comment #1

Rich S. says ...

Of all of these projects, I think When Worlds Collide has the most potential, Sommers' involvement aside. The science of the original film is all kinds of wacky, but the core idea is great.

A planet is going to make a near-Earth approach and cause untold natural disasters. 99% of the scientists agree the other planet is coming, but think it's going to be a near miss.

One scientist, who's dismissed as an alarmist, think it's going to plow into the Earth and destroy it. He recommends building a "space ark" to save whatever can be saved of humanity and Earth animals by transporting them to another planet in the same system as the one that's going to crush Earth. Since he's dismissed as a crackpot, no one starts to make preparations.

He convinces a wealthy industrialist to bankroll the project in return for a place on the ark. The ark is finished just in time and a lottery is held among those who worked on it to determine who gets to go. Things are hunky-dory until about an hour before the ark is to leave, when the remainder of humanity realizes the scientist was right and everyone attacks the compound to get onto the ark.

Lots of potential for great destruction and stuff about mob mentality there.

comment #2

actionman says ...

The one planned sci-fi remake/redo/reimagining/rewhatever that I am most interested in seeing isn't even on this list:

Peter Berg's Dune.

Hope he goes hand-held with it like he did on Hancock, which is easily one of the most underrated, underappreciated, and misunderstood movies of the year. Watched the unrated director's cut last night -- what a fun, funny, and pretty subversive big-budget movie.

And after watching it last night, I had a flying dream, which is always just a blast.

comment #3

rgmax99 says ...

A Westworld re-boot would be a blast. That was one of my faves as a kid.

And, actionman: I'm with you 100% on Hancock.

comment #4

/3rtfu11 says ...

actionman says ...

The one planned sci-fi remake/redo/reimagining/rewhatever that I am most interested in seeing isn't even on this list:
Peter Berg's Dune.
Hope he goes hand-held with it like he did on Hancock, which is easily one of the most underrated, underappreciated, and misunderstood movies of the year. Watched the unrated director's cut last night -- what a fun, funny, and pretty subversive big-budget movie.
And after watching it last night, I had a flying dream, which is always just a blast.

You have such a hard on for him? I hope the general audience stays away from his remake like they do films centered around black women.

comment #5

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

What the hell was so subversive about Hancock?

It was a $150 million superhero flick starring Will Smith.

Your endless, over-enthusiastic pimping of over-inflated Hollywood turds gets tiresome. Why am I not surprised you work in marketing?

comment #6

actionman says ...

/3rtfu11: Yes, I have a major man-crush on Berg. I love his style.

rgmax99: I too used to watch Westworld a ton when I was a kid. Would be pretty neat to see a new version up on the big screen.

comment #7

actionman says ...

Kane:

Hancock did things differently. It toyed with genre conventions, it had an asshole as the lead character, and it had a dark streak that few major superhero movies have dared to show. And yes, it was a $150 million Will Smith summer movie that didn't feel like your typical $150 million Will Smith summer movie. Berg, Mann, and the writers didn't care about creating a super villain, they didn't care about making a likable character, and they had a lot of fun with a getting-tired genre. I hope they make a sequel and we get to see more on the mythology of the characters.

If my comments are tiresome to you, don't fuckin' read 'em or respond to 'em. I speak how I feel. If you don't like it, tough shit.

There is no "endless, over-enthusiastic pimping of over-inflated Hollywood turds" going on with my comments. If you have read anything substantial that I have written you'd see that I have a wide range of movie tastes.

Sorry if Hancock didn't do it for you. Or Quantum of Solace. Or any other film I happened to enjoy that you didn't.

comment #8

MikeSchaeferSF says ...

I recall seeing Westworld on Thanksgiving weekend in '73. It was pretty cleverly directed for the time (and especially for a first-time helmer), and I always wondered why Crichton stopped directing.

Speaking of Hancock, I see that the TV spots for the DVD give away the big reveal. WTF?

comment #9

actionman says ...

Yeah, Mike. Very stupid about the Sony marketing people giving away the twist. Granted, the film made over $600 million so they're assuming that most people who will buy the DVD have seen the film. But it's still no excuse for ruining the surprise.

comment #10

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

Yeah, I agree the main character being a prick and lack of villain were different for the genre. I'm not sure who had fun with it, exactly, though..other than you, I guess. The script was a mess (can anyone explain Charlize Theron's behavior near the end?!) and the lack of villain really led to a second half collapse due to a total lack of story tension, IMO. I think it's a semi-interesting experiment, but sort of think it's exhibit A why these sort of movies need great villains to work effectively.

