[Movies] The Upcoming Movies Trailer Thread

That's okay, telling you to go fuck yourself will cheer me up.

I didn't really want to get into it, but here's the thing: when you say the action sequences are by the numbers, samey, or repetitive, you are staggeringly wrong, to the point of either you didn't pay attention to the movie, or you're being a dick about it intentionally.

The long sweeping take following each Avenger during the battle against the Chitauri.

The elevator fight in Winter Soldier. The car chase in Winter Soldier. Hell, every action sequence in Winter Soldier.

The stairway fight / footchase in Civil War. The airport fight.

These are masterpieces of action events.

If you didn't get anything out of them, if you think they're the same, the problem is you.
Your approach to this conversation is a wee bit less tactful than mine.
EDIT: Changed "see" to "wee" because my phone's autocorrect hates me.
 
Last edited:
I guess I find the Hulk explanation to be really reaching. It seems to me that it was established previously (and for me, this has been about the films, as I have admitted very limited comic knowledge) that if Bruce is angry, he is the Hulk. I liked the Norton Incredible Hulk for a few reasons (though it isn't great, admittedly), and it's really clear in that one that he works extraordinarily hard to avoid stress. So when he suddenly says "I'm always angry," it just comes across as, "We decided to change the rules lol," like playing Monopoly with a six year old.
Well Norton's Hulk had Abomination in it, showing that gamma radiation affects people differently, so we can assume the comic book rules apply.

So Hulk exists because Banner always had rages issues, and he stay Banner by repressing them, while Hulking out when they bubble to the surface against his will. While a killer like Abomination just becomes more monstrous in appearance.

So it's less changing the rules and more like explaining them better.

Of course i don't remember if they actually showed that Banner was repressed in the Norton one...
 

figmentPez

Staff member
So when he suddenly says "I'm always angry," it just comes across as, "We decided to change the rules lol," like playing Monopoly with a six year old.
Honestly, as someone who has severe psychiatric problems because he represses his emotions, most notably anger, it kinda did feel like a rule change when I was told "you are angry about this, you're just not letting yourself feel it" (though not in those exact words). It's not at all inconsistent with Norton's portrayal of the Hulk, either. It's possible to control anger with meditation and staying calm, without ever admitting that the underlying thoughts and emotions are there the whole time; because the root cause hasn't been dealt with, it's that much more difficult to deal with anything that causes new anger to get added to the pile.

Also, it may be important to note the difference between repression and suppression. I'm not sure how universal the distinction is, but suppression is conscious, while repression is automatic. From experience, it's possible for me to carry around a whole lot of anger about something, and not even realize it's bothering me until I explode about something else (or my somatoform disorder gets so bad I experience paralysis).

In short, I share more in common with the Hulk than just the name Bruce. Good thing I haven't been exposed to any gamma radiation, or my pissy cosplay thread ranting would have gotten really out of hand.
 

fade

Staff member
I'll have to watch when I get home. I know King is more enthusiastic about this version, but then again, he liked that Shining TV remake. I saw a promo shot of the kids yesterday and was glad I could point out who each was just on visual. IT is my favorite book so it's going to be impossible for me to approach without bias despite my positive feelings toward looser adaptations, but I'm trying.
Well, in his defense, the TV remake was more accurate to the source.

I'm going to be honest. I wouldn't mind the movie changing up the ending, because the
giant spider thing
was kind of a trite letdown. Sure, it's just how their brains perceived an eldritch abomination or whatever.

As for Pennywise, I hope he's doubles as a passable normal clown. The promo shot leaked months ago had him all scary. He's got to look like an actual clown at least some of the time, or else there's no point in the guise when it comes to catching kids.

All that said, that slide projector thing is exactly the kind of thing that scares me, so I hope there's lots of that.[DOUBLEPOST=1490822777,1490822558][/DOUBLEPOST]As for the Hulk, my take on "I'm always angry" was that it was a show of character development. It used to not be true, but now it is because he's worked on it. They even showed this in the final scene of the Norton movie, where he starts to transform voluntarily right before smashing to black.
 
Say what you will about the MCU movies starting to feel samey (granted, the plot structure of every superhero intro is staggeringly similar), I have to admit that Marvel has nailed every casting of each super (eventually..thanks Mark Ruffalo). Only one that bothers me slightly is Black Widow, but it's not bad so much as the action scenes with her are always so slow. Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Bruce Banner, Spider-man, Black Panther, Winter Soldier, Vision, Scarlet Witch, Hawkeye, Loki, Ant-Man, Nick Fury, Doctor Strange, Star-Lord, Groot, Rocket Raccoon, Gamora, Drax the Destroyer, nailed it every time.
 
Well, in his defense, the TV remake was more accurate to the source.

I'm going to be honest. I wouldn't mind the movie changing up the ending, because the
giant spider thing
was kind of a trite letdown. Sure, it's just how their brains perceived an eldritch abomination or whatever.
That's just what I mean. Ditch all that. I love it in the book, but it just doesn't work on film unless you devote a good chunk of attention to building the lore around it, and that's just going to bog the movie down.

As for Pennywise, I hope he's doubles as a passable normal clown. The promo shot leaked months ago had him all scary. He's got to look like an actual clown at least some of the time, or else there's no point in the guise when it comes to catching kids.
I'll be fine with it either way. Pennywise more uses the clown as a trick in previous cycles like back in the 1700s when he's depicted in a wood carving, but far as I recall he only makes himself a normal clown at the start of the book's story. Later he just lowers his face to hide it, or doesn't even bother with disguises, he'll just show up as a bird or a leperous hobo or a side-character's dead brother, and just have some aspect of the clown getup as part of the shape.

For a movie it would probably work best if he can look like a nice clown sometimes, though probably for people who are scared of clowns, it'll be scary that way too.

