Topic: (NEW Poll Added!!) New Movies/TV Shows we should keep an eye out for!

[oohhboy]

Aren't you guys sick of Wolverine? There is surely more to X-Men than him. Every movie it is him again. **** that nonsense.

[Wah]

But Hugh Jackman...

[nickmitch]

Yeah, I'm getting of him, tbh.  He was the whole first X-Men trilogy, and has been heavy in this current incarnation. It was fun at first, but now it's. . .meh.

[ThePerm]

Aren't you guys sick of Wolverine? There is surely more to X-Men than him. Every movie it is him again. **** that nonsense.

I think Logan might be his last.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Aren't you guys sick of Wolverine? There is surely more to X-Men than him. Every movie it is him again. **** that nonsense.

I think Logan might be his last.

Until he cameos in Deaderpool

[oohhboy]

That new Ghost in the Shell movie is looking good and is set to transcend it's casting decision.

I love who they cast for Aramaki, it's boss as hell.

[Plugabugz]

Is it worth watching the trailer?

I know nothing of the source material.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Beauty and the Beast

I think it looks ok, but the talking objects just look weird.

[oohhboy]

Is it worth watching the trailer?

I know nothing of the source material.

It's is a real treat if you are a fan. They took the anime/manga and made it real.

If you were looking for a Deus Ex movie this would be it. I am really looking forward to this movie, that and John Wick 2:More Headshots.

[BlackNMild2k1]

In regards to GitS, does it look like they fully embraced the source material?

I'm only vaguely familiar with franchise from my anime days decades ago. But I would be pretty excited about it if they went ALL-IN and just brought it life.

[oohhboy]

Not absolutely, they seem to have toned down the messaging to make it a bit more approachable.

The original movie's monologues are pretty heavy handed. They would have needed true master actor to pull off something like that off and they don't have one. As much as I like Jo, she can't do it, it is currently beyond her.

A lot of those action scenes are shot for shot from the 1995 movie. It also melds scenes from different continuities. The geisha kidnapping people is from GITS:Stand Alone Complex. The drop off the building is in every continuity. Batou looks like he is busting up a Yakuza office is from GITS 2.

It might be a Dredd level movie.

[nickmitch]

I like that they went as true to the source as they seemingly could, but I worry that the story might be too much for a casual audience even with ScarJo.

[Spak-Spang]

Not absolutely, they seem to have toned down the messaging to make it a bit more approachable.

The original movie's monologues are pretty heavy handed. They would have needed true master actor to pull off something like that off and they don't have one. As much as I like Jo, she can't do it, it is currently beyond her.

A lot of those action scenes are shot for shot from the 1995 movie. It also melds scenes from different continuities. The geisha kidnapping people is from GITS:Stand Alone Complex. The drop off the building is in every continuity. Batou looks like he is busting up a Yakuza office is from GITS 2.

It might be a Dredd level movie.

Monologues are a staple of Japanese Manga and Anime to quickly explain the complex story and/or deeper themes but they are almost ever done well.  Even in Ghost in the Shell which I love.  It was unnecessary and slowed down the story. 

I know many people were hoping for this movie to be rated R, but I hope it is PG-13.  I know that part of the nudity and violence plays to the themes that these are just robotic bodies, but I think having the bodies be void of sexual organs actually plays off that idea better.
 

[oohhboy]

They were already void of sexual organs in the originals and they are following it here so that isn't remotely a concern. Being "nude" was less sexual than when the Major is wearing her "Battle Teddy" in SAC.

What I am interested in is whether they go for the ultra violence that the shows/movies had on occasion where they gib someone. They were never scared of showing blood whether it was splattered or pooling under a fresh corpse/cyborg. This was one of the things I really liked about Dredd was the thought of sanitising it never crossed their mind.

Why exactly do you want PG-13? It has repeatedly diminished violence level seen which remove the consequences of people's actions. I hope they pull a Deadpool/Dredd and not give a **** about the demographics of PG-13 as going R was what made it great.