I enjoy reading your comments (I wouldn't respond if I didn't!), man. I just think you have a tendency to over-exaggerate a lot of mediocre studio tentpoles.

But COME ON, do you honestly think it's possible that a Will Smith-headlined summer superhero film is "one of the most underrated, underappreciated, and misunderstood movies of the year?" Dude, that's kinda like entering "The Dark Knight" in Roger Ebert's Overlooked Film Festival.

I'm just not buying it, and I'm calling you on it. Tough shit :).

comment #11

actionman says ...

Kane: There were plenty of people who enjoyed Hancock. We both know that. A movie doesn't gross over $600 million if people don't like it. I know plenty of people who feel the same way as I do. Again, sorry if the film didn't live up to your expectations.

And yes, I do think that Hancock is underrated. Critics, by and large, didn't get the film at all, and trashed it. Unfairly in my estimation. But it had its fair share of knowledgeable and intelligent critical supporters, chiefly Ebert, Denby, and Dargis. In fact, if you want, read Dargis' review; she says it better than I ever could.

I liked how it was the first superhero movie to do something DIFFERERNT. It didn't provide you with what you might typically expect from a movie of this sort. I liked that it felt edgy, both in style and in content. I liked how it dealt with the idea and ramifications of a superhero in the real world. What behavior from Charlize threw you for a loop?

And I never said the film was pefect, either. It feels a little rushed, there are a few scenes that should have gone on a bit longer, and I really wish they could have been able to go all out with an R-rating.

That said, there was plenty in there to enjoy and have fun with.

Other than Hancock and Quantum, what other tentpole films have I unjustly praised based on your personal reactions?

Different strokes for different folks, brutha. It's all good.

comment #12

bmcintire says ...

I was looking forward to both this and LOGAN'S RUN. Both are great commentaries on the price of unfettered hedonism that was rampant in the 70's and is going just as strong today (the current financial crisis notwithstanding). And they both suffer to one degree or another from poor production values and a cheeseball aesthetic. I'm just hoping the DVD release of FUTUREWORLD doesn't wither on the vine while the remake WESTWORLD goes into eternal turnaround.

comment #13

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

Well, first of all, a lot of Arnold and Sly stinkers have grossed $600 worldwide, so I'm not exactly sure what makes that figure some sort of quality hallmark. Hell, ID4 made over $800 million, and that was back in 1996. I'm not sure why I'm arguing this point with you, you probably thought "Eraser" and "The Specialist" were quality cinema.

I guess when you say "underrated," I generally think of tiny budget movies like "Primer," or something a little bit off the beaten track like "The Motorcyle Diaries." I guess I just have a hard time labeling any film with a $75 million advertising campaign (regardless of its eventual quality, or lack thereof) "underrated." Didn't this thing even have a Super Bowl ad? It was incredibly overrated before I even saw an inch of film.

I'm also not sure how it was particularly unique, given that "Last Action Hero" had a lot of similar subvert-the-superhero-genre ideas (executed about as sloppily, IMO) about 15 years ago. I'm curious, now...would you consider that flick to be underrated?

I felt Theron's character was totally out of whack from the moment when she throws Hancock through the house. And what was all that fighting between them about? Just a lame excuse to shoe-horn in tired action sequences where they totally weren't warranted and out-of-character. Yeah, so much for it being different.

I will grant you there are some good ideas here, but the execution is just so sloppy. If you really wanted to think out of the box, they should have just made Charlize's character a regular woman. What does the Bateman character do when he finds out his wife is cheating on him with a superhero? What *can* he do? I guess those would be R-rated developments, but not necessarily. They wouldn't have to *show* the sex or anything (although that would be interesting, too...).

I find your praise of Michael Bay/Tony Scott films intriguing, because I find them to be so loudly, irritatingly, and desperately empty. I've seen your comments on other films, and you seem to like a lot of the arthouse/foriegn stuff (and props for that, etc.), but it boggles the mind how anyone can find *anything* to praise about movies like "Bad Boys 2" or "Armageddon." But like you say, diff'rent strokes, Willis.

