This is going to be the best film of 2010

Hopefully. But I think the intro and end of the trailer are fairly weak.

Then you have no soul. The calm intro is a deliberate decision so that the outlandish stuff stands out more. It’s a common trait for comedy trailers.

Either that or you have ADD and all that gentle talking didn’t sate your need to see whizzing colours all the time forever.

Or, someone has a different opinion to you.

IMPOSSIBLE.

I have a different opinion to you.

That does look great. Like Kick-Ass I haven’t been paying much attention to it and I’m now excited to both close to release date. Makes a nice change from 2009 after all that time waiting for Avatar and Watchmen.

Speaking of Kick-Ass, I’m impressed by your page on Rotten Tomatoes Seb.

I don’t doubt that it will be great, but the trailer left me cold.

Based on that alone, I don’t know how excited I’d be. My (intense) optimism right now comes from Wright at the helm, the strength of the source material, and the overall choice of actors…rather than anything I actually saw in that trailer.

Still though, I can’t say I disagree with the title of this thread.

Yeah, I get a good feel for what the film will be like from that trailer and it makes me look forward to it…but I didn’t find it particularly funny.

Then you have no soul. The calm intro is a deliberate decision so that the outlandish stuff stands out more. It’s a common trait for comedy trailers.

Either that or you have ADD and all that gentle talking didn’t sate your need to see whizzing colours all the time forever.

Oh, at last you’re talking to me. I knew we’d make it up.

It’s because it’s a common trait that I found the intro weak. I’m sure it’s to appeal to a wider audience but it comes across as just another wacky comedy when I think the ‘swerve’ could have gotten away with a bit more subtlety. Just a bit. Unless They’ve ditched that in the adaptation anyway. ;)

And the outro voice is just Rob Schneider trailers from South Park quality to my ear. AND it spoils the seven evil exes.

Michael Cera derp derp derpi derpi derp.

The best film of 2010? I dunno, this is the year that Kick-Ass, Four Lions and Inception come out…

I read the first volume of the comic earlier this week. (I’d actually only requested an inter-library loan of it, but they decided to buy it to add to their stock. Which was nice.) Really enjoyed it, and I hear the comic only gets better after that…

Also, remember this? In the same way that Shaun of the Dead was an expanded version of Spaced’s Resident Evil scene, maybe Scott Pilgrim’s fights could be seen as the logical conclusion of that scene’s use of videogame iconography? (The “KO!” is straight from Street Fighter Alpha 3!)

Can’t comment on the casting of Cera as I haven’t seen any of his other films. In fact I haven’t seen any of this recent batch of post-Juno movies (the likes of (500) Days of Summer) which cause people to derisively throw around terms like “quirky” and “hipster” and “Sonic Youth”… ;)

>Speaking of Kick-Ass, I’m impressed by your page on Rotten Tomatoes Seb.

I DID NOT KNOW OF THIS. I’m a “Top Critic”, apparently. Aces.

> Also, remember this? In the same way that Shaun of the Dead was an expanded version of Spaced’s Resident Evil scene, maybe Scott Pilgrim’s fights could be seen as the logical conclusion of that scene’s use of videogame iconography? (The “KO!” is straight from Street Fighter Alpha 3!)

Erm, you might want to read more of the comics.

I know that Scott Pilgrim’s overlaying of videogame graphics is taken from the comics, I just meant it ties in nicely to the “Daisy Steiner wins” that Wright had done previously. And the Street Fighter KO reference was to the sound effect.

What am I missing? :-/

Edgar Wright’s also reposted this frame-by-frame analysis done by Gamervision. Seems a little bit spoilery, in its listing of exes’ names and the origin of Scott’s sword…
http://www.edgarwrighthere.com/2010/03/frame-by-frame-scott-pilgrim-vs-t...

Saw Kick-Ass tonight. Great film. Definitely go to see it.

>Yeah, I get a good feel for what the film will be like from that trailer and it makes me look forward to it…but I didn’t find it particularly funny.

This.

If the trailer for a comedy doesn’t make me laugh, then it will have a difficult time trying to get me to watch the film itself.

