Jump to content

CaptainJackSparrow

⊃∪∩⪽ | Legendary | October 22 2021 | Denis Villeneuve | Returns to IMAX on December 3

Recommended Posts



6 hours ago, The Futurist said:

Really can't believe how blind some of you can be.

Villeneuve can't do fun even if his life depended on it.

He propably is one of those who truly think this is a curse word at the movies.

This movie will live and die depending on its tone.

Somehow I doubt Villeneuve will do some soul searching and discover he has some JJ Abraams or James Gunn in him.

Also, can you  make a fun version of Dune, Villeneuve or not ?

I don't know ...

And by fun , I don't necesseraly mean jokes ( ah ah big worms, so funny), but making a movie entertaining, engaging, with a sense of adventure, with likable characters.

All traits absent frm Villeneuve's filmography.

His movies are engaging but certainly not in the pop corn way.

 

Dennis, are you gonna make your Dune movie for movie buffs & yourself or for audiences ?

Or strike a miraculous balance between both.

Your move, Dennis.

Dune is not meant to be light-hearted or pulpy like say the MCU or Star Wars. It's a pretty serious dramatic sci-fi story that is a parable for the Middle-East. There really is no humor to it at all. So his style fits the tone of Dun very well. 

 

If it was fully of quippy characters it wouldn't be Dune. This is meant to be a sweeping epic. Dune has more in common with Lawrence of Arabia than Guardians of the Galaxy.

Edited by Cheebs86
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still laughing at anybody comparing Mortal Engines with Dune.

ME was a modestly successful YA series, the Dune Novels are one of the most successful series in Science Fiction History.

In terms of size and scope, Dune is comparable with Lord Of The RIngs.

Warners is swinging for the fences with this; but if they hit a home run they have a long term franchsie on their hands, given  how many sequel novels Dune has.

  • Like 1
  • Knock It Off 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Cinephiles and sci-fi fans are definitely going to see this, but with Spielberg's West Side Story and the Disney Cruella movie, I have a hard time seeing this appealing to families that often drive the holiday box office season. 

 

I guess it'll all depend on if they budgeted this accordingly. The story really does require a lot of money to work, but at the same time, anything close to $200m spent would basically guarantee this flops or at least makes it very hard to make any profit to justify sequels. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





2 hours ago, The Futurist said:

This narrative needs to die a quick, sudden death.

Nah it is a delicate balance and that narrative help to keep it alive, it is not like we will not have marketing study/toy department/studio exec influenced affair to see in theater when we want too if that narrative do not die (and it is not like those supposed Studio did leave it alone movies will not continue to receive a tons of notes).

 

Maybe balance it a little bit more (like say if the studio took Ad Astra from Gray hands and still get good reviews/nice festival run and you do not release the story when you know very well it would be everywhere if the movie was trashed by critics like for Suicide Squad, just to reinforce this narrative, then it is cheating), but keeping it a bit alive so the healthy tension between creators and financier do not get too one sided.

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea I  Detest that comes along with this narrative is that every turd produced by an auteur director on a set is a good, brilliant genius idea.

ANd the evil suit is well

 

EVIL !!!!

 

Studio suits are not the ennemies of the movies, far from it actually but the journalists/ critics that cover movies sell this narrative to gullible cinephiles who see filmmakers as all knowing gods that can't do no wrong.

Obviously I simplify but you ll have a hard time finding a journalist  hit piece explaining in detail how important producers/studio suits can be.

 

Kevin something something something Marvelous ? 

 

If the movie is great, the director gets all the laurels.

 

If it s bad, it s the producer/evil studio suit's fault St00pid !!!

 

Making a movie is such a giant collaborative process with hundreds, thousands of artists in all the artistic fields that exist.

Honest/some filmmakers often say jokingly  the best directors are the ones who steal ideas from others and call it their own.

Edited by The Futurist
Link to comment
Share on other sites



25 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The idea I  Detest that comes along with this narrative is that every turd produced by an auteur director on a set is a good, brilliant genius idea.

