CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Hellboy Reboot
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hellboy Reboot - Page 4

post #151 of 312

My biggest problem with Pacific Rim is that how they determine the best candidate to synchronise with the surviving Gypsy Danger pilot is through an arbitrarily scored stick fight.

post #152 of 312

I really like del Toro. He's got boundless enthusiasm and creativity, and he's genuinely in love with everything he does. I even enjoy Pacific Rim (I can do without the intentional weirdness and wandering off of everything with Charlie Day and Ron Perlman, when there was so much more interesting story to tell with the Jaeger pilots and the drift), but the film is fun. A giant robot drags a cargo ship into battle with a kaiju and uses it as a weapon. Come on!

 

del Toro just gets sucked into his own worlds with a million different ideas all going at once. When he focuses those ideas, we get something genuinely great like Pan's Labyrinth. When all the ideas start to take over and pull him in different directions, we get Hellboy.

 

Unfocused del Toro is far and away better than no del Toro, though. There's still a spot in my heart for both the first and second films (maybe moreso the second), but there are significant missteps. If he had gone through with The Hobbit, it would have been absolutely fascinating to see what the film ended up being, for better or worse.

post #153 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. View Post
 

 A giant robot drags a cargo ship into battle with a kaiju and uses it as a weapon. Come on!


They did a great job rendering all those raindrops hitting the ship!

post #154 of 312
Blade II?

Pretty good.

Pacific Rim?

The suck.
post #155 of 312
Boy am I gonna get shit for this but I'm (mostly) glad The Hobbit happened the way it did.

Crimson Peak ain't that great either...visuals aside. He needs to do a whole bunch of Spanish language films for a while..
post #156 of 312

I still would've rather had GDT's THE HOBBIT.

post #157 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 


They did a great job rendering all those raindrops hitting the ship!

 

Scientists have said there's no way using a ship as a club would have worked, due to the structure and how they're built (and distribution of weight and so on), it would have snapped in two while still being swung (kind of like how the Titanic snapped in half when it did).

 

The scientists were aware of the context that it was a film about giant robots and monsters punching each other. I suspect they also have news for us about the feasibility of building such robots but they didn't want to spoil all our fun. At least not all at once.

post #158 of 312
I guess I'm just relieved I like it as much as I do....and have trouble picturing a version that doesn't get suffocated in Del Toro's quirks. But that's on me. It might've been spectacular and blown what we got outta the water..
post #159 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post
 

 

Scientists have said there's no way using a ship as a club would have worked, due to the structure and how they're built (and distribution of weight and so on), it would have snapped in two while still being swung (kind of like how the Titanic snapped in half when it did).

The Titanic is generally accepted by the experts as having broken up after it was below the surface, not while it was tipped, as in the movie. Cameron just wanted a cool visual.

 

I also kind of fanwank the ship club as whatever materials science and structural engineering they've figured out that allows them to build 200 foot tall bipedal robots has trickled down after 20-odd years and they're building cargo ships with that knowledge.

post #160 of 312
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shan View Post

 

Scientists have said there's no way using a ship as a club would have worked, due to the structure and how they're built (and distribution of weight and so on), it would have snapped in two while still being swung (kind of like how the Titanic snapped in half when it did).

 

The scientists were aware of the context that it was a film about giant robots and monsters punching each other. I suspect they also have news for us about the feasibility of building such robots but they didn't want to spoil all our fun. At least not all at once.

 

I was just being snarky about how DARK AND RAINY PacRim is.

 

That kind of fidelity to physics in a movie about giant robots and monsters is meaningless. I was really good with the ship remaining intact because that's a fucking cool move (which it is). It's too bad it's muffled by darkness and rain.

post #161 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fafhrd View Post
 

The Titanic is generally accepted by the experts as having broken up after it was below the surface, not while it was tipped, as in the movie. Cameron just wanted a cool visual.

 

I also kind of fanwank the ship club as whatever materials science and structural engineering they've figured out that allows them to build 200 foot tall bipedal robots has trickled down after 20-odd years and they're building cargo ships with that knowledge.

 

I guess I got science and reality back to front. It wouldn't be the first time. So to dodge further discussion of the topic, I'm going to leave with this quote out of context by Lew Grade about the film Raise the Titanic "... it would have been cheaper to lower the Atlantic".