Anyway, while I don't share all of your tastes, I *do* actually appreciate your passion for cinema. I have a tendency to be a bit sarcastic/snarky with people I disagree with (like a lot of regulars here, it seems), but I really do welcome nice film debates. Isn't that why we're all here? So a reluctant kudos to you for expressing your viewpoints well and all that shit. :-P

comment #14

actionman says ...

Eraser and The Specialist both sucked. The Last Action Hero was fun for what it was but it was hardly great, or even very good. Though there are a handful of truly funny lines of dialogue. I can see the similarities between Hancock and Last Action Hero but Hancock was far more successful IMO.

In terms of it being underrated, it's about as underrated as a big budget movie can get. It got terrible reviews which I don't think the film fairly earned; people trashed it because it's the easy thing to do with big-budget summer popcorn cinema. I agree with you that small, excellent films like Primer or Happy-Go-Lucky or any number of films of that sort need all the help that they can get in order to put butts in seats, and many films that fall into that category, are indeed underrated.

And as far as Bay goes, The Rock is his best film hands down. What he did with Transformers is a landmark in visual effects but it'll soon be toppled by his work on the sequel. The action in Bad Boys 2 is, in a word, amazing. And I am not really a fan of Armageddon; it's OK as a piece of loud entertainment but it's so stupid. The Island is also a film that I'd consider to be underrated.

comment #15

actionman says ...

And Kane, like you, I am all about passion; thanks for recognizing that.

Too many people around here simply bitch and moan without ever once expressing any real love for cinema. That's what I find most annoying.

Happy Thanksgiving. It's time for me to split from the office and hopefully catch a matinee.

comment #16

Luke Y. Thompson says ...

Stephen Sommers looks like Guillermo del Toro compared to Breck Eisner. I love big action movies and even enjoy Matthew McConaughey's redneck shtick, but SAHARA is one of the worst-directed movies I've ever seen.

Sommers' initial MUMMY remake was and is fun. Too bad they had to make more, but even Sommers' sequel was better than Rob Cohen's part 3.

comment #17

Clark Perry says ...

Oh God, the last thing we need is another goddamned go at DUNE. We already have Lynch's weird 3-hour version from the 1980s, and the SciFi mini-series and its sequel from earlier this decade. That's gotta be, what, twelve or fifteen hours of sand and spice and messiahs and prophecies and big-ass worms?

Neither adaptation is perfect, but mash 'em all together and WE GET IT. It's LAWRENCE OF ARABIA meets JOHN CARTER OF MARS. A typical and by now predictable Hero's Journey with ray-guns and mysticism and all the stations of the cross. I don't care which director or writer you bring to it: there's nothing more to see here.

And I say this as an admirer of Frank Herbert's original novel.

comment #18

D.Z. says ...

I thought the upcoming Terminator was a prequel, not a remake.

actionman: "A movie doesn't gross over $600 million if people don't like it."

Then how do you explain Michael Bay?

comment #19

Chase Kahn says ...

I love how people champion HANCOCK because it changed 'genre conventions' -- never mind the fact that they didn't work.

comment #20

Cadavra says ...

Crichton already remade WESTWORLD...as JURASSIC PARK.

comment #21

actionman says ...

D.Z., please, Bay has plenty of fans. Look at the track record.

Chase: what didn't work for you worked for me.

comment #22

Chris Willman says ...

actionman: "I liked how it was the first superhero movie to do something DIFFERERNT."

So "Unbreakable" was a standard-issue superhero movie?

comment #23

TVMCCA says ...

MikeSchaeferSF wrote:
I recall seeing Westworld on Thanksgiving weekend in '73. It was pretty cleverly directed for the time (and especially for a first-time helmer), and I always wondered why Crichton stopped directing.

LOOKER and RUNAWAY were pretty mediocre, but Chrichton had a good run as a filmmaker with WESTWORLD, COMA and THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY.

comment #24

sony says ...

Never heard of Saddle the Wind, but the comments at IMDB make it sound interesting. buy essay | buy dissertation | buy thesis | buy assignment | buy coursework Written by Rod Serling. Never heard of the director, Robert Parrish (he was better known as an editor), but around the same time he directed two of Robert Mitchum's lesser known films, Wonderful Country and Fire Down Below.

comment #25

janee says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of server high availability