Abduction
“Whatdya say we remake those Bourne movies with that kid from those, eh … Twilight movies? Yeah! No, not Robert Patterson (sic)! The other hunky one. Yeah. We just need to get a big director like Spike Lee! Oh, he’s not available. What about John Singleton? Yeah, that’s the stuff. And, uh, we’ll pack it with good actors like Alfred Molina and Sigourney Weaver! Big blockbusta on our hands!” – random movie exec. I’ll pass on this September 23. Abduction trailer

Real Steel
Pop quiz, Hollywood hot shot! What do you get when you combine the Fighter/Rocky/any other boxing movie with Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em Robots? Uh, the humorously named Real Steel apparently. From the trailer below, it seems to hit all of the stepping stones for a underdog sports movie … except by replacing the underdog with a pile of metal under the tutelage of Wolverine and some bratty looking kid. Expect it to make a trillion dollars off the backs of stupid movie fans on October 7. Reel Steal trailer

Footloose
Sacrilege alert! I’ve never seen the original Kevin-Baconized Footloose. Wait, is that cheering or booing? Either way, chalk another 80s film to the Tinsel Town remake train as a small town with a ban on typical teenager fun like dancing. I would assume the sex and drugs are off-limits as well. A new cast of unknowns attempt to shake up the establishment by dancing any-damn-way (shocker!) and ruffle Dennis Quaid’s feathers. It looks flashy like Step Up and edgy like … Step Up 3(?) with the hollowness of both combined. Mark your calenders to skip this turkey October 14. Footloose trailer

Red State
Honestly, it’s hard to judge this one by the trailer alone. It looks part awesome (the gunfight mostly) and questionable (everything else). But this has gotten crapped on by a lot of reviews regardless of what Quentin Tarantino says. Kevin Smith will probably chalk that up to critics being stuck-up assholes but I am hardly a critic and despised Cop Out. Be educated when it drops October 21.
Red State trailer

Tower Heist
I’ve already spoken of Brett Ratner’s Tower Heist before but mostly because it was a pretty good cast in a horrid looking movie. It is even more relevant now that Eddie Murphy has been tapped to host the Oscars next February (coincidentally produced by Ratner too) and I still cannot imagine a good movie coming out of this. Be skeptical come November 4. Tower Heist trailer

Jack and Jill
Dear baby Jesus. I cannot believe this is a real movie! I honestly cannot conceive that “From the Producers of Just Go With It and Grown Ups” is a selling point in the trailer! I cannot comprehend that there seems to be twice as much unfunny Adam Sandler in this than his last aborted comedy I watched. I am still waiting for the day before November 11 that Sandler announces to the world that this was merely a big-budgeted hoax made into a trailer just to show movie-goers how asinine their purchases are. I’m really waiting … still waiting. Jack and Jill trailer (Dear God, why?)

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 1
So … positives! The trailer came in under two minutes! That’s pretty good considering the recent crop. And … well, I got nothing else. Yes, you might recall that I kind of liked the last one to an extent. At least it wasn’t as bad as the preceeding entry. Watching this trailer makes me want to go tear off my shirt in anger and go run in the rain. If I transform into a werewolf, at least I won’t have to worry about gaining admittance to this piece on November 18. And I hate weddings too! Breaking Dawn trailer

New Year’s Eve
What can Ashton Kutcher, Katherine Heigl, Zac Efron, and Sarah Jessica Parker equal? A movie that I unconditionally do not want to see! I never saw Valentine’s Day either. I consider myself lucky for that but even the celebratory night of drinking and shenanigans is not safe from the rom-com crew. Put those folks in a remake of New Year’s Evil and I’ll be there. Otherwise, have fun in a probably crowded theater when this launches December 9. New Year’s Eve trailer

In lieu of a video, we bring you another podcast! This time, PBF, Digger, and I react to the winners of the Golden Globes and the presumptuous nominees for the Oscars. And PBF gets very defensive about liking Mark Wahlberg. We discuss what we’ve seen, dump on what we haven’t, and generally drift off topic.

Get yo’ movie on!

Mentions: The Social Network, The Fighter, Inception, Black Swan, King’s Speech, Toy Story 3

**THIS RANT CONTAINS SPOILERS FOR ANY NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET MOVIE**

A remake/reboot/reimagining/whatever is truly not a bad idea at the surface. There are many films or even ideas that are not fully realized in their original form whether it suffered from technological limitations, poor production, or other issues. Other than the George Lucases of the world, most filmmakers or companies are not able to retroactively go back and fix problem areas in an already released movie. The problem comes in when a remake offers nothing over the original other than a polished look, a slew of teen actors, and a more modern setting. The Nightmare on Elm Street remake is one of those offending movies.

For any movie, whether it is based on an existing property or somewhat original idea, the goal should be to create something not only enjoyable but a film that can stand on its own. The Nightmare remake (which PBF did a wonderful job summarizing my thoughts before I had them in his review) leans far too much on the existing films to be seen as anything other than a money-grab from nostalgic fanboys like myself.

To find the essence of a good, nay spectacular, remake let’s look at 2004′s Dawn of the Dead. It had zombies and people in a mall. Other than cameos and a few repeated lines, there was little else in that remake that was ripped from the remake. In contrast, I would guesstimate approximately 68% of everything in the NOES remake was either directly lifted from at least one movie of the original series or a sometimes subtle, and at other times not, homage.

Like PBF said before, if you are going to rip off iconic shots from a movie, do it shot-by-shot like Gus Van Sant’s Psycho. It might not turn out well but at least it had a clear intention. Others, like Dawn, take the mere essence of the story and branch off. Would I have been upset to have a movie titled “A Nightmare on Elm Street” that had the burned-face Freddy Krueger hunting kids in their dreams? No, as long as the story was something that I hadn’t seen before.

Where I will give the remake credit is that the underlying story was different than the original films and largely interesting. A group of kids have similar nightmares, discover that at one time they knew each other, and have to piece together both their connections and the man of their dreams.

In fact, the main crux of the tale is what would stop me from labeling it as crap. In fact, it was pretty cool. It takes the pop-culture knowledge of Freddy and further vilifies him as Krueger is not merely a child killer but a child molester. Add to that the guilt that the characters feel thinking that their accusations may have killed an innocent man and we’ve got a pretty decent story going. Why does Freddy then have a razor-blade glove in the flashbacks? Oh, just another stupid allusion to its source.

What isn’t cool is to rip me out of this story to have gratuitous callbacks to the original movie (and even the sequels which I really did not understand). For the sake of nostalgia, I was willing to forgive the inclusion of the bathtub scene or the hallway that turns into a blood-red sea of unwalkable sludge like the stairs from the original. What I was not forgiving of was random quips like “How’s this for a wet dream?” or pointless shots like Freddy coming out of Nancy’s wall (albeit in horrible CGI) which quickly cut to another scene with no further reflection.

I hate that movie producers are so quick to harp on those that bash a remake because it is a remake. Well, geniuses, if you weren’t reminding me every three minutes that you are unoriginal enough to fill your movie with pointless references to another film, I might be more open-minded. That argument holds as much water as someone remaking Star Wars as ‘Star Battles’ with a character named Jon Soho complaining about the constant comparison.

Going back to the Dawn remake, it had rather subtle references to the original movie. Ken Foree had a brief part as a preacher. A store was called Gallen Ross (one of the actors in the original). These sorts of things are homages, not blatant plagiarism. There was some subtly here though with Nancy driving a Volvo station wagon (that type of car shows up at least three times in the original series) or a particular shot of Kris driving in her convertible that mirrors a shot in Nightmare 4. I’m convinced these cannot be accidentally but purposefully included for the fans like me who grew up on this series.

Why then must the characters of Kris and Jesse (obviously patterned after Tina and Rod but named after previous series characters) have expanded storylines? They die. We know this. But every minute they are on screen, we have less time with Nancy (Nancy) and Quentin (Glen) which makes their time together so awkward that their casual conversation consists of “What’s your favorite color?” Whereas in the first film, we had a firm grasp on Nancy and her personality as it slowly became unraveled, no one character gets time to expand because of another stupid reference shoehorned into the movie!