 

Also Neil deGrasse Tyson and his "takedown" of a mistake James Cameron made in Titanic to the point where he changed the film. Even I spotted two all-but-mistakes in his "takedown" of Gravity.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 

 

I was just being snarky about how DARK AND RAINY PacRim is.

 

That kind of fidelity to physics in a movie about giant robots and monsters is meaningless. I was really good with the ship remaining intact because that's a fucking cool move (which it is). It's too bad it's muffled by darkness and rain.

 

a) I know.

 

b) Having gone through many a recruitment process, I'm much more irked by the pilot recruitment procedure than any physics problems.

post #162 of 312
I found the Hong Kong fight quite good. I have more problems with the undersea fight which has some visibility issues and the final kaiju (Slattern, I think) is wasted.

Ultimately it's the actors that really destroy the film for me. The Aussie pilots and the Gypsy Danger crew all seem miscast.

The film works for me overall because of the world building. I watch it with the kids and we talk about the different Jaegers and the relationship between the pilots and the various abilities of the Kaiju and it's a ton of fun.
post #163 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. View Post
 

I really like del Toro. He's got boundless enthusiasm and creativity, and he's genuinely in love with everything he does. .

 

Yeah he earns the Geek Cred via his media and personality, and I think people give his movies a pass because of it. NOT the general public tho.

post #164 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post
 

 

Scientists have said there's no way using a ship as a club would have worked, due to the structure and how they're built (and distribution of weight and so on), it would have snapped in two while still being swung (kind of like how the Titanic snapped in half when it did).

 

The scientists were aware of the context that it was a film about giant robots and monsters punching each other. I suspect they also have news for us about the feasibility of building such robots but they didn't want to spoil all our fun. At least not all at once.

 

I found PR as rubbish as the rest of GdT's English language output but yeah, scientists - and other TACTICAL REALISM CinemaSins spergelords whining about cool imagery being against the laws of physics or whatever bullshit - can eat a bowl of Alpo. That's the same kind of crap that leads to midget velociraptors covered in feathers, ugh.

post #165 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel Red View Post
 

 

I found PR as rubbish as the rest of GdT's English language output but yeah, scientists - and other TACTICAL REALISM CinemaSins spergelords whining about cool imagery being against the laws of physics or whatever bullshit - can eat a bowl of Alpo. That's the same kind of crap that leads to midget velociraptors covered in feathers, ugh.

 

Well, I personally did find the physics of wielding ships as a club while using a giant robot you're piloting to be interesting but there was a sense of perspective about the whole enterprise. Any non-Japanese character's attempt to speak Japanese was much more horrifying, for starters.

post #166 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post

My biggest problem with Pacific Rim is that how they determine the best candidate to synchronise with the surviving Gypsy Danger pilot is through an arbitrarily scored stick fight.

My complaint was that the story was set in the least interesting time in this world's history. "Hey, there used to be fleets of giant robots fighting giant monsters! But we shut that down and we're building a wall now."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

I still would've rather had GDT's THE HOBBIT.

We would have at the very least gotten a director who was emotionally and creatively invested in the project.
post #167 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post

My complaint was that the story was set in the least interesting time in this world's history. "Hey, there used to be fleets of giant robots fighting giant monsters! But we shut that down and we're building a wall now."

I'm sure budget was a factor. Its always easier to write it than to make it. Its what J.R.R. Martin attempted to do with A song of Ice and Fire, write it as impossibly unfilmable. The show's producers are learning this the hard way.

Y'all remember the movie Legend with Tom Cruise and Tim Curry? The initial draft was some sweeping epic with clashing army battle scenes. Dan Akroyd's initial concept for Ghostbusters was set in a Blade Runner-esque future outer space. Reign of Fire skipped the whole Dragonpocalypse as well and focused instead on the aftermath.
post #168 of 312

No one should blame this new incarnation for HELLBOY III not happening. As much as I wanted to see GdT close out his trilogy, his budget ask just wasn't realistic. It makes sense for this to go after the R-rated, reasonably budgeted creative freedom sweet-spot.


