The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
- dimejinky99
- what on earth am I talking about
- Posts: 39789
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
So those two people who made one of the best films ever and followed it up with two of the worst, are making more matrix films
https://www.empireonline.com/movies/new ... x-project/
https://www.empireonline.com/movies/new ... x-project/
Calibrate your enthusiasm
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
I wonder if they’ll actually be directing. Kinda doubt it.
- wease
- Major Dude
- Posts: 40702
- Joined: Sat January 05, 2013 1:57 pm
- Location: Where everybody knows your name
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
I’ve only seen the first one.
Let me tell you, Homer Simpson is cock of nothing!
- C. Montgomery Burns
- C. Montgomery Burns
- dimejinky99
- what on earth am I talking about
- Posts: 39789
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Was the direction really the problem with the last two?
I’m gonna way the story was.
I’m gonna way the story was.
Calibrate your enthusiasm
- E.H. Ruddock
- Guys, I am not a moderator! I swear to God! Why does everyone think I'm a moderator?
- Posts: 52027
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:48 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
"and 2015’s batshit sci-fi Jupiter Ascending."
Lol
Lol
Clouuuuds Rolll byyy...BANG BANG BANG BANG
- VinylGuy
- jeeeesus relax already
- Posts: 43432
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
I dont really care about more matrix movies. We already know how that went.
BONE FUCKIN´ TOMAHAWK.
- dimejinky99
- what on earth am I talking about
- Posts: 39789
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Pulp fiction was released 25 years ago today
Calibrate your enthusiasm
- VinylGuy
- jeeeesus relax already
- Posts: 43432
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm
- E.H. Ruddock
- Guys, I am not a moderator! I swear to God! Why does everyone think I'm a moderator?
- Posts: 52027
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:48 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Yeah I'm looking forward to thatVinylGuy wrote:Dying to see Midsommar¨
Clouuuuds Rolll byyy...BANG BANG BANG BANG
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Today, WB announced a 4K Blu-ray release of The Shining in October. That's already awesome. But this particular bit from the press release is causing some excited speculation:
The American version that's been in circulation since the premiere is 144 minutes, and supposedly that's because Kubrick had two minutes that were shown at the premiere removed from all subsequent prints. From IMDb:The 4K remastering is of Kubrick’s original 146 minute version of the film which premiered in the United States on May 23rd, 1980.
It's pretty insane if the press release is accurate and we're going to finally get to see those "lost" couple of minutes.Three days after the release of the film, Stanley Kubrick and Warner Bros. ordered all projectionists to cut about 2 minutes from the end of the film, and send the footage back to the studio. Starting after the closeup of frozen Jack, the camera goes to a pullback shot with part of a state trooper's car and the legs of troopers walking around in the foreground. We then cut to the hotel manager Stuart Ullman (Barry Nelson) walking down a hospital hallway to the nurse's station to inquire about Danny and Wendy. He's told they're both doing well and proceeds to Wendy's room. After some gentle conversation, he tells Wendy that searchers have been unable to locate any evidence of the apparitions she saw. Additionally, Jack's body cannot be located. We then cut to the camera silently roaming the halls of the Overlook Hotel for about a minute until it comes up to the wall with the photographs, where it [back to the ending as it is now known] fades in on the photo of Jack in the 1921 picture.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 85161
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
1. I really feel like I've seen that already. Is it not on YouTube or something?
2. But if SK wanted it removed, isn't it kinda shitty to put it back in?
3. A 4K Shining might get me to buy a new TV & setup.
4.
2. But if SK wanted it removed, isn't it kinda shitty to put it back in?
3. A 4K Shining might get me to buy a new TV & setup.
4.
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Unless you saw the premiere in 1980, you’ve never seen it. Kubrick didn’t let that shit out.
Yeah, that’s gonna be a contentious issue, I imagine. Still possible it’s just a mangled press release at this point, though.
Yeah, that’s gonna be a contentious issue, I imagine. Still possible it’s just a mangled press release at this point, though.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 85161
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
man, I'm having a real Sinbad is a genie moment on this oneLoathedVermin72 wrote:Unless you saw the premiere in 1980, you’ve never seen it. Kubrick didn’t let that shit out.