To summarize, I agree with PBF’s assessment that you cannot like both the new and old NOES. If you like the old, you will find the new one irritatingly different and similar at the same time. If you like the new, you have not seen the old. If that is the case, you should rectify that as soon as fucking possible.

/endrant

Honestly, the only things I knew about this kid before writing this article what that he was a singer and that he was popular with squealing pre-teen girls.  The mind- boggling bit about this film is that it is a documentary/biopic about his life and career.  There are only two reasons I can think of for making a biographical film about a boy this early in his life.  Either he has some sort of terminal illness that he hasn’t told anyone about yet and is not long for this world, or the producers and promoters in charge of this project realize that he is a flash-in-the-pan pop star and need to make a movie quick before his marketability is lost and Bieber fades into obscurity and alcoholism.  Don’t believe me?  Well, the movie is also coming out in ‘Real D’ 3D for no other reason than to insure that all the kiddies (excuse me, all the parents of the kiddies) will have to pay $12.00 a pop to watch this pointless fiasco.  No, this venture doesn’t have the stink of “Cash Grab” radiating from it at all.  Honestly, what has he done his life that so damn amazing that it must be captured for ever and always in movie form?  Pop singers like him have been chewed up by the recording industry and spat out like cheap bubble gum for decades.  He never had to cut off his own arm with a pocket knife to escape from a canyon like Aron Ralston.  He’s no Charlie Wilson, or Julia Childs even.  I will concede that, through the tiny amount of research that I have done, Justin looks like a gifted musician with a lot of potential.  Hell, at some point in the future he may become the greatest singer/songwriter in the history of mankind, or he could discover the cure for AIDS or male-pattern baldness. (anything is possible)  But, at this point in his career, he’s just a mouthpiece for a record label that’s squeezing as much money as possible out of excitable tweens with horribly bad taste in music.  The only thing that’s even remotely different from the legions of garish pop musicians that have come before is that he was discovered on You Tube.  Seriously, that’s it.  If you’re so much of a sheep that you’re excited about seeing this film (in unnecessary 3D, no less) then you diverse to be separated from your money, but anyone that can think for himself or herself is going to stay far, far away from this trite piece of trash, and rightfully so.

Now, personally, I have nothing against the Star Wars films. I am not a lunatic like our friend to the right over here, but I enjoyed the original trilogy. If I am not mistaken, there was the original trilogy, the special editions, then the prequels, and now the 3D converted six film saga. Let us not forget the countless TV movies, animated programs, action figures, books, record albums, various Star Wars based religious cults and many many other products and services based on this universe.

Fucking enough already. I get it. The films were great. Are you over compensating so that no one remembers that you are associated with Howard the Duck? George, you have got to get over that and just let it be your Rocky Horror and sleep comfortably at night on your bed made out of money draped with your Return of the Jedi sheet set. Star Wars came out the year after I was born and I am getting tired of the periodic updates to this universe. I mean, surely you are rich enough to afford a dictionary and have the access to a definition of the word “idolatry.” That’s the genius of DVDs and instant streaming; we can see these films basically anytime we want. We don’t have to be Jar Jar Binksed back to the Force.

Also, why must you constantly risk tarnishing (further) such a legacy? You understand that the original trilogy all by itself, was held in such high regard that you basically had your name embossed on the greatest films ever business card upon each film’s release, right? I mean that set of prequels was fucking garbage. Can you just be satisfied with being one of the most culturally referenced things EVER? There isn’t one day that goes by, not one, in which, “Luke, I am your father,” or “Use the Force,” or some such phrase isn’t heard on television or out of the mouth of some dickhead making a bad joke. What’s next, fifty dollar bills with the Emperor’s face on them? Vacation packages to the Degobah System? Body of Christ wafers shaped like the Millennium Falcon?

George, I beg of you. Stop it. The Holy Trilogy transcends time. It will always be awesome. It will always be referenced in other movies and television programs. If somehow, there is some person who does not understand these references, there will be a billion people readily available to provide an impromptu Power Point presentation to explain.

Now, like most sane people, I quite enjoyed The Hangover. In fact, I thought it was one of the funniest movies I had seen in a significant length of time.