Edited by Barry Woodward - 5/12/17 at 2:08pm
post #169 of 312
I could see Republicans cutting the giant robot budget after coming to power in mid-term elections, solely because they were a Democratic president's idea. It's the single most plausible bit in the movie.

I had actually forgotten a lot about Pacific Rim until y'all brought it up. All I remembered was the robot fist punching into the office building and starting the Newton's Cradle toy on the desk.
post #170 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post

I could see Republicans cutting the giant robot budget after coming to power in mid-term elections, solely because they were a Democratic president's idea. It's the single most plausible bit in the movie.

I had actually forgotten a lot about Pacific Rim until y'all brought it up. All I remembered was the robot fist punching into the office building and starting the Newton's Cradle toy on the desk.

 

I remember thinking that the idea of building a wall around everything was stretching things a bit far especially after it as shown to not work, something that should have been self-evident even before they built it. Hence no-one in their right minds would ever consider such a thing in real life. Shows what I know.

 

I have a long record of failure, going back to 1998 when I thought the Siege was ridiculous. I guess it still was in that obviously, Bruce Willis's character would clearly have gotten a medal of some sort and probably a promotion. Might as well add to the list a mention about how The Long Kiss Goodnight showed a world where the problem was "not enough terrorists".

post #171 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post

I remember thinking that the idea of building a wall around everything was stretching things a bit far especially after it as shown to not work, something that should have been self-evident even before they built it. Hence no-one in their right minds would ever consider such a thing in real life. Shows what I know.

I have a long record of failure, going back to 1998 when I thought the Siege was ridiculous. I guess it still was in that obviously, Bruce Willis's character would clearly have gotten a medal of some sort and probably a promotion. Might as well add to the list a mention about how The Long Kiss Goodnight showed a world where the problem was "not enough terrorists".

I always thought the wall was purely a desperate political solution. The Jaegers were going down faster than they could build them and the Kaiju arrivals were increasing.

"Reports by the FAKE NEWS that the wall won't work are wrong! The pro-Jaeger party lost the election and are lying. Sad!"
post #172 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriegaffe View Post


I always thought the wall was purely a desperate political solution. The Jaegers were going down faster than they could build them and the Kaiju arrivals were increasing.

"Reports by the FAKE NEWS that the wall won't work are wrong! The pro-Jaeger party lost the election and are lying. Sad!"

 

So what's going to happen to all the kaiju that come out of the portal on an escalating basis? They're just going to lurk about in the ocean in ever increasing numbers? What's going to happen to the shipping industry? I always thought the whole thing with the wall was just some sort of construction scam. I'd be interested to see the books on the financing of that whole project and the % markup.

 

You'd think the project would be dead in the water when that kaiju went through that wall like butter but I find it quite believable that somehow the whole thing kept going. I mean it's nice if the F-35 like ... worked when everything's said and done but that's almost beside the point (as the projected $1.5 trillion or more to be spent on the project and ... other stuff will attest to).

 

Corollary, I found it hilarious when it turned out there were kaiju that could fly for that very reason. Now you'd think that would kill the wall project but ...

 

Well, I guess maybe we'll find out in Pacific Rim 2. Who else thinks Maelstrom was a better title than Uprising?

 

Uprising against what? The sinister forces of the construction industry?

 

Mind you, it was an interesting point about how there were sinister political machinations to shut down thes seemingly effective Jaeger programme (at least more so than the alternatives), so I actually do hope they expand on that. They did actually set up a few things pointing towards something no good going on behind the scenes at the policy level so there could certainly be an uprising against that.

post #173 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post

They did actually set up a few things pointing towards something no good going on behind the scenes at the policy level so there could certainly be an uprising against that.

I honestly believe that a better drama than Pacific Rim could have been made by elaborating on that point further. Do what Shin Godzilla did, and look at American politics to demonstrate why we're unprepared for a kaiju disaster. Cast James Caan as the wall construction industry lobbyist who buys off the congressmen.
post #174 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post
 

My biggest problem with Pacific Rim is that how they determine the best candidate to synchronise with the surviving Gypsy Danger pilot is through an arbitrarily scored stick fight.