ANd the evil suit is well

 

EVIL !!!!

 

Studio suits are not the ennemies of the movies, far from it actually but the journalists/ critics that cover movies sell this narrative to gullible cinephiles who see filmmakers as all knowing gods that can't do no wrong.

Obviously I simplify but you ll have a hard time finding a journalist  hit piece explaining in detail how important producers/studio suits can be.

 

Kevin something something something Marvelous ? 

 

If the movie is great, the director gets all the laurels.

 

If it s bad, it s the producer/evil studio suit's fault St00pid !!!

 

Making a movie is such a giant collaborative process with hundreds, thousands of artists in all the artistic fields that exist.

Honest/some filmmakers often say jokingly  the best directors are the ones who steal ideas from others and call it their own.

I am very skeptical of the pure auteur feeling myself, but you are really going to the other extreme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The idea I  Detest that comes along with this narrative is that every turd produced by an auteur director on a set is a good, brilliant genius idea.

 

I feel that narrative died down a while ago with the, critics now do not get too afraid to pan people with the biggest auteur signature out there:

 

michael_bay_explosion.jpg?itok=asJxV_W8 

(been a while since is last criterion release as well, not so long ago being an big name auteur with a large success even if it was making Armageddon tended to get you those)

 

and the :

GettyImages-516771494.0.jpg

 

 

30 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I simplify but you ll have a hard time finding a journalist  hit piece explaining in detail how important producers/studio suits can be.

For the rest it tend to be true one exception is for director turned producer it seem not sure of the usage of the expression hit piece there, but for positive example of producer close involvement:

 

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/10-cloverfield-lane-director-dan-trachtenberg-bad-robot-fan-theories/

How involved was J.J. Abrams whilst working in a galaxy far, far away?

He was shooting Star Wars when we were shooting this movie, so he couldn’t be there on set but he still somehow managed to find the time to watch all our dailies and shoot me emails. I’d wake up in the morning to an email from him saying, “Love the inserts you’re getting!”, and, “Hey, what do you think about shooting this or that?”. Like crazy, smart and very encouraging. The greatest thing is to wake up to an email from him when I knew he was on the Millennium Falcon and looking at our movie and really proud of what we were doing. [That] was very emotional and exciting for me. He really put wind in our sails.

 

Or interviews of people on TV/movie that worked with Spielberg for example I heard a lot of things saying how great Spielberg input are has a producer, Rudin, Apatow, for example:

 

https://filmmakermagazine.com/102788-michael-showalter-on-working-with-kumail-nanjiani-and-judd-apatow-on-the-big-sick/

 

Something like this:

FilmmakerHow collaborative and open to suggestions are you while filming?

Showalter: Very, especially on a movie like this, where you’ve got Kumail and Emily, who are the writers and producers and Kumail is the star and it’s their real story. And you’ve got the producers, who bring an enormous amount of wisdom, experience, creativity and their own way of doing things, and these amazing cast members. I very much was in a facilitator role, wanting to make sure that everybody felt like their ideas were being heard.

Filmmaker: How much input did Apatow or Mendel have? Were they on set?

ShowalterBarry was on set every day and Judd was there periodically, a lot at the beginning and then at the end. Barry has been hands-on from the beginning to the end and Judd has been involved at every stage of the process. He’s involved in reading the script, he’s involved in postproduction when we’re editing and picking the music and sound, as well as getting into screenings and getting feedback. I was kind of in the center channeling it all through.

 

Is not presented or talked about with any negative bent during the film release I think, it is a lot more when it comes from people that was running the conglomerate capacitor or south west parks or when it is a kid that never made a film trying to say too Ridley Scott/Scorsese how to make a film that it came with more backlash.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



All I want confirmed is the running time. Based on casting list, they get to

 

 

duel with Jamis

 

so it's either a very long movie or they [hopefully] minimized Duke Leto portion and maximized Fremen portion. Duke Leto parts are boring and he's just a catalyst for Paul, but in the book, first 1/3 treats him as the protagonist, which is all wrong for movie adaptation. So I hope much less Duke and much more Fremen for that part is focused on Paul as the protagonist. Also, it means more Stilgar.

