Flatliners Reboot (Sony) Sept 29 2017 Kiefer Sutherland Ellen Page

[filmlover]

[Cochofles]

Hmmm. Looks...competently made.

 

Still trying to process that trailer.

I gotta re-watch the original, because I don't remember the details of what exactly happened to the kids...

Edited June 13, 2017 by Cochofles

[75Live]

kind of meh on the trailer.  Not that it was bad just not sure how i feel about it since nothing looked all that great either

[marveldcfox]

Will actually make money unlike AC...that's all that matters. 

[Cochofles]

5 minutes ago, marveldcfox said:

Will actually make money unlike AC...that's all that matters. 

 "AC"?

[Krissykins]

Not a great trailer. Nice poster though. 

 

Meh. 

 

I'm sure ScreenGems will advertise it well.

[CaptainJackSparrow]

I'll see it.

[WrathOfHan]

This looks dumb.

[CoolioD1]

Looks stupid and annoying. So at least they've kept the essence of the original intact.

[TwoMisfits]

I admit the original on video was a guilty pleasure in my youth...it was a glorious trainwreck that was a fun watch...maybe b/c I loved the whole cast:)...

 

I'm sure this can be made better, but I'm not sure it can be made more enjoyable viewing...hopefully, this is a not a beat-for-beat remake b/c then it will be a disaster b/c this cast is no Sutherland, Bacon, Roberts, Platt, or Baldwin...

 

Edited June 13, 2017 by TwoMisfits

[baumer]

Why is it the original considered a guilty pleasure? Was the original considered to be some kind of crappy movie? I'm not aware of this at all. I was in high school and that would be came out and it was pretty well received from what I can remember.

[Boxofficerules]

Sony / Screen Gems make the worst, safest movie blandest remakes 95% of the time (rare exceptions) and they're usually always awful!

[TwoMisfits]

18 minutes ago, baumer said:

Why is it the original considered a guilty pleasure? Was the original considered to be some kind of crappy movie? I'm not aware of this at all. I was in high school and that would be came out and it was pretty well received from what I can remember.

 

:)...someone who is older than me on the boards other than Tele:)...

 

I caught it on video after reading some scathing reviews back in the day in some movie review compilation book (not named Ebert, but don't ask me whose or what b/c my memory isn't that good)...I think it's big selling point was it had Julia Roberts in it, and at that point in time, I was a big fan.  I was as much a completionist of her work as Tom Cruise's (my other childhood must see actor)...

 

Checking my memory to rotten tomatoes now, I see fans and critics put it in the middling category, with Julia (and then the other actors) being the best reason to see it:)...it's not a genius story or plot:)...

 

EDIT: Unless you like groundhog day for dead people:)...

 

Edited June 13, 2017 by TwoMisfits

[WrathOfHan]

This will be lucky to gross what Life did. Jake Gyllenhaal and Ryan Reynolds provided at least some star power to that; among films with similar target audiences, this opens the weekend after Kingsman, the same weekend as American Made, a week before Blade Runner, and two weeks before mother! 

[filmlover]

This looks pretty lame and even worse than the original movie (which was hardly a masterpiece with little room for improvement). It's gonna get lost.

[baumer]

Well, it looks okay to me.  It's got the ideas of the original and then it takes them a bit further....nice to see Page back up on the big screen.

 

BTW....I'm watching the original now and it is definitely not a guilty pleasure....terrific cast, well directed and really well done imo.  And anything with Oliver Platt can't be all bad.

[Cochofles]

 

33 minutes ago, baumer said:

Well, it looks okay to me.  It's got the ideas of the original and then it takes them a bit further....nice to see Page back up on the big screen.

 

BTW....I'm watching the original now and it is definitely not a guilty pleasure....terrific cast, well directed and really well done imo.  And anything with Oliver Platt can't be all bad.

 

I think the original is a nicely constructed, tight, efficient little thriller that happens to be well acted and delivers chills with conviction and verve. I don't see why it would be called a guilty pleasure either, but to each their own. I look forward to the remake because I love Ellen page and because I want to see how they use Sutherland.

[TwoMisfits]

"guilty pleasure
noun
something, such as a movie, television program, or piece of music, that one enjoys despite feeling that it is not generally held in high regard."

 

Ummm, I'd say the original pretty much is bang on to the definition of guilty pleasure:)...it's not highly regarded by the public or the critics (if rotten tomatoes scores are any indication), but I enjoyed it for what it was...but I'll be the 1st to admit, it ain't Shakespeare:)...

 

 

 

 

Edited June 14, 2017 by TwoMisfits

[HesAPooka]

i enjoy the 90s version but not enough to give this a shot in theaters. this is a wait till netflix for me.

Edited June 14, 2017 by HesAPooka

[RobinHood26]

-

Edited January 16, 2019 by Jay Hollywood