I like the look of it, it didn’t make me outwardly guffaw but it did produce a chuckle within my mind. I’ll definitely be seeing it.

LOL, that looks like it will be marvelous…thanks for the link…;)

-K

New trailer!

Almost makes up for the news about Guillermo del Toro is stepping down as director of The Hobbit. :( Though he’ll still be working on the scripts for now, and presumably much of his influence on the production design will be retained by whoever takes over.

Yeah, this trailer gets me much more excited than the other one did. Should definitely be a very interesting film.

Dare I say it? The game looks even better than the film!

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2889&p=.htm

I’m afraid the American Box Office for Scott Pilgrim was a bit shit.

This is because American tastes are a bit shit. Everyone went to see a film with Dolph Lundgren in it.

In fairness, I don’t think The Expendables stole much of Scott Pilgrim’s target audience. I doubt the potential viewers for either film were flipping coins over which of the two to see.

I’d see both.

Also, most people who wanted to see it in the US have seen it for free at previews.

Also, its market clearly isn’t “opening weekend big bucks”. Despite the massive promo push, it’s a pretty cult thing. It’ll do extremely well on DVD.

It’s fucking awesome, by the way. Review to follow on Film4 shortly. But I will admit I was wrong - it’s not the best film of 2010. Toy Story 3 is.

>Also, most people who wanted to see it in the US have seen it for free at previews.

Most people? Really?

Agreed though. It’ll be huge on DVD.

> it’s not the best film of 2010. Toy Story 3 is.

No arguments there, though Inception gives a it a bloody good run for its money.

I think the highest praise I can give Toy Story 3, is that it’s better than Toy Story 2.

Yeah. I wasn’t quite sure of where it fell after the first viewing, but after a second, I’d say it’s the best of the three. Which I never expected to be the case.

The bit where they all held hands…awww, fuck.

> The bit where they all held hands…awww, fuck.

There was no dialogue for a really disconcerting amount of time, especially for an animated film - very powerful.

And the moment when Andy finally lets go. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

> And the moment when Andy finally lets go. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

That’s such an amazing moment because it’s raw, emotionally true, something every person can feel and relate to. Even if the rest of the film didn’t affect someone they’d have to be coooold not to at least well up in those final minutes.

Pixar really know how to get you right there… The opening 5-10 minutes of Up, for example, so beautiful and poignant, and most of it a montage without dialogue.

> The opening 5-10 minutes of Up, for example, so beautiful and poignant, and most of it a montage without dialogue.

I saw Up on the plane to New York when it first came out so a lot of the passengers were watching it. That opening montage really got me and the husband - and there were plenty of sniffles to be heard on the plane during those early scenes!

The balloon floating in to old Ellie’s bed…for me that is the single best moment in Up and maybe any Pixar film.

Well I managed to see Scott Pilgrim at a preview the other day and it was very strange but also very fucking cool.
But anyway, the best film of 2010 was Kick-Ass.

Kick-Ass was indeed a very good film, and I’ll fight many people to the death who say otherwise.

Inception was a fucking masterpiece. I’ve seen it twice in theaters (something I never do, unless it’s Wes Anderson…) and will gladly watch it many more times on DVD.

I expect I will, at the very least, very much enjoy Scott Pilgrim. I’ll know for sure this weekend.

Saw Pilgrim last night - it was absolutely amazing. Up there with Inception and Toy Story 3 as my faves of the year so far, no question. Ed Wright - can you do no wrong?!

I’d love to see Inception. I was hoping to go see it with my mate. However now that the special edition of Avatar is showing on Imax, I think she’s got her head set on that instead.

I’ve seen the original (she actually leant it to me on DVD) and although I largely liked it* I’m not all that fussed seeing a new version, especially as I understand the new footage adds little if anything to the story. I wouldn’t mind the full 3-D experience though, and if she wants to see it I certainly won’t complain.

But I’d rather see Inception. (Sure we can see both, but I have to be a bit careful with how much I spend at the moment.)

*I agree it’s largely overrated though. But it isn’t bad!

