It is currently Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:20 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 399 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 11:14 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
Tony Scott discussion moved here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 30, 2011 11:23 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
I think we need to remember this is just a teaser. Once a trailer comes along, we'll get a better sense of what's going to be on screen. And yes, the song rocks. Rather appropriate choice too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Awesome tagline


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:23 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:48 am
Location: KCK
First poster...apparently 100% to Fincher's desire:

Edit to add: Spoilerized as I realized after posting you can see Rooney's right nipple \:D/
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Image


Last edited by HistoryProf on Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:27 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:48 am
Location: KCK
This is hilarious for those who have read the book(s)....I laughed especially heartily as I listened to the first of the trilogy on CD on a cross country drive and upon returning home I stopped at the store and got fixings for a cheese and pickle sandwich due to its frequent appearance in the book!

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo: A Sandwich Retrospective


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:04 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Next to Tree Of Life, this might be my 2nd most anticipated film I want to see in theaters. Two reasons, one being how this adaptation fares against the previous movie. The other (and probably the primary) is I want to see how many people leave the theater during the screening.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:17 pm 

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:58 pm
Huh? I haven't read the books or anything, but the original movie was far from something I thought would inspire walkouts. Pedestrian, yes, overtly subversive, I think not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:06 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
I assume he's speaking more of the possible violence. The rape scene in the Swedish version caused quite a few to walk out during the showing I was at.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Exactly, which leads me to wonder what the MPAA will make of it all and if they give it an NC-17.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 10:51 pm
flyonthewall2983 wrote:
Exactly, which leads me to wonder what the MPAA will make of it all and if they give it an NC-17.

I doubt it. The very graphic Swedish orignal was rated R and I don't imagine Fincher will go much further. The MPAA has been a lot more lenient as of late. I was shocked when I realized "The Killer Inside Me" got an R.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:00 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 9:45 pm
Location: Portland, OR
I've heard that one of Fincher's stated goals for the film was to push the definition of "R" as far as he could. So take that as you will.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 11:55 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Cold Bishop wrote:
I've heard that one of Fincher's stated goals for the film was to push the definition of "R" as far as he could. So take that as you will.

That's an extremely pointless goal, IMO.

At any rate, Fincher strikes me as someone who enjoys a reputation for being edgier and nervier than he actually is. If this really goes farther than the Swedish version - and why would it need to? that version was repulsive enough the way it was - I'll be very surprised. I find it considerably more likely that it'll be just repulsive enough to get mainstream critics repeating the "feel-bad movie of Christmas" line ad nauseum and pretending that the Swedish version doesn't exist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:15 am 

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:24 pm
I don't feel very much loyalty toward the Swedish version, it looks and plays out like a by-the-numbers TV show - oh, wait: that's what it is. I doubt Fincher's movie will be accused of that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 1:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
Brian C wrote:
Cold Bishop wrote:
I've heard that one of Fincher's stated goals for the film was to push the definition of "R" as far as he could. So take that as you will.

That's an extremely pointless goal, IMO.

At any rate, Fincher strikes me as someone who enjoys a reputation for being edgier and nervier than he actually is. If this really goes farther than the Swedish version - and why would it need to? that version was repulsive enough the way it was - I'll be very surprised. I find it considerably more likely that it'll be just repulsive enough to get mainstream critics repeating the "feel-bad movie of Christmas" line ad nauseum and pretending that the Swedish version doesn't exist.

Well, I think a strength of Fincher's is that he can make something feel nasty and unsettling without actually pushing the limits of what can be shown all that far- here I'm thinking of Se7en, which is a lot more gloves-on than the glut of serial killer movies that followed it, but which has a real sense of nastiness derived more from the stylization of the movie than what is actually shown.