Will watch teaser in a few minutes when I get home.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Say what you will about the MCU movies starting to feel samey (granted, the plot structure of every superhero intro is staggeringly similar), I have to admit that Marvel has nailed every casting of each super (eventually..thanks Mark Ruffalo). Only one that bothers me slightly is Black Widow, but it's not bad so much as the action scenes with her are always so slow. Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Bruce Banner, Spider-man, Black Panther, Winter Soldier, Vision, Scarlet Witch, Hawkeye, Loki, Ant-Man, Nick Fury, Doctor Strange, Star-Lord, Groot, Rocket Raccoon, Gamora, Drax the Destroyer, nailed it every time.
Much as I like action redheads, I will say I think ScarJo started phoning it in post Avengers-1. In the years since, I went from "Why isn't there a Black Widow movie?!" to "Ok, I see why there isn't a Black Widow movie."
 
Okay, I've now watched it.

I think it looks pretty good. Got excited to see the house on Neibolt Street. I'm hoping Mike's rundown of Derry's history with Pennywise isn't relegated to a throwaway line this time, especially since we get a glimpse of the Black Spot. Overall, it looks promising, like Nick said.

Also hoping we get a sweet 80s-inspired score like we did with Stranger Things and It Follows.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
It's the same thing, and you're 100% right, it's cheap.. It's an auditory cue to get you to react a certain way when the director doesn't think the event happening is funny/scary enough to elicit the response on its own.

Remember how cringy/dull Big Bang Theory is without the laugh tracks?
The problem isn't that it's bad or cringey, it's that it's written with pauses for the laughter. When the laughter is taken away, the pauses are amplified. If it were written to NOT have a laugh track the dialogue would be spaced better and tighter.

Stop drinking the haterade.
I'm not home yet, but I found this, by the same guy...



Note that though the pauses for the laugh track are still kind of awkward, the jokes are still funny.
 
I'd firstly like to point out that TBBT and Friends were both filmed in front of a live studio audience. So it's not exactly a laugh track, it's people sitting in the studio really finding the jokes funny.

Having said that though, I consider myself a big TBBT fan, but even I find myself going through the newer episodes with nary a laugh. Not even a chuckle. I'm basically just watching them to keep up with the drama and gossip now.

(also for Melissa Rauch's boobs, because they are magnificent)
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I'd firstly like to point out that TBBT and Friends were both filmed in front of a live studio audience.



"Live Studio Audiences" are prompted.

Here, I got home and did a quick and dirty edit job on the BBT video. No more awkward pauses, the conversation flows as if a normal conversation. Note the cringe factor is much lower... but it still is not funny.

 
But if it weren't for long, awkward pauses, we wouldn't have the cult classic that is The Rocky Horror Picture Show!


Anyway, getting back to IT... IT has been my favorite Stephen King book, so I'm kind of torn. Yes, the mini-series was flawed, and a lot of it doesn't hold up well, but I still love the majority of the cast and I feel like a lot of it looked like I imagined it in the book. Also, they could keep the ages of the Losers closer to the decade they grew up in from the book, obviously something they can't do now. (Or chose not to. Assumably, the adult years will be in modern day, so I wonder how they're going to get around new plot holes like cell phones. I'm betting Derry is going to have crappy-to-dead-zone cell service.) I also agree that for this new movie to not be a giant mess, they really need to tone down the eldritch mythos and focus on Pennywise himself. Not to mention that really unnecessary "sex bonding us kids" part. But, hey, nice to see Beverly's back to being a redhead!

And of course, the obvious, "The clown is scary, but he's no Tim Curry".



(I just realized my comments came full-Tim Curry circle.)
 
Yeah, remember that one psychologist guy that Phoebe dated in season one? I do love the show, but I gotta admit, he kinda nailed it when he called them... well...

I'm surprised that not EVERY stray addition to the Friends group went through the same breakdown, given how they can get.
 
But if it weren't for long, awkward pauses, we wouldn't have the cult classic that is The Rocky Horror Picture Show!


Anyway, getting back to IT... IT has been my favorite Stephen King book, so I'm kind of torn. Yes, the mini-series was flawed, and a lot of it doesn't hold up well, but I still love the majority of the cast and I feel like a lot of it looked like I imagined it in the book. Also, they could keep the ages of the Losers closer to the decade they grew up in from the book, obviously something they can't do now. (Or chose not to. Assumably, the adult years will be in modern day, so I wonder how they're going to get around new plot holes like cell phones. I'm betting Derry is going to have crappy-to-dead-zone cell service.) I also agree that for this new movie to not be a giant mess, they really need to tone down the eldritch mythos and focus on Pennywise himself. Not to mention that really unnecessary "sex bonding us kids" part. But, hey, nice to see Beverly's back to being a redhead!

And of course, the obvious, "The clown is scary, but he's no Tim Curry".



(I just realized my comments came full-Tim Curry circle.)
We are never going to get THAT scene. And that's a good thing.
 
Good grief that It trailer gave me the willies. I'm not sure if I want to watch it. Adults in peril is fine, but kids in peril really messes with me. I liked the miniseries back in the day, but I guess having kids can goof with your emotions.
 
I appreciate showing the map of the pipes under Derry. Lets us know the underground won't be that lame pipe + hall and room like the 90s, but something closer to the labyrinthine mess from the book, the one that people had gone missing in even outside of the cycle, that much of it wasn't even mapped at all.
 

fade

Staff member
I appreciate showing the map of the pipes under Derry. Lets us know the underground won't be that lame pipe + hall and room like the 90s, but something closer to the labyrinthine mess from the book, the one that people had gone missing in even outside of the cycle, that much of it wasn't even mapped at all.
The key to defeating Pennywise is a good civil engineer.
 
Top