QuoteReplyTopic: Forum Members' DISCUSSION of RED RIDING HOOD... Posted: March 11 2011 at 2:46pm
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn
Better Amanda Seyfried movie: "Chloe". Watch it on Netflix and enjoy the sheer awesome of Amanda being naked and having hot lesbian sex with my favorite MILF, Julianne Moore.
I don't have pet peeves, I have major psychotic f**king hatreds! George Carlin
Better Amanda Seyfried movie: "Chloe". Watch it on Netflix and enjoy the sheer awesome of Amanda being naked and having hot lesbian sex with my favorite MILF, Julianne Moore.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
The R.T. concensus(7%)is in:"Amanda Seyfried is magnetic in RED RIDING HOOD's starring role, but she's let down by her uninspired leading men and a painfully cliched script".Does this mean she won't be in the ballots?
Also,both Roger Ebert and Peter Travers gave this */****.
Yeah, I realized Oldman was technically a nominee before, but don't really count that as much. I was referring to "major" nods like Worst Actor or Supporting Actor, which he is eligible for in this case.
Originally posted by oiram
Does anyone else wonder if this movie will get Gary Oldman his first Razzie nom?
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Since he was co-nominated with both Demi Moore and Robert Duvall for Worst Screen Couple in 1995's RAZZIE® "winning" remake of THE SCARLET LETTER (IMdb LINK) this would possibly garner Oldmanhis second RAZZIE® nom...
Elizabeth Hartman and Judith Barsi are much more talented and beautiful than Scarlett Johansson and Chloe Grace Moretz. Fact.
27 Years has a point -- it's not wrong to adapt fairy tales ... if not for the fact that the "modern" adaptations almost always SUCK. I would be fine with Hollywood remaking them, so long as they actually bothered remaking them WELL instead of just sleepwalking through the motions!
Originally posted by 27years
I don't think there is anything wrong with having fairy-tales adapted for modern audiences. Will they be any good? I don't know...but I'm looking forward to seeing them as individual efforts and judging for myself!
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
I don't think there is anything wrong with having fairy-tales adapted for modern audiences. Will they be any good? I don't know...but I'm looking forward to seeing them as individual efforts and judging for myself!
Oiram & GTAhater: I knew about them, and I somehow saw the first Hoodwinked. I think it will all depend on how widely this will be released, and what other films will be released the same week.
Oh and Oiram, I think Hood-Winked 2 would do just a little worse with critics than RRH. But I am not good at predicting these things...
To oiram: Nobody knows about the Hoodwinked movies. I'd say skip over it unless it gets 0% at Rotten Tomatoes.
To Mr. Burn: I'm equally worried about all these fairy tale adaptations as I am about movies named after folk rhymes, one directed by the dreaded Dennis Dugan, coming this autumn!
To Vits: I'd say the creepy house says very little about the art direction.
RAZZIE Dirty Dozen: Battlefield Earth, F G Fingered, Pluto Nash, A Sound of Thunder, Alone in the Dark, Dirty Love, Rise Silver Srfr, Daddy Day Camp, IKWKM, The Love Guru, All About Steve, Airbender
That was the studios giving her a little creative control "gift" for the Oscar nods that "Thirteen" got.
Originally posted by Vits
Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn
It's clear she's only given projects that feature female leads because it's a niche market, but it seems such projects are always poorly written.
What about THE LORDS OF DOGTOWN?
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Miguel -- Dude -- give it up with the "Twilight" comparisons! How many times do I have to tell you, Hollywood had been doing movies about werewolves for DECADES before the "Twilight" books were even published. Same goes with love triangles. These are not cliches that Stephenie Meyer invented 6 years ago, they have been around almost since storytelling was first created.
I mean if there are movies to blame for this one, they are the recent "Alice And Wonderland", which because of it's success, there's a slew of fairy tale movies in the works, and "The Wolfman", which just won an Oscar (although, granted, no one seriously cares about Best Make-Up).
Oh, and as for the not showing the wolf in previews thing, that's a near 40 year old lesson from "Jaws" ... don't show the monster right away, save it for later on. Funny thing is, the robot shark not working was the real reason why it wasn't shown on screen, but it's funny how Hollywood's genre rules are created like that.
Originally posted by MiguelAntilsu
I don't know where to begin here. There's the attempt to turn a Brothers Grimm story (that Disney hasn't touched) into a movie, there's a backstory for the characters, there are additional characters to add depth to the story, and there are two things that get my attention: 1) a werewolf serial killer and 2) a love triangle (the latter doesn't stand out as much as the former). I forgive them for only using two of Twilight's marketing ploys and I think the suspense element might override the romance element. The only thing I'm really worried about is that none of the trailers show us the wolf itself. I can't seem to figure whether they're trying to reserve the element of surprise or they're hiding something embarrassing from us (I know some trailers that do the latter).
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
I don't know where to begin here: There's the attempt to turn a Brothers Grimm story (that Disney hasn't touched) into a movie, there's a backstory for the characters, there are additional characters to add depth to the story, and there are two things that get my attention: 1) a werewolf serial killer and 2) a love triangle (the latter doesn't stand out as much as the former). I forgive them for only using two of Twilight's marketing ploys and I think the suspense element might override the romance element.
The only thing I'm really worried about is that none of the trailers show us the werewolf itself. I can't figure out whether they're trying to preserve an element of surprise, or they're hiding something embarrassing from us (Yes, I know trailers often do the latter).
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: I would say it's safe to assume they're not showing even a "flash frame" of their "werewolf" because it's not credible. Nothing else about this film's campaign has been even remotely subtle, so why should they be classy about that one element?!?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Share Topic
Printable Version
Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Furl
Google Boomarks
Google Buzz
MySpace
Newsvine
reddit
StumbleUpon
Twitter
Windows Live
Yahoo Bookmarks
Topic Search 
Topic Options
Post Options
Quote 
Topic: Forum Members' DISCUSSION of RED RIDING HOOD...