Sexualized violence in any context is difficult for me to watch, though, and from what I hear of the books there isn't much justification for the quantity and brutality of it other than nasty prurient interest- I'm hoping I hear good things, because so far Fincher is batting about .750 for me, but I'm prepared to write this one off as one I'll have to skip.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:40 am 

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 6:58 pm
There's no need to remake this, and Rooney Mara does not have me convinced whatsoever, but that's a damn amazing teaser if I ever saw one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:16 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Coming from the perspective of someone who knows nothing about the original books or films, I am completely in awe of that teaser. Fincher is a hit-or-miss filmmaker; but when he hits, he hits hard. Hopefully this is more Zodiac, less Fight Club.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true
mfunk9786 wrote:
Hopefully this is more Zodiac, less Fight Club.

I'm not sure why you would want that, especially given the material (other than the obvious reason that you think one works and the other doesn't). FWIW, I hope for the exact opposite. That teaser sure as hell ain't Zodiac.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
I was just juxtaposing what, in my opinion, is his best film and his worst film. I realize that there'll be a very different tone here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:45 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
stwrt wrote:
I don't feel very much loyalty toward the Swedish version, it looks and plays out like a by-the-numbers TV show - oh, wait: that's what it is. I doubt Fincher's movie will be accused of that.

From my understanding, only the sequels (THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE and THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNET'S NEST) were made-for-TV because the producers didn't expect the theatrically-released TATTOO to do as well as it did, especially overseas. When the first film became a hit, the other two (already in production for television?) were released theatrically. At any rate, the sequels look like they were shot for TV and are quite weak when compared to the higher budget first film.

I suppose there is little question the two sequels will be remade as well; is Fincher going to helm those as well?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:59 pm 

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 8:58 pm
Jeez, the 2nd and 3rd Swedish films are LESS cinematic than the first? I knew none of this TV business, but the 1st one in that series felt like such an uninspired episode of a procedural TV show, just no flair at all save for the violence (which is hardly something to brag about these days.)

As for the franchise question, I read an interview a while back where Fincher said he wasn't signed for sequels and his attitude was pretty much of the 'cross that bridge when we come to it' variety. BUT he also admitted he was sold on the film (which he originally couldn't see himself doing) when the studio pitched it to him as 'we're making the first franchise film for adults' so I think the assumption is that if this does well (critically or financially or both, I don't know how Fincher judges such a thing) he'll be back for more. Personally, I just hope he directs another Sorkin script someday.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:04 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
I can't say the first one felt like a TV show at all. It was pretty mainstream and safe in its direction, sure, but it still felt to have a budget and had more flair than the sequels, which I still think were absolute horseshit. I wasn't shocked at all when I found out they were meant for TV.

I'm interested in this remake but I'm much more curious about the sequels and what Fincher(?) might do with them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:13 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
cdnchris wrote:
what Fincher(?) might do with them.

Why the uncertainty?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:41 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
There's a lot of uncertainty. Talk about sequels already is putting the cart before the horse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 3:10 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 7:25 am
Roger Ryan wrote:
stwrt wrote:
I don't feel very much loyalty toward the Swedish version, it looks and plays out like a by-the-numbers TV show - oh, wait: that's what it is. I doubt Fincher's movie will be accused of that.

From my understanding, only the sequels (THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE and THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNET'S NEST) were made-for-TV because the producers didn't expect the theatrically-released TATTOO to do as well as it did, especially overseas. When the first film became a hit, the other two (already in production for television?) were released theatrically. At any rate, the sequels look like they were shot for TV and are quite weak when compared to the higher budget first film.

It seems to me the original versions deliberately underplay the material which a lot of times gets confused for making an inferior or just "good" product. While the literally vaginal bleeding trailers for the US version seem to indicate to me that they are overplaying the material which is maybe the more easily impressive route.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:53 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
I saw the "Approved For General Audiences" TATTOO trailer last night in a theater and I have to say that the sound mix alone absolutely thrilled me. As the subjective camera moves closer to the house, the discordant percussive sound effects that accent each graphic come whipping past you from the front of the theater to the back. An astonishing marriage of sound and vision, this just blew away all the other trailers shown - hats off to Fincher and Trent Reznor (if, in fact, they were actively involved in the cutting and scoring of this). Also, because this version of the trailer did not include some of the more graphic or explicit images, I liked it more; it was subtler than the "red band" version and didn't give away as many spoilers.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 399 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection