen Munich. If that is indeed a good flick, it'll be just a blip on the recent Spielberg radar as far as I'm concerned.

Tim Burton - well, I'll agree with you there. I just used him as an example because of the ham-fisted Planet Of The Apes remake. His Charlie & The Chocolate Factory do-over wasn't inspirational either, despite it being more faithful to the book. Sometimes it seems that Burton thinks he can just take a bunch of oddball characters, throw them into a bizarro setting (often with Johnny Depp) and let the film fly on autopilot. Nightmare Before Christmas was probably the last Burton film I really liked, and not a human to be seen.

Point taken on Van Sant. I'd also give him kudos for trying something new, but there's the rub - he wasn't in the case of Psycho. He was attempting to re-do something that was already pretty much perfected. You wouldn't re-carve Michelangelo's David, don't remake Hitchcock films Not shot-for-shot anyway - the remake of Dial M For Murder (with Paltrow & Michael Douglas in it, can't recall the name) was pretty decent, but ultimately pointless. I just think Gus should've done his Psycho shot-for-shot experiment in film school, where it could do no harm and never be seen by anyone

510N3D (do you have a word-name? Surely your parents didn't name you with a "5" ), I think Deadwolf's comment that AvP was a comedy was meant be ironic. Lost in translation I guess