vanilla sky a remake?

Re: vanilla sky a remake?

[quote author=GenJerDan link=board=movies;num=1107402240;start=15#18 date=02/07/05 at 01:53:13]

They're making Ubik? Damn. I wanted to. :(

Guess I'll have settle for A Maze Of Death.

(Not so interesting side-note: the first film I wrote was based on one of Phil's short stories... Maybe someday I'll buy the rights and shoot it.)

Dan[/quote]

I don't have heard about an Ubik adaptation but I hope it'll arrive.
Why not you ? ;)
 
Re: vanilla sky a remake?

[quote author=hvpz link=board=movies;num=1107402240;start=15#20 date=02/07/05 at 03:07:07]

I don't have heard about an Ubik adaptation but I hope it'll arrive.
Why not you  ? ;)[/quote]

Because they will screw it up, of course. Just like they've screwed up every PKD story on the screen.

Dan
 
Re: vanilla sky a remake?

its not shot by shot, is a bad copy, Amenabar is a great Director.

By the way, my DOP Teacher (when I studied) was the camera man...
 
Re: vanilla sky a remake?

[quote author=GenJerDan link=board=movies;num=1107402240;start=15#21 date=02/07/05 at 09:31:55]

Because they will screw it up, of course. Just like they've screwed up every PKD story on the screen.

Dan[/quote]

I share the same opinion even if BladeRunner is a great film living in his own referencial.
The PKS' universe is so far from hollywood. 1000 light years at least !
 
Re: vanilla sky a remake?

Why on earth isn't there any more american voice on this particular thread ?

This question about Hollywood's gluttony and its increasing tendency to judge its audience as a herd of stupid junk-fooders seems symptomatic of the western cultural position to me.

Not to say of course that this problem is uniquely american (I can witness the very same "Mac Donaldization" plague creeping over french arts and culture), but at least, in Paris, I'm can see hundreds of films from all over the world in original version and in decent conditions — which in my opinion is a major luxury.

For how long still ? That is the question.

So speak up Yankees ! Do you think that you, as a people, are too self centered, at least concerning cinema ?

No will to argue or get into some stupid nationalistic debate here. Just a desire to read opinions from your point of view.
 
Re: vanilla sky a remake?

Hollywood is a business.

Sarah Michelle Gellar and Tom Cruise will sell tickets.

Their Japanese and Spanish counterparts, while I’m sure they’re better actors, will not.

And given the choice, no one wants to read a movie.

In any case, the rot of Western Civilization has been a theme among intellectual chatterers for hundreds of years.
 
Re: vanilla sky a remake?

sure, ...U.S. citizens tend to be very self absorbed and entirley aloof to what the rest of the world is like. IMHO hollywood films in that is respect are a mere reflection of the self indulgent consumer lifestyle that the U.S. is both blessed by, and plagued by. Its not a big secret or anything... but all things considered.. why would they make films about cultures the vast majority does not understand? it only makes sense that you give catfood to a cat.
 
Wow. Tried to watch this shambles of a movie. It's appallingly bad. I couldn't finish it (I do remember enjoying the original Spanish version, years ago).

Anyhow, I was really shocked to see Cameron Crowe directed it. Funny, as I was watching, I felt like the direction was entirely wrong. Like the director was someone who should be directing romantic comedies or something. Then I look at the DVD jacket and read it's Cameron Crowe. He's such an accomplished director, but clearly is a director who has a very specific sensibility. Keep him far, far away from sci-fi or supernatural thrillers please.
 
sean90291 said:
Wow. Tried to watch this shambles of a movie. It's appallingly bad. I couldn't finish it (I do remember enjoying the original Spanish version, years ago).

Anyhow, I was really shocked to see Cameron Crowe directed it. Funny, as I was watching, I felt like the direction was entirely wrong. Like the director was someone who should be directing romantic comedies or something. Then I look at the DVD jacket and read it's Cameron Crowe. He's such an accomplished director, but clearly is a director who has a very specific sensibility. Keep him far, far away from sci-fi or supernatural thrillers please.
Click to expand...

I would have to disagree with you. I thought it was well directed. I did see both films, and yes the original was much better acted I thought, but I still love the re-make. I loved it because of the love story involved, eventhough it is sci-fi, but its the love story that got me.

But you are entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it. :beer:
 
capitalP said:
I would have to disagree with you. I thought it was well directed. I did see both films, and yes the original was much better acted I thought, but I still love the re-make. I loved it because of the love story involved, eventhough it is sci-fi, but its the love story that got me.

But you are entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it. :beer:
Click to expand...

Hm, you say Vanilla Sky is well directed, but that the acting in the original Spanish version is better. Given that performance is one of the chief responsibilities of the director, I'd have to therefore disagree with your conclusion (although you too are entitled to your opinion--so there, I'm glad we've given each other the basic right to an opinion again...heheh). If you can't get a good performance out of the likes of a superb caliber actor like Tom Cruise, then I think the director has missed something important. Cameron Diaz and Kurt Russell were bad too. They're great actors. The script was poorly adapted and the direction bizarre. I kept expecting Cruise to dance around in his underwear singing Old Time Rock n Roll.
 
I thought the original was far superior...And using Good Vibrations during the climax was one of the worst music cues I've ever heard. Still, it's better than Elizabethtown, which I thought was Cameron Crowe at his absolute worst. Howard Hawks once said the thing he hates most in filmmaking is preciousness, and that is Crowe's biggest sin as a director.
 
I didn't get to Good Vibrations. But the opening selections of music were really jarring too. Another element which the director is supposed to be artfully selecting, and which were just so wrong for the tone of this particular story. So how was Jerry McGuire so damn good? It's a great movie. I can only assume that the rah-rah romantic comedy type movie is much more within Cameron Crowe's repertoire.
 
sean90291 said:
Hm, you say Vanilla Sky is well directed, but that the acting in the original Spanish version is better. Given that performance is one of the chief responsibilities of the director, I'd have to therefore disagree with your conclusion (although you too are entitled to your opinion--so there, I'm glad we've given each other the basic right to an opinion again...heheh). If you can't get a good performance out of the likes of a superb caliber actor like Tom Cruise, then I think the director has missed something important. Cameron Diaz and Kurt Russell were bad too. They're great actors. The script was poorly adapted and the direction bizarre. I kept expecting Cruise to dance around in his underwear singing Old Time Rock n Roll.
Click to expand...

As for the music, it didn't bother me at all. I think Tom Cruise is a good actor but I wouldn't go as far as calling him Superb. We obviously have different taste, but like I said before, I watch the film and experience a great love story, the performances and the direction wasn't bad enough to take me away from the story. We not talking Oscar worthy performance here, but we're not talking about Gigli performances neither.

I personally wasn't too crazy about Jerry Maguire, never got why that movie was so popular, it was just average to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top