3D or no 3D, Inception is definatly the better film, and by quite a long way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BitByGeWGxU

I’m watching In Bruges at the moment. It’s the first time I’ve seen it, and so far it’s pretty good.

Cracking film, is that.

It was too!

I’m not too clear why he went back to the hotel to get his revolver though considering
(Minor spoilers but it’s not really an issue being out of context.)

a) He grabbed that pistol from his mate. A better gun too, and

b) There was someone on his tail.

If it was to remove the trail I’d understand ‘a’ but taking ‘b’ into account, you’d think it would be bet to take the chance and get away as quickly as possible. I probably just missed something though. (Or he just wasn’t being very bright, which is in character.)

Apart from that, it was very good. Amazing how a film can pull on such a range of emotions too, being extremely funny one moment, heart rending the next.

> a) He grabbed that pistol from his mate. A better gun too, and

Wasn’t the pistol all smashed up though?

I think 99% of people will agree that this will be the best film of 2010.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDpYND4-xFQ

Smeg4Brains wins.

Allow me to gripe that I’m not in the UK in October and I’ve never seen BttF in the cinemas. The BDs will have to suffice. Boo.

Ps. In Bruges is fantastic.

> Ps. In Bruges is fantastic.

This.

>Wasn’t the pistol all smashed up though?

That would explain it…. (Completely missed that. Obviously.)

I think 99% of people will agree that this will be the best film of 2010.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDpYND4-xFQ

Oh, I’ve gone all funny again. Why can’t they release all three in a marathon or something.

Hey you, get your damn hands off her…

The BTTF music is enough to get me fired up, it makes my spine tingle! Even the Huey Lewis music (which I know some people absolutely hate) gives me chills. Seriously, does a more perfect movie exist??

No.

No.

This.

I can’t believe I actually copied and pasted that in order to quote it :)

Okay maybe there IS one flaw - how perfect Marty’s family is at the end. It’s not a huge gripe but even after all that happens it still feels like Marty has it all handed to him, it’s almost like cheating, not earned.

My alternative version would be…Marty returns and everything is exactly the same as it was. However, he opens the garage door and, to his amazement, the 4x4 is sitting there. George then appears and says that he was hoping it was gonna be a surprise. Marty asks how he could afford the car and George goes to a box in the garage and pulls out the sci-fi novel, it pans down to reveal the name ‘George McFly’. George then says ‘a good friend of mine once told me, if you put your mind to it you can accomplish anything…’

> it still feels like Marty has it all handed to him, it’s almost like cheating, not earned.

Now you come to mention it, I’d quite like to punch Marty in the face.

I saw Scott Pilgrim today. Bloody marvellous. Also, my girlfriend has Synesthesia and she says this movie overloaded her brain. But in a good way.

>Now you come to mention it, I’d quite like to punch Marty in the face.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpNtbyz3DEE

I always thought that with the whole causality thing Marty’s perfect family at the end would mean that Marty would come back different (richer, more like he hadn’t been raised by an alcoholic mother and a spineless father) although the time travel rules in Back to the Future have never really followed logic rigorously.

Strange that he’s still living in the same house, really, even if it has got nicer furniture.

Nope, BTTF is basically perfect.

Aaaand I’m going to a press screening on Thursday. Lovely stuff.

(That said, after a second viewing, I’m still completely in lesbians with Scott Pilgrim)

Okay maybe there IS one flaw - how perfect Marty’s family is at the end. It’s not a huge gripe but even after all that happens it still feels like Marty has it all handed to him, it’s almost like cheating, not earned.

My alternative version would be…Marty returns and everything is exactly the same as it was. However, he opens the garage door and, to his amazement, the 4x4 is sitting there. George then appears and says that he was hoping it was gonna be a surprise. Marty asks how he could afford the car and George goes to a box in the garage and pulls out the sci-fi novel, it pans down to reveal the name ‘George McFly’. George then says ‘a good friend of mine once told me, if you put your mind to it you can accomplish anything…’

In terms of the overall message, though, is your way any different from the actual film? At the end of the day, George McFly becomes a successful author precisely because Marty told him that. Marty had a positive impact on his father’s life, and as a result was able to reap the rewards. I’m not sure it’s “unearned” at all.