Yeah, that’s gonna be a contentious issue, I imagine. Still possible it’s just a mangled press release at this point, though.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 85161
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Ah, you know why? It's because I've seen some still frames from it and read the script. I think I may have also seen a YouTube video that showed the stills and had people reading the script over them at one point. That's why.
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
The restoration is premiering at Cannes tomorrow and it’s reported to have the lost ending restored. Can’t believe this is happening.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 85161
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
This is super interesting. I'm so torn on whether or not I want this to be included in the film.LoathedVermin72 wrote:The restoration is premiering at Cannes tomorrow and it’s reported to have the lost ending restored. Can’t believe this is happening.
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
I get that, but I’m just so excited to see it that I don’t care.durdencommatyler wrote:This is super interesting. I'm so torn on whether or not I want this to be included in the film.LoathedVermin72 wrote:The restoration is premiering at Cannes tomorrow and it’s reported to have the lost ending restored. Can’t believe this is happening.
Also, if there’s any film for which Kubrick’s infamous perfectionism wasn’t as rigid as usual, it’s this one. I mean, there have been two very different cuts circulating in different territories for decades and Kubrick approved both of them. And technically he did approve this ending as well and showed it to the public, even if he did rescind it afterward.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 85161
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Fair points.LoathedVermin72 wrote:I get that, but I’m just so excited to see it that I don’t care.durdencommatyler wrote:This is super interesting. I'm so torn on whether or not I want this to be included in the film.LoathedVermin72 wrote:The restoration is premiering at Cannes tomorrow and it’s reported to have the lost ending restored. Can’t believe this is happening.
Also, if there’s any film for which Kubrick’s infamous perfectionism wasn’t as rigid as usual, it’s this one. I mean, there have been two very different cuts circulating in different territories for decades and Kubrick approved both of them. And technically he did approve this ending as well and showed it to the public, even if he did rescind it afterward.
Still feels like this much [] icky since he's not around to approve this. But I take your meaning and I am excited to see it as well.
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
This should make you feel better, Joey. According to the film’s producer, those two minutes were cut at the studio’s behest due to poor critical reception. Kubrick always wanted to keep them in.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/ew.com/mov ... ained/amp/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/ew.com/mov ... ained/amp/
The second outtake was a two-minute hospital scene that was placed after Jack froze to death and before the final shot of the ballroom photograph. In the scene (read the script pages), the hotel manager, Ullman (Barry Nelson), visits Wendy and Danny after their ordeal and explains that no supernatural evidence was found to support their claims of what transpired. Just when the audience begins to question everything they’ve seen, Ullman ominously gives Danny the same ball that was rolled to him from an unseen force outside Room 237.
Johnson: In other words: All of this really happened, and the magic events were actual. It was just a little twist. It was easy to jettison.
The hospital scene was included in the film’s preview screening for critics in New York and Los Angeles. Johnson has previously said Kubrick liked the scene because it reassured the audience that Wendy and Danny were okay. But Ullman giving Danny the ball ramped up audience confusion. So in a unusual move, Kubrick ordered it removed from prints distributed around the country.
Harlan: The tennis ball is the same thing as the photograph — it’s unexplainable. It makes Ullman now another ghost element. Was he the ghost from the very beginning? The film is complex enough because nothing is explained. That non-explaining is what was bad for the film initially. It was not a huge success. Now everybody thinks it’s the best horror film ever or whatever. But when it came out the audience expected a horror film with a resolution, with an explanation. Who is the baddie? What was going on? And they were disappointed — many of them, anyway. The fact they were left puzzled was exactly what Stanley Kubrick wanted. And when the film [screened for critics] and wasn’t well received, Warners quite rightly suggested, “It’s enough, just take [the hospital scene] out.” So Stanley did it. He’s not stubborn, especially since this is a film mainly to entertain people. But Stanley was actually very sad that he misread the audience, that he trusted the audience to live with puzzles and no answers, and that they didn’t like it.
- Strat
- Waiting for HVAC Repairman
- Posts: 35420
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:48 pm
- Location: Twin City Kisses
Re: The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread
Chris Rock rebooting the Saw Franchise
wut