Cinematical

They showed two full scenes at comic con (about 10-15 minutes worth) and it looked pretty fun. I figured it'd be R -- the car chase scene is pretty intense and McAvoy drops a few F-bombs along the way.

The only parts that have me iffy is when they slow the speed down on a close-up of McAvoy's face. Those shots just made me laugh.

Reply

FYI, Hitman was rated PG-13 during its theatrical run (the DVD was unrated, IIRC).

Reply

this movie will just make the money because it got angelina jolie on it, and the legions and legions and legions of fans she have will see anything she puts out(ujuh!!!), but for the few that we have read the original source material for this hyperkinetic action romp, this is a travesty.just the fact that there is no similarity whatsoever, will put me and a few people i know away from this one.

Reply

First, I LIKED Hitman. Quite a bit actually. And it was definitely R-rated, if for nothing else than the full frontal nudity and sexuality.

The trailer was for this wasn't that great, and it was a sensory assault. But it still looks 3 and 1/2 times better than Speed Racer to me.

Reply

If this movie looked any worse it'd be called Sex in the City and I'd develop breasts during the trailer.

Reply

Maybe I just like campy movies, but this movie like Shoot 'em Up just looks fun. (Btw Shoot 'em up had great swag. At DragonCon they gave out things like pacifiers.) Oh and I liked Hitman as well. And yes I have played the games.

Reply

I'm about 50% convinced that the movie could be mindless summer fun, but every time they get to explaining 'curving bullets' I giggle like a little schoolgirl -- and that is probably not the reaction they were going for.

Reply

I was a big fan of the comics, but this I don't know about watching. Originally the main charactor could just shoot real good not curve his bullets. Him and his new friends were all villians that had killed all of the superheroes. The villians were the ones secretly in charge of the world.

Reply

The problem I, and many others I talked with, have with the movie is it looks like it doesn't think it's way over-the-top. The action is ridiculous but the dialogue and tone aren't. It seems like it's taking itself far too seriously for how absurd "curving bullets" are. It worked in The Matrix because that took place not only in an alternate future reality but an artificial reality within that alternate reality.

This, not able to fall back on that, needs the right tone to not be stupidly insulting. The trailers lacked that tone.

Reply

The original theatrical preview was a real grabber and created a great deal of positive buzz in the packed theatre I was in the first time I saw it. It is always encouraging when this genre of movie has actors in it that can actually act and director's with imaginative style (as evidenced in Night Watch & Day Watch). Subsequent trailers have heightened the promise of the first substantially. I find all the prejudging and false purist posturing somewhat annoying. Maybe it will suck/maybe it will be a blast but it certainly deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Reply

The filmmakers adapted the film based on only reading the first issue of the comic. Then when they saw where the rest of the story led to, (something original and challenging) they decided to diverge from the source material completely. This is going to be a lame mess.

Reply

I personally wanna know what caused Hancock to be rated R!

Reply

This is the ugliest I have seen her look and no it is not worth the money.... disappointing movie after movie... please retire and raise your kids!

Reply

First we get more false purist posturing from Lane who is willing to dismiss a film without having seen it and then blady02 writes some fiction about the ugliness of Angelina Jolie. Well, if that's ugly then I guess I'm into ugly. About her disappointing work, her performance in A Mighty Heart towers over anything you folks seem to blather about on these blogs. Listen, I am familar with the source material as anyone here and probably twice the fan of it. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate this film or discover that it is something else to be passionate about. You can't just declare something lame until you've actually experienced it. The day after it's release I may be the most vocal voice deriding this film. As of today, it is a film, based on the previews I have seen and the filmmaking talent involved, that I am excited about seeing.

Reply

The Night/Day Watch movies were non-admitting vampire/monster/supernatural movies. Very different from the books in which the characters were very specifically identified as sorcerors, changelings and the like. in the movies none of these terms is even mentioned and I think someone says the word vampire once.

I think Timur is kinda going the same way with Wanted, its a superhero (supervillain actually) movie where no one admits to being, or is identified as, superhuman. Despite Jimmy MaC bending bullets and shooting the wings of flys.

The comic in its raw form would never have worked as a movie anyway, there were far to many in jokes and obscure comic references, the things that made it most enjoyable, to translate well. Plus the comic was uber-nasty with a racist, rapist mass murdering 'hero' who looked like Eminem, ie. someone impossibly to connect with as a movie audience.

Reply

Thanks AJ. I appreciate an intelligently thought out observation. There were many things about the Day/Night Watch films that made them an improvement over the source material. There were things I would have liked to have seen represented in the movies but that didn't prevent me from truly appreciating what Timur did in those films.

Reply