But, as PBF and I posited in an episode not too long ago, the idea of a sequel for The Hangover seems ill-conceived. I may not have an idea of how things in the Hollywood-world work but I know there have always been “scheduling conflicts” and “creative differences” that have prevented entire teams from previous films from reuniting for a sequel.

Also, I’ve seen Caddyshack II which should cast a shadow of doubt on any comedy sequel … ever.

The biggest draw of the original film was the outlandish scenario that was established after our leads have an eventful night and not have the slightest idea of what the hell happened and the subsequent piecing together of everything that went wrong. Will the sequel follow the same path, just in Thailand? If so, it can die in a fire.

As PBF would argue, on certain films there is an unnatural charm and chemistry that is established that is hard to replicate, no matter how hard a studio tries. If we imagine that Weekend at Bernie’s had any redeeming cinematic quality, its sequel which took the same exact premise took any gravitas, spat on it, fed it to chimps, and watched as excrement was thrown on Helen Hunt and Matthew Broderick. Does the Hangover really need to suffer that same fate?

I may be reaching to compare Hangover to Weekend at Bernie’s. That would be the equivalent of comparing Inception to … Battlefield Earth? Regardless, the point still stands.

Could it be a good and worthwhile movie? Possibly. But I’m not willing to take that chance.

9. “Large Screen” Releases
Essentially, these are films originally in a larger aspect ration, usually 2.40:1, that are cropped during a certain group of scenes. Not only do I despise not watching movies in their original ratios, the way this was handled for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was quite poor, and I’m not only referring to the movie itself. The jump back and forth between scenes (and even different shots within the same scene) is quite jarring. I know a normal movie-goer might not notice but it is rather annoying regardless.

8. Delayed Releases
Now that Netflix and Redbox have caved to several studios’ demands to withhold new releases for almost a month after they hit DVD, the only way to see The Blind Side, Sherlock Holmes, and now Avatar on DVD is to either buy them outright or go to Blockbuster (and who really wants to do that) only to get a stripped down version lacking any extras. Not only does that make things more difficult for us at Movie Scum, Inc. to keep up with the newest films, regular consumers who might be looking for the latest generic rom-com from these studios in their normal venues might get discouraged and give up. Or if they are tech savvy enough, they will just download it illegally.

7. Cheaper DVD Cases
Back in the day, I could not stand those Warner cardboard cases but at least they fell relatively sturdy even if they just fell apart ten years later. Now, the latest trend is to take a regular case with a nice, happy recycle sign where the insert (remember those?) used to go. Allegedly, these are better for the environment as they use less plastic but every time I go to remove a disc, I feel like the whole case will either break in half or break the disc in the process of getting it out. Give me that extra three slivers of plastic back and go plant a tree or something to feel better.

6. Unskippable Previews
When I sat down to watch Sherlock Holmes, I was treated to at least eight to ten previews of some sort. They were mostly movie trailers with a few video game previews and even a non-smoking ad. The problem was the next chapter option was disabled and the only way to skip through was to fast forward. As every other preview started a new chapter which you had to then hit fast forward again, this was quite an arduous task that took about five minutes to get to the actual menu itself. So, for all the trailers and the mind-boggling thought involved, the menu did not even have a scene selection option. What the hell?

5. Stupid Floating Heads vs. Original Poster Art
There has been much written on this in other venues but it is still irritating when a perfectly good (and appropriate to the film) theatrical poster is jettisoned for the DVD release because it is not as flashy. I quite enjoy most all of the Nightmare on Elm Street series poster art (even for the crap ones) but for the single DVD releases, these awesome posters were replaced by the always popular floating heads and bad photoshop backgrounds. The same thing happened to the James Bond re-re-releases some time ago. I shudder to think of what an awesome, minimalist poster like The Thing would look like if released today.

4. Lackluster Collections
To mention the Sherlock Holmes DVD yet again, there was in one of the aforementioned trailers a collection of all of Clint Eastwood’s Warner Brothers films which actually looked quite good and thorough. However, most DVD collections leave much to be desired. This could be for a number of different reasons — lack of competing studio cooperation, lack of behind-the-scenes involvement, etc. — but most give you the same movies you can buy separately but with an additional disc for extras not available otherwise. So, you can buy all the films (including the ones you don’t want or already have) just for the bonus or miss out. And even worse, they are not “complete” collections which leave out the good stuff. I have yet to see any deleted scenes from the original Nightmare on Elm Street other than an Anchor Bay VHS from about fifteen years ago even after two collection releases and a standalone special edition. Not to mention that it took Paramount three tries (one single disc, one collection, subsequent “special-er” editions) to get decent releases of the Friday the 13th series.