Well you can’t have Marty’s jaunt in the past having no effect at all. I just think it would be better if it was more subtle. George and Lorraine would act exactly the same as at the start of the film. Maybe it could be played that George always had written the book even without Marty’s involvement in the past.

Unsurprisingly - given that we’re taking about changes to the only Oscar-nominated sci-fi-comedy screenplay in film history - I don’t much care for the mooted alternative ending.

The family’s set up as one full of issues precisely because it’s going to be solved at the end. If you’re not planning that ending, you don’t write the mother as a drunk, the dad as a nervous drip, the kids as drop-outs and losers. The end’s built into the start - you don’t change one, you change both.

Or, preferably, neither.

George McFly buying the same house is within the (admittedly nonsensical) rules BTTF choses to establish - there’s never any question that getting his parents back together will cause Marty and his siblings to be born, and be born the same, despite that being unlikely in a ‘real’ buttefly-effect time travel situation. Old man Peabody’s farm gets turned into the same (name aside) mall despite an ‘alien landing’ on the premises in the 50s.

Time’s a hardy thing in BTTF, and it has a whiff of destiny about it.

But why would George become a novelist…then keep it from his family? To buy Marty a 4x4 down the line? How about paying for Elaine’s rehab and straightening the kids out?

The change suggests that ‘Marty’s life getting better’ is the goal of the film. But it’s also about happy-ever-afters for George and Elaine. They were, however unwittingly, with Marty on his journey to solve the future. They get rewarded too for doing the right thing.

That gain isn’t financial, it’s not about paying for a car. It’s emotional - George’s sense of self-respect and confidence, Elaine’s happiness in ‘choosing’ a hero rather than marrying for pity. Kids raised in a happier environment, Marty able to talk to his parents about who he’s dating rather than hide it. All that stuff.

You’d have to take those issue out of the script, too, for the suggested new present-day ending. And since all those things are woven into the film in the early set-up and represent the character arcs for the bulk of the secondary characters, to take them out would be to collapse most of what makes BTTF such a strong character piece.

Listen to this dude Andrew, he knows what he’s talking about.

Apart from the Elaine bit, obviously.

Why the hell did I type ‘Elaine’?! OVER AND OVER AGAIN?!

a) The promised Seinfeld/BTTF crossover is finally happening.

b) Fucking idiocy.

Darn it, Pete, you had to get in there first… (methinks th’Ellard had Seinfeld on his mind) and Seb, how dare you bring a Bill & Ted reference into this!! *stamps foot*

Btw Andrew, just because BTTF’s screenplay was Oscar-nommed doesn’t make it right!

Okay…the original ending obviously works really well in terms of viewing it as a pure entertainment piece (if it doesn’t give you that warm fuzzy feeling you are cold, so very cold), which, duh, BTTF is meant to be. If you went with my ending (which btw I’ve just emailed to the two Bobs to get their feedback), or one similar, you definitely would have to change how George and Lorraine are at the start, as well as the way Marty views them, both in the present and the past. You would end up converting the whole thing into an afternoon family drama more concerned with ‘daddy issues’ payoffs than the sheer fun of BTTF’s story and setup. Suddenly it all becomes less entertaining, less interesting, more shit…*sigh*

‘I figured…what the hell!’ is my favourite moment. It sums up the whole screenplay, if you think about it. You can poke holes in it left right and centre but what the two Zemeckis and Gale blatantly understood (and you can tell it’s where loads of writers go wrong) is that they were not writing Shakespeare, they were having a lot of fun with clever ideas. RTD is also pretty good at this, even though he gets the shit ripped out of him for even daring to write with that attitude.

> Btw Andrew, just because BTTF’s screenplay was Oscar-nommed doesn’t make it right!

I feel I have been taught a valuable lesson. Thank you.

Why the hell did I type ‘Elaine’?! OVER AND OVER AGAIN?!

a) The promised Seinfeld/BTTF crossover is finally happening.

b) Fucking idiocy.

You are her density.