I feel like you missed the point. They're supposed to fight to a draw if they're drift compatible. Raleigh can't be drift compatible with someone that he takes down immediately. If somebody came in and beat the piss out of him Raleigh would also not be compatible with them. Ideally, NO points would be scored because they'd always know what move each other was going to make and counter it.

 

The Drift takes people who are already capable of predicting each other's thoughts and actions and removes the latency and uncertainty. If you get thrown into a Jaeger with someone who will react completely different than you, or that you have no idea how they'll react, then it won't work. Stacker is able to be drift compatible with Chuck because he both knows how Herc and Chuck fight from years of observation, and is capable of letting Chuck take the lead.

post #175 of 312
Quote:
 
 

We’ve been granted permission to do it R-rated, which for me is just like taking the cuffs off,” (Neil Marshall) told Garris. “It’s like, okay, so now we can just make the movie we want to make. Nobody’s going to stop us. So, that’s the main [difference]. And I’m sure, obviously, the success of things like Deadpool and Logan have not hurt that cause. But, also, when you go back the original material, it is kind of bloody, so I’m going to embrace that.”

Marshall continued, “It’s definitely going to be as practical as we can possibly make it. I love to do stuff in camera whenever I possibly can, and use CG as the amazing tool that it is, to enhance or expand upon the world, but not to use it to replace reality, when you can do it [for] real.”

post #176 of 312

...OK?

 

I mean, not being terribly familiar with the source material, my issues with the two films never boiled down to "needs more blood/violence/nudity/swearing." Things like the unnecessary audience surrogate in the first film, the limited budget, the patched-together quality of the second....these were/are the problems the films had. (Again, I still love the first film, and enjoy pieces of the second).

 

Marshall's certainly earned a lot of goodwill, so I remain mildly optimistic and interested, but this feels like a textbook entry of films we just don't need but are getting anyway.

post #177 of 312

The comic book was never gory or gritty. In fact there was very little blood. The aesthetic was dark and, in line with most of Mignola's work, everything is in shadows.

 

But viscera was never a concern. And in terms of tone there's always a dry, situational humor. Not goofy like the del Toro movies, but more like every scenario is, "Ah crap, Hellboy is having a bad dad." Followed by ever-escalating set pieces where the monsters keep getting bigger and the chasms keep getting deeper, etc.

 

So having Hellboy drop a few f-bombs and adding more arterial spray is not a plus. del Toro was on to something by having Hellboy be the supernatural Men in Black, but tone down the silly just a smidge and add an edge of film noir. Hellboy in the end is a cynic, and most of his stories, that are usually short vignettes, end on a downer note. Not tears or anything, but an ambiguity that Hellboy accepts at face value as his lot in life because them's da breaks. 

post #178 of 312

I mean, here's your standard depiction of violence in a Hellboy comic:

 



It's all so stylized as to not even come across as blood or a deep neck gash. I kind of wish Marshall would pull a Rodriguez Sin City and try to translate the look of the comic literally.

 

But Sin City has not aged well. And Snyder has shown how stagnant translating actual comic panels can be. I just wish some middle ground could be found, because something really gets lost between the mediums without Mignola's distinctive touch.

post #179 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

...tone down the silly just a smidge and add an edge of film noir. Hellboy in the end is a cynic, and most of his stories, that are usually short vignettes, end on a downer note. Not tears or anything, but an ambiguity that Hellboy accepts at face value as his lot in life because them's da breaks. 

 

With the caveat of "We don't really need more HB movies," I'm good with this! It's a take that could still feel fresh despite the glut of comic/GN-based films.

 

And it doesn't need an R rating.

post #180 of 312

I wonder if the goal is to make it R-rated, or if they just have the freedom to roll with it, if it ends up being rated as such.

 

If they've got creative freedom to make the movie they want to make and the studio is good whether it ends up R-rated or not, cool. If they're deliberately making an R-rated movie for marketing purposes (like, I don't know... Logan), then get to fuck.

post #181 of 312

Perhaps it's not so much the violence and language but simply a desire to make something with its roots much more based in horror? Like proper dread as opposed to simply depicting it as a giant monster or army of cool clockwork robots.

post #182 of 312
If you take one look at Neil Marshall's filmography you'll have your answer as to why this will be bloody. It's okay if it's not a slave to the source material, and they can still execute the tone of the books and while having all the gore they want. I'd rather have a filmmaker be able to explore what interests them and make it his own than treat comic panels like storyboards.. It seems like Neil Marshall enjoys exploring blood and heavy violence, and I usually like the final product. So I'm on board.
post #183 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.T. View Post
 

I wonder if the goal is to make it R-rated, or if they just have the freedom to roll with it, if it ends up being rated as such.

