Forum - View topicNEWS: Cameron Talks About Battle Angel
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Tenchi
 Posts: 4469 Location: Ottawa... now I'm an ex-Anglo Montrealer. |
|
|||
|
I doubt Leonardo DiCaprio will be in it, since sci-fi isn't really his oeuvre, but I think DiCaprio is a fairly decent actor. He was perfectly cast in Catch Me If You Can, one of my top three movies of 2002 (along with Lilo & Stitch and About Schmidt), and I like what I've seen of him thus far as Howard Hughes in The Aviator. (And my brother thinks The Beach is a vastly underrated film, though I thought it was just weird myself.)
|
||||
|
||||
Andre Linoge
 Posts: 19 |
|
|||
If Titanic is that high on your list of the worst movies ever then you really haven't seen many movies. The Titanic disaster is one of the most ironic and dramatic events in all history. It was the event that shattered the faith of an era that felt it had solved all the world's problems. Its a true life allegory about man's fallibility and his arrogance and the flaws with a blind faith in the power of technology to overcome all obstacles, who can't appreciate that. I have faith that Cameron can make a good movie with Battle Angel. |
||||
|
||||
|
Aaron White
Old Regular
Posts: 1365 Location: Birmingham, Alabama |
|
|||
|
Just because a movie is about a weighty subject doesn't mean it's a weighty or good film. I thought Titantic was very good at some things and really bad at others, but was neither good enough to be a great film nor bad enough to be dismissed as a bad film. I'm sure Cameron will make a visually stunning film that will cost enough to feed every starving child in the world for a year. If he makes it. Beyond that, I dunno.
|
||||
|
||||
Glory Questor
 Posts: 456 |
|
|||
|
I agree with the "wait for the details" people.
Cameron is a good enough director to do some justice to a live-action Battle Angel. But, if it's going to be based on the beginning of the GUNNM series ... ADV already published that. It's in the can and done. Cameron should focus a bit more on an overall story that the two-OAV Battle Angel didn't go over -- more on the mystery of who Gally used to be. (Also, he should consider following the Lord of the Rings tactic, and make a movie that can be long enough to remain true to the manga, while cutting it down into multi-movies. I feel the manga story is both interesting enough and has enough material for them to do this -- they just need to take a chance, stick to a solid story, and just do it.) |
||||
|
||||
|
jsyxx
|
|
|||
|
Titanic was a bit too chick-flickish for me. I don't really like the movie either. I won't say its bad though. And perhaps, Cameron was just out of his element.
|
||||
|
Tenchi
Posts: 4469 Location: Ottawa... now I'm an ex-Anglo Montrealer. |
|
|||
|
I think, at best, they'll make one and have open contingency plans for the sequels should the first one not flop at the box office.
I don't think they'll risk shooting several films of an untested (with a general audience) franchise simultaneously like with LOTR, because, umm, preexisting fan base for LOTR > (* 100) preexisting fan base for BAA And that's probably an underestimate on LOTR's side. |
||||
|
||||
Haiseikoh 1973
 Posts: 1590 Location: Waiting for the Japanese 1000 Gunieas. |
|
|||
So what does having hot steamy sex in a Model T Doctors Coupe have to do with 1,400+ people dying? |
||||
|
||||
|
GATSU
Posts: 15306 |
|
|||
|
Speaking of pointless sex scenes, I always wondered why Kyle Reese bangs Sarah Conner, because it means John Conner won't be born, and won't be able to help send Reese into the past, assuming Reese is also born in the remade future. But who cares about paradoxes when you can see T&A in-between things blowing up?
|
||||
|
||||
|
Steventheeunuch
|
|
|||
John Conner is the son of Kyle and Sarah. (and if not... condoms perhaps?) |
||||
|
GATSU
Posts: 15306 |
|
|||
|
That doesn't make sense though, because John and Kyle are roughly the same age in the future.
|
||||
|
||||
|
ZODDGUTS
Posts: 600 |
|
|||
|
Dam people I can't believe that your comparing James Cameron to that shitty director Paul W. Anderson.
Give the film a chane this won't be titanic type of film. Cameron is going back to his "roots" by that I mean a movie that has sci fi+ action+strong female lead character which is Cameron's style of movie that he used to make Aliens,Terminator 1 and 2 and True Lies. 
Cameron has commented if the movie is succesful there will be at least two sequels so I see the movie ending open ended for a possible sequel. So I hope the movie does end up being a success. |
||||
|
||||
Proman
 Posts: 947 Location: USA |
|
|||
What's with all the Cameron bashing? I don't care what you think about "Titanic" (in my opinion it was a great movie, except I didn't like the first part of it), he's a talented director who made some great action movies ("Terminator 2", "Aliens"). He might have a big ego and you might not like his movies but calling him a hack is not only uncalled for, it shows that you have no idea what makes a good director. Either way, it's too early to know how good or bad this movie will be. By the way, Cameron had nothing to do with either "AvP" or "RE" movies. Try Paul W.S. Anderson. He's an anime fan too (he especially liked "Ghost in the Shell"), so maybe he'll stay true to the manga. I'm willing to give this movie a chance.
And this is BS because...? I suggest next time you try to provide some support for your arguments. Why should I doubt he at least "wants" to do another "Alien" movie? Besides, making a movie can mean many things (directing, producing, etc...). Just my 2 cents. |
||||
|
||||
|
Andre Linoge
Posts: 19 |
|
|||
|
A scene that lasted barely half a minute. Dear God Cameron should be drawn and quartered for it. Its a fictionalization of the event like Gone with the Wind fictionalized Gettysburg, and its not even the first to do this. Cameron did the best he could with the historical aspects while still maintaning the fictional plotline. He certainly did better than most. Take, for example, the 1953 film with Clifton Webb. Historically speaking, this movie is a joke. It didn't even have roles assigned for such key figures as Ismay or Thomas Andrews. When the ship strikes the berg it simply sinks. There is nothing about the arrogance nor anything about the complacency, not a whisper about how Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable. Just the Sturgess family and their troubles along with 1950's ragtime music and the Titanic exploding as she sinks. I won't even go into the 1996 miniseries, also a fictionalization, with its rapetastic perfromance by Tim Curry along with George C. Scott's Pattonesque portrayal of Captain Smith.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Haiseikoh 1973
Posts: 1590 Location: Waiting for the Japanese 1000 Gunieas. |
|
|||
Before the discovery of the Titanic wreckage in 1985, there was alot of debate on whether the ship sank "intact" or broke into two (as correctly portrayed in the movie  ). Some of the Titanic survivors were even at odds over how the ship went down before the discovery.
One clip of 7 Titanic Survivors from the 1970's had all of them state without fail that "Titanic Sank Intact." But some survivors countered that Titanic sank in two. The 1953 film was more or less based on such info and given enough "artistic license" to make 4Kids entertainment proud. |
||||
|
||||
|
Andre Linoge
Posts: 19 |
|
|||
It is true that the general belief before the discovery in 1985 was that Titanic had sank in one piece. That was why people thought they could raise the ship by stuffing her full of ping pong balls (don't think anyone ever worked out how many it would take though). Yet, even with that uncertainty, the 1953 film was more artistic license than historic fact. It is even more unforgiveable when a mere 5 years later the British make A Night to Remember based on the same currently available information about the disaster. It didn't have the boilers exploding near the end, no passengers on deck covered in soot from blasts below deck, and definitely didn't have Robert Wagner doing the Navajo Rag. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group