You’ve only got to look at Hot Tub Time Machine’s shoddy conclusion, to realise that BTTF’s ending is pretty much perfect.

There’s really only one thing I’d dare change about the film and that is:

“Lorraine, if you ever have a kid that acts that way, I’ll disown you”

I HATE that line!

God that is a bad line. I also don’t like the TV conversation, ‘what do you mean you’ve seen this? it’s brand new…’ It’s one of the few parts where the dialougue’s hitting your over the head rather than letting you enjoy it. Also…’who the hell is John F. Kennedy??’ cringe!

Yeah, if someone said a name to me that I didn’t know I would just nod sagely.

Sigh.

…and now Scott Pilgrim’s not in theaters anymore. At least not by me.

Mother pusbucket.

I saw Scott Pilgrim vs. The World a few weeks ago, the day it came out in UK cinemas if I remember correctly, and I effin’ loved it! Want to see it again! Just genious, beautiful work from Edgar Wright IMO.

Saw it for the fourth time last night, and it was just as amazing as the second and third time! The first time gets an extra point though, seeing as I wasn’t waiting for Matthew Patel to show up. Not that the beginning of the film is in any way boring or unfunny, I just love Matthew Patel.

I still can’t get over the fact that Kieran Culkin (the bed-wetter from Home Alone 1 & 2) plays Scott’s gay roommate. He was great in it!

Fuller, go easy on the Pepsi!

I saw K Culkin years ago onstage, he was great (and I believe he was very good in Igby Goes Down, though I’ve never seen it). Clearly the most talented Culkin, and yeah, he’s brilliant in SP.

(well done, gnun, you win with four - so far the most I’ve known anyone do, me included, is three. And one of those was free.)

A friend of mine recently gave me a copy of Igby Goes Down, still have yet to watch it, maybe tonight or some point this week. She said “…and BE HONEST” when I let her know what I think of Igby, so I’m guessing it’s one of those flicks you either love or hate.

>I saw K Culkin years ago onstage, he was great

Me too, he was in Our Nation’s Youth and stole the show.

That’s the one! All three were great (I’ve been a big fan of Colin Hanks ever since, too - odd seeing him pop up in the season two ep of Mad Men I’ve just watched), but he especially stood out. Was pleased when he was cast as Wallace, and he didn’t disappoint.

Except now that I think about it, wasn’t it called This Is Our Youth?

>Except now that I think about it, wasn’t it called This Is Our Youth?

Yes, you’re absolutely right.

The only line I remember was Culkin’s character opening a door for the female character and saying: “Chivalry isn’t dead, it just smells funny”.

The night I saw it, Colin Hanks’ dad was in and in the interval a ripple went through the audience and they spent the next twenty minutes craning to see him.

Trailer of the year? I think so.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uco41pOKeJg

Wouldn’t go that far, but it looks pretty strong. I’d always rather the Coens be writing original stuff than doing adaptations, though.

Also, here’s a gripe of mine - Matt Damon is not an Academy Award Winner(TM) for acting. He’s an Academy Award Winner(TM) for writing. Therefore, if he’s acting in your film, and not writing, and you call him “Academy Award Winner(TM) Matt Damon” in the trailer, it’s MISLEADING. That is all.

(I mean, I like Matt Damon. That just annoys me.)

To be fair, I think Damon is well known enough for it not to be a deciding factor for the majority of cinema goers. I doubt anyone would go see a Matt Damon movie on the basis of his being advertised as an Oscar winner, only to later find out he actually won his Oscar for writing and feel cheated and betrayed.

I totally agree with you on principle, though. I hate misleading advertising of any kind. For example, don’t even get me started on these “unlimited” mobile phone packages… which have “fair use policy caps” and are, therefore, y’know… limited. That kinda shit should be outlawed!

While No Country For Old Men was a tad overrated (okay maybe I’m still annoyed that There Will Be Blood didn’t pick up Best Picture…bastard from a basket!) True Grit does look like something to get excited about (Jeff Bridges = teh won).

Trailer of the year? You’ve gotta be frakkin kidding me!

Also, if only for the Eddie Olmos…