3. Stupid “Special Edition” Names
I guess when you release the same movie countless times, there has to be a way to differentiate between each. Most of these DVD nomenclatures attempt to tie into the movie but, seriously? Pretty in Pink: Everything’s Duckie Edition; Planes, Trains, and Automobiles (Those Aren’t Pillows Edition); 13 Going on 30: Fun & Flirty Edition. Whatever happened to just plain old Special or Ultimate Edition? Check here for some special edition names that may or may not come to fruition.

2. Rerelease Hell
You know that little movie Avatar that is being released on DVD this week? Can’t wait to see the quadrillion dollar grossing picture in lackluster at home 3D? Ah, you’re going to have to wait as that is being withheld for another version down the line. At least (some) consumers had the knowledge going in that a better version was coming out but what about the other films that are released almost bare with the intention to release a better version down the line. Studios are all about cashing in on popular franchises so it makes sense from their end to release whatever they can as fast as they can but for those fans who want, I dunno, promised special director’s cuts or more in-depth special features, they have to either be patient and wait for the in-the-pipeline better release or buy two versions of the same movie.

1. Same Movie, Three Different DVDs
The trend used to be different version for full-screen n00bs and widescreen which made it hell to receive a DVD as a gift from someone who does not know different. While that still happens, there are now separate releases for theatrical version, bare-bones uncut version with digital version, uncut version with special features, theatrical version full screen with a commentary only available on that disc. If you want to have everything available, you have to buy at minimum two discs, if not more! Whatever happened to that awesome seemless branching thing that DVDs were advertised with back in the day to allow different versions on the same disc? Is it really that much easier to have eight different SKUs for the same movie? Damn all that.

Post-publish addendum:
Dear Disney,
Remember all of those DVDs you released in your first year or two that are non-anamorphic, bare bones releases? If you can’t at least go back and add in a commentary or something, at least clean it up so a VHS bootleg copy doesn’t look better than your product.
Sincerely,
Puck

Here’s the thing that you probably know and what studio execs apparently haven’t figured out: back stories in and of themselves can be cool but can also drag down a movie and/or franchise. Immediately, I point out the awesome Halloween as an example of back stories run amuck. The original started off great with just a shape stalking girls and descended into a convoluted series of Druid rituals and darkly dressed men in the sixth installment. While I have a soft spot for Halloween 6, the simplicity from the first was shot and drug to hell in a sea of screenwriters and abandoned ideas. But when they went back for Halloween: Resurrection (I’m not linking to that piece of shit), it was absurd that the plot line of the previous four movies, one of murdering family members, was all but jettisoned.

Now, this is not to say that all back stories are bad or unneeded. I would imagine the greatness of the original Nightmare on Elm Street would have been diluted (yet still effective) with no idea why Kruger was targeting kids in their dreams. Even still, in that franchise, as we delve into his murder, his mother(!), or his children, it lost track of the original intent: scaring the shit out of people without to much thought as to why or how. Monsters are scarier if they just want to kill you, not avenge a death of their sister thirteen years ago due to a freak accident on the monkey bars.

Origin stories work in comic books because you want to see what led to the heroes (or even villains) becoming who they are. Most other movies do not need that level of detail in a character’s story. This is not to advocate the abandonment of a rich character. Far from it in fact.

In Die Hard, is it relevant to know McClane is on the outs with his wife? Yep. Is it important to know how he cut his teeth in the NYPD busting drug dealers and German terrorists, leading to a hatred for Hans Gruber and his kind? Nope and the filmmakers knew it. I would argue there is a difference between character history for a motive and character history for actions.

That said, are there holes in this rant? Absolutely. Are there movies, or characters, that I wish would have a back story not described here? You betcha. The point is, not all characters are created the same. Some are better without (Chris Nolan’s The Joker for example) and some better with.