[Spak-Spang]

Reducing the violence level does not in fact remove consequences.  That is a foolish argument.  If the story has put enough time to make you value and care about a character, then if that character dies or is injured you care. 

You can do violence without it becoming too graphic.  take the Scene from the Anime where she rips her arms out trying to open the tank.  Since she is a robot if you don't have blood showing you can probably do that scene carefully editing it for PG-13, and even showing the effects of her pushing herself beyond her limits and her body.  That is one of the most important scenes in the movie, showing that the Major understood that she was more than her body...and  yet being a machine she does not have the same limits of a person.  It showed her detachment from the world as well. 

I personally, don't like to see excessive violence and I think it tends to lazy editing and storytelling.  It is a personal preference but one I try to hold true to.

[oohhboy]

It most certainly remove or diminish the consequences. PG-13: Person gets shot, he falls over, there is no hint of damage, there isn't a "Oh **** he's dead" moment, he's just some dude and maybe he will get up later or something.

You want your audience to go "Woah that's a bit much" which forces them to acknowledge the consequence of what has happened. It makes the you consider maybe there were some other solution to the conflict. There is a scene in the first movie where Togusa complains about the method used and the mess they made, mirroring the audience's reaction.

The tank scene didn't need blood at that point in time, they selectively excluded it. In this case blood would have detracted from showing how much of a robot she is. It also made the following scene more shocking as ultra violence shown throughout the movie as being absolutely "You are not coming back from this" level.

I am guessing your threshold for viewing fictional violence is much lower than mine. I am more willing to see it being used to it's full effect rather than shy away.

Violence is another tool to use for story telling. It is no more lazy than any other tool and open to misuse like everything else. Reducing the level of violence wouldn't be true to the source material anyway and was absolutely pivotal for a movie like Dredd. Just maybe this isn't a movie for you.

Looking at the trailer I think there will be an R as they are showing blood sprays even though they are white. They show Aramaki straight up finishes a guy off and the actor who plays him is famously in really violent movies. The Matrix got rated R and if the level of violence seen in the trailer holds up it would be an R. If they re going to get an R anyway you might as well use it to full effect. The rating board doesn't look kindly to lesbians so that is another R flag.

Besides, the R market is really under-served for quite a while only to be punctuated with films like District 9, Deadpool, John Wick, Hardcore Henry, Kingsmen and Dredd. There just aren't that many films of that type. Is this a movie that should not be PG-13.

PG-13 is an albatross that needs to be done away with. It makes cartoons out of violence and other mature content. It induces a self censorship effect. I ruins films that should have went for a higher rating.

[ThePerm]

It most certainly remove or diminish the consequences. PG-13: Person gets shot, he falls over, there is no hint of damage, there isn't a "Oh **** he's dead" moment, he's just some dude and maybe he will get up later or something.

You want your audience to go "Woah that's a bit much" which forces them to acknowledge the consequence of what has happened. It makes the you consider maybe there were some other solution to the conflict. There is a scene in the first movie where Togusa complains about the method used and the mess they made, mirroring the audience's reaction.

The tank scene didn't need blood at that point in time, they selectively excluded it. In this case blood would have detracted from showing how much of a robot she is. It also made the following scene more shocking as ultra violence shown throughout the movie as being absolutely "You are not coming back from this" level.

I am guessing your threshold for viewing fictional violence is much lower than mine. I am more willing to see it being used to it's full effect rather than shy away.

Violence is another tool to use for story telling. It is no more lazy than any other tool and open to misuse like everything else. Reducing the level of violence wouldn't be true to the source material anyway and was absolutely pivotal for a movie like Dredd. Just maybe this isn't a movie for you.

Looking at the trailer I think there will be an R as they are showing blood sprays even though they are white. They show Aramaki straight up finishes a guy off and the actor who plays him is famously in really violent movies. The Matrix got rated R and if the level of violence seen in the trailer holds up it would be an R. If they re going to get an R anyway you might as well use it to full effect. The rating board doesn't look kindly to lesbians so that is another R flag.