 

If they've got creative freedom to make the movie they want to make and the studio is good whether it ends up R-rated or not, cool. If they're deliberately making an R-rated movie for marketing purposes (like, I don't know... Logan), then get to fuck.

 

I'm fine with this approach - tell the story they want and let the ratings fall where it may - rather than taking what works perfectly well at the PG-13 level and arbitrarily intensifying it to R.

post #184 of 312

Ian McShane is going to play Professor Broom.

 

This thing is really shaping up nicely.

post #185 of 312

I don't know if I like that. I'm only familiar with the del Toro movies, but isn't Broom something of a father figure? I just don't see McShane like that. 

post #186 of 312
McShane legitimizes this a bit more but what it is sorely missing is a big enough star to make it marketable.

That was the problem with the Del Toro movies and their lack of profitability.

Perlman was great but the cast in neither film could get the butts in the seats.
post #187 of 312
After Doomsday, it's extremely easy for me to give this the benefit of the doubt. Given that I wasn't over the moon in love with the Del Toro films only helps it's case. Bring it on..
post #188 of 312

The Del Toro films had incredible production design and a lot of heart. But I've never, ever been a fan of making Hellboy basically a teenager in an adult body. I also could go for Abe being a little less of a nerdy, sensitive sidekick and more of an active participant with moments to shine.

 

As for McShane, he's got the range to pull off the paternal figure. But I hope there's enough for him to chew on, as far as writing. Even in his small role in the John Wick movies, he's been excellent.

 

I wonder if we'll see some younger (but still older) Broom doing some jet-setting and investigating in his own right.

post #189 of 312
It wasn't how Hellboy was played that left me cold on them. I always like Perlman. And like you said, the previous film's hearts were most definitely in the right place and they both looked really great. They just never gelled into a whole in the way that I personally needed them to to have been a big fan. They felt very forced most of the time..
post #190 of 312
"Hellboy 1" was kind of hobbled by the need to bring in an audience surrogate character as well as providing Hellboy with some sort of weird perpetual adolescence to overcome. Part II is the perfect Hellboy movie.

The end.
post #191 of 312

Yeah, John Myers was a non-character and basically served no purpose after his Men In Black-lite tour through the BPRD. There are many less lazy ways to introduce us to the strangeness of Hellboy's world without having to go that route.

post #192 of 312
Has Nick come out and said what his exact involvement is in this project? Looks like with the casting it's shaping up nicely.
post #193 of 312
I really like what I'm hearing about the characters and creatures they're exploring.
post #194 of 312

Ed Skrein has been cast as Benjamin Daimio.

 

Who is Asian-American in the books.

post #195 of 312

hahahah yes of course

post #196 of 312

That feels like a double insult. First to Asians and then to everyone who hates Ed Skrein. Which is everyone else.

post #197 of 312

Daniel Dae Kim has left Hawaii 5-0 as well! He's like the go to Asian American actor isn't he? No excuse.

 

Mind you there's never any excuse for Skrein. I can't imagine him putting up a passionate Swintonesque defence of the casting.

post #198 of 312
Gross.

BUT, the first time I read it as Ed Sheeran, so at least it got a bit better. I bet Skrein looks better in those CLOUD ATLAS eyes.
post #199 of 312

I'll watch this movie. But I have to admit, I'd be surprised if it lives up to GdT's films. Not even because I'm holding them up as classics of the genre, but more that I think dark fantasy epics like this end up not working far more often than not. I like Marshall, and Harbour seems fine. Milla Jovovich as a villain is worth my money. But this could end up landing anywhere between Spawn and Constantine, and I wouldn't be surprised.

post #200 of 312

If this is as good as Constantine, I'll be a happy bunny.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Hellboy Reboot