Edited by Valonqar
Link to comment
Share on other sites







2 hours ago, Alli said:

OMFG   I just found out my old arch nemesis Jon Spaiths (the genius behind The Mummy 2017) is involved with writing this. 

 

It's cursed!!!

 

I've been inspired by this post to analyze the screenwriter's other credits.

 

Jon Spaihts is also credited as a screenwriter for The Darkest HourPrometheusDoctor Strange, and Passengers.

 

The Darkest Hour

I'll give you that one. That's a pretty by-the-numbers "oh no the aliens are disintegrating those teenagers" movie. Though, one should except a writer's first screenplay to only be so-so. Ari Aster had eleven feature-length screenplays written when he got the chance to make Hereditary. Script-writing talent takes time to cultivate.

 

Prometheus

He shares a credit with David Lindelof (LostThe LeftoversStar Trek Into Darkness) for this one. Say what you will about the loose-ended plot of the film--they deleted the scenes that made the story make more sense--but I'd argue that the film is successful in the way it presents its events in a thematic way. The film went on to find new appreciation after Alien: Covenant proved to be lacking in many areas (to say the least).

 

Doctor Strange

Definitely Spaihts' best writing credit to date, and it's shared with writer/director Scott Derrickson. The film came out four years after Prometheus. It's a Marvel film, yeah, but it has its moments of original spark; those moments help it stand out among other MCU films.

 

Passengers

He's the only credited writer on this one. I'd argue the film was one small change away from greatness--it should've opened with Jennifer Lawrence's character waking up on the ship, not Chris Pratt's character. But I'd say the film has a lot of good intentions, and the script provides more than enough opportunities for the two lead actors to chew the scenery.

 

The Mummy

Spaihts has what's called a "Screen Story" credit (shared with two other people); according to this source (https://www.noblemania.com/2011/04/screenplay-terminology-story-by-vs.html), a “screen story by” credit goes to a person or team who adapted other material such as a novel, a TV show, or a news article for film and made it substantially different from the source. He does not have a screenwriting credit, which is shared by three writers including Mission: Impossible - Fallout writer/director Christopher McQuarrie. I personally believe the conception of The Mummy had a lot of systemic issues that none of the writers could've been able to fix.

 

Which brings us to Dune.

 

Jon Spaihts is one of three screenwriters alongside director Denis Villeneuve and screenwriter Eric Roth (great films like Forrest GumpThe InsiderMunichThe Good Shepard, and A Star is Born (2018), as well as so-so Oscar-bait like The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close). That's a wide variety of script-styles that these writers can reach into. Spaihts is the sci-fi guy, Villeneuve is the auteur guy, and Eric Roth is the 'traditional classic film' guy. How successfully these writers are able to blend their strengths remains to be seen.

 

Screenwriter Eric Heisserer wasn't seen as a great screenwriter before he worked with Villeneuve on Arrival. He has credits on A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), Final Destination 5,  and The Thing (2011), all of which were labeled as mediocre upon their release.

 

I think it's a little too early to call whether Dune will be as great as Villeneuve's other films or not. The director is bound to falter sometime, it's just a matter of when--and I say that because nobody's perfect, you know? I probably didn't need to type as big of a post as I did, but I thought it could've been fun to analyze the writer's past work, and, hey, you might feel a little better about Dune because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



My most anticipated for next year, more so now after watching The King. I didn't bother with Call Me By Your Name, thought he was amusing in Lady Bird, and he proved himself a pretty good actor in a rather unlikable role in Beautiful Boy, but in The King I finally saw the guy everyone's been raving about. He's watchable at all times and never less than compelling in that movie. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







3 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

I remain amazed at how much power people think screenwriters have, not to mention how they think the final film is completely attributable to their script (or script contribution). 

I suspect the only real motivation for that post was that an Ansel Elgort movie is coming out the same day as this. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.