Besides, the R market is really under-served for quite a while only to be punctuated with films like District 9, Deadpool, John Wick, Hardcore Henry, Kingsmen and Dredd. There just aren't that many films of that type. Is this a movie that should not be PG-13.

PG-13 is an albatross that needs to be done away with. It makes cartoons out of violence and other mature content. It induces a self censorship effect. I ruins films that should have went for a higher rating.

I agree with everything you said Oohboy. I had a similar discussion with Spak-Spang had a about Luke Cage. I think you said it much better than I did. When people sanitize violence in movies it can hamper their artistic integrity. Not everyone wants to do the James Bond or Star Wars style. Sometimes the level of violence can be integral to the storytelling. This is an adult oriented story, changing it to a pg-13 is aiming the content for kids.

here is a film analysis of Saving Private Ryan, a movie that as the movie progresses becomes less violent.

also, if you've ever seen Fury. I don't think any movie makes a point about the horrors of war than having to clean the gibs of your predecessors face off of the inside of a tank.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Live Action Winnie the Pooh on the way - Christopher Robin
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/marc-forster-direct-disneys-live-action-winnie-pooh-movie-948831

Boy is all grown up, and must rediscover his imagination in this live action adaption.

[nickmitch]

I. . .I don't think I want this. . .

[Stratos]

This would be the film everyone of us talked about at some point in our young adult lives, but no one ever thought would get made. And there is a reason it would never get made. I do not have high hopes for it.

[BlackNMild2k1]

So who remembers all the Live Remakes Disney has confirmed so far?

Beauty and the Beast is coming soon.
Christopher Robin (Winnie the Pooh) mentioned above
Mulan I believe was confirmed as well
I remember reading something about The Lion King
I think I even read something about a script for Dumbo too....

We've already had Alice in Wonderland, Maleficent (Sleeping Beauty), Cinderella, and Jungle Book.
technically we've already had Peter Pan in Hook, and 101 Dalmations too.
Oh, and we just had Pete's Dragon, which I still have yet to see.

I think it would have been awesome to get an Aladdin w/ Robin Williams voicing the Genie (RIP).
I still think Aladdin could be a really fun one.

The Little Mermaid would be quite the challenge. They should hurry that one up and release it the week after Aquaman comes out, just for the LOL's.

I'm sure Tarzan is on hold for a while (thanks WB.... although I haven't seen their effort yet, it's sitting in front of my TV waiting for the day of it's viewing)

Pocahontas..... probably not gonna happen?

Hercules could be lots of fun as well. very clash of the titans... I'd watch it.

so what does that leave out?
Snow White? Call it The Seven Dwarves and marketing them as main characters sells the rest.
Pinocchio... it's been done (not by Disney), but I'm sure no one either watched it or remembers it.
Bambi.... if Jungle Book worked, and The Lion King also nails it... I guess Bambi might work too.
Hunchback of Notre Dame. I have nothing on this one. call it Esmeralda, and go from there?

[Spak-Spang]

Aladdin could still be made with Robin Williams voice.  The Genie is going to be CGI...or should, and they could easily just use the lines we already have for Genie already recorded.  Sure that would mean you have to be careful writing the script...because the Genie's lines won't change...but is that really a problem?

[nickmitch]

Guys, the obvious solution is to go to the other big time Hollywood experienced actor who's played a genie:

[ThePerm]

Pocahontas: The movie I thought was stupid and horribly inaccurate in 5th grade.

The Lion King - Only if Nathan Lane continues to voice Timon.

[Stratos]

Disney was working on a version of Snow White in 2012 called Order of the Seven. It was slated to release shortly after those other recent Snow White movies did (Snow White and the Huntsman, Mirror Mirror) but production delays and other financial issues led to it being cancelled. A pity because it looked to be the best of the three with an Asian Kung-Fu theme.

Purportedly there are two different Snow Whites being prepared by Disney now. A classic retelling like Beauty and the Beast, and a "sidequel" called Rose Red starring Snow White's sister which has her going on a quest with Grumpy the dwarf to find a cure to Snow White's curse.