Studios: don’t try to shoehorn in what clearly does not belong.

When I saw The Crazies this weekend, attached to the print was a new trailer for the upcoming Nightmare on Elm Street remake. As I previously worried based on the test screening reviews, this remake could very well suck balls and destroy my own personal, nostalgic 80s universe by further bastardizing the franchise already undone by the likes of Freddy’s Dead and Freddy vs. Jason. But, as I sat in the darkened movie theater and realized what movie was being previewed, my concerns started to dwindle. This new Nightmare trailer was chock full of jump scares, creepy images, and effective call-backs to the original. For just a moment, I had completely forgot about the nervous article I had written just three days before. As the trailer ended and the feature began, I did not have the time or opportunity to really dwell on it. Now, more than 24 hours after seeing that, I realize the new Nightmare will probably suck and I’ll likely hate it even more just because of that trailer.

Now, I certainly understand that the entire purpose of trailers is for marketing purposes only and not necessarily to give you an accurate idea or feel for the film at hand. In fact, it would be quite difficult to create a two and a half minute preview which addressed and covered all the relevant information for the upcoming movie. For the good or even decent movies though, the trailer gives you a good sense of what to expect for the full ninety minutes or more of the movie. For the bad movies, the trailer is the little white lie which spirals out of the control of its creators and takes on a life of its own, destroying lives in the process. Okay, maybe that was a bit dramatic but trailers for bad movies are especially evil as the best editors seem to work on those exclusively, trying to shrink two hours of fail into a minute and a half of passably decent scenes to sucker in viewers across the country. If you need an example, look at the trailer for the Friday the 13th remake and compare that to the final product.

Therefore, I propose we enact legislation to ensure that promotional materials for an upcoming release match the quality of the film itself. Just like it is illegal to sell a cream that claims it will turn you into Cyndi Lauper, it should be illegal to pass a movie off as hip and edgy and featuring music from Stabbing Westward if it does not (I’m looking in your direction Mod Squad)! So how do we quantify and equate the quality of the preview to the movie itself? Just put a bunch of movie fans and let them watch the feature followed by the preview. Is your movie not as funny as it tries to be? Let’s put one of those failed jokes right smack at the start. Is your top-billed star only in approximately thirteen minutes of the two hour movie? We can just go ahead and trim out every other frame of that actor to create a jarring effect that would eventually be rather common to film goers. It’s as simple as that. It would not cost the studios any additional advertising dollars and maybe then can we rid the world of actors who need to go away for good.

Now all of that having been said, check out the new Nightmare trailer.

Man, Julia Roberts sure is ugly. Not that being ugly has anything to do with talent. Man, Julia Roberts is not talented.  Sorry if you Googled yourself and found this, Julia.

Sleeping with the Enemy is on right now, which I have seen a couple of times. I am not sure why. I mean it isn’t terrible by any means, but it certainly isn’t the type of movie I tend to watch repeatedly. Julia’s grotesque appearance caused me to drift off and think of her body of work, which brought me to Ye Olde Internet Movie Database.  You certainly can’t accuse her of being lazy. She has 9 projects in development, one in post production and a new movie coming out on February 12th, appropriately titled Valentine’s Day. She has had as many as 3 films out in one year and has appeared on television numerous times as well. Looking at her resume, I find very little that I like. Flatliners was pretty good. Ocean’s Eleven was marginal. I mean, I don’t even like the hugely successful ones, like Steel Magnolias, Pretty Woman and Erin Brockovich. Am I trippin’ balls for not understanding her appeal? I certainly can’t figure out why she would be sought out as opposed to have to audition. I can’t possibly imagine anyone ever saying, “No! Only Julia can do this!” She is a horse in a sea of other horses that can act. What separates her from the lady that does the Miracle Gro, and the individually wrapped prunes commercials? Nothing. She did have that bad ass line at the end of Sleeping with the Enemy, though. As she is pointing the gun at her abusive husband, she tells the police, “Come quickly. I have just killed an intruder.” Then BLAM! Shoots him. Too bad the intruder wasn’t her career.

By the way, that post contained a spoiler.