CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › All The Money In The World (Pre-Release)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

All The Money In The World (Pre-Release) - Page 2

post #51 of 79

CGI looks fake. They had ten million to get it right, and this is what they came up with? 

 

Oh, wait. Wrong thread. 

post #52 of 79

I feel bad that I'm also interested in what Spacey's take would have looked like.

post #53 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones View Post
 

I feel bad that I'm also interested in what Spacey's take would have looked like.

 

Honestly, I bet he was fantastic as Getty.  In a few years, it'd be interesting to see a SPACEY CUT of the film to see just how good he was (remember, they were going to push heavily for a Best Supporting Oscar for Spacey's work in this prior to the scandal erupting).

post #54 of 79

I've never been the biggest Spacey fan (oh, he says that NOW) but I think Plummer's a better fit.

 

A lot of Spacey's roles feel very ACTING to me whereas Plummer is almost always effortlessly inhabiting his roles.

 

Also, no weird old-man make-up. Geriatric Au Naturale all the way. 

post #55 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codename View Post
 

I've never been the biggest Spacey fan (oh, he says that NOW) but I think Plummer's a better fit.

 

A lot of Spacey's roles feel very ACTING to me whereas Plummer is almost always effortlessly inhabiting his roles.

 

Also, no weird old-man make-up. Geriatric Au Naturale all the way. 

 

Agreed.  Also, Plummer is fucking cool.  He's been great in recent years in INSIDE MAN and BEGINNERS, and he was fantastic in THE INSIDER.  He's a pro, and it'd be great to give the man an Oscar at his age, especially if he fucking delivers again.

 

I expect a BIG Oscar push for him.

post #56 of 79

I think they just want to get the fucking movie done and out before they even look at Oscars. :D

post #57 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

I think they just want to get the fucking movie done and out before they even look at Oscars. :D

 

Maybe, but I expect commercials on TV to have big 'Christopher Plummer is amazing' type raves on them in the week prior to release just to generate buzz.

post #58 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codename View Post
 

I've never been the biggest Spacey fan (oh, he says that NOW) but I think Plummer's a better fit.

 

A lot of Spacey's roles feel very ACTING to me whereas Plummer is almost always effortlessly inhabiting his roles.

 

Also, no weird old-man make-up. Geriatric Au Naturale all the way. 

 

This all the way. I've never been a Spacey fan. There was just something about him that felt phoney to me. 

post #59 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
 

 

Agreed.  Also, Plummer is fucking cool.  He's been great in recent years in INSIDE MAN and BEGINNERS, and he was fantastic in THE INSIDER.  He's a pro, and it'd be great to give the man an Oscar at his age, especially if he fucking delivers again.

 

I expect a BIG Oscar push for him.

 

Plummer did win for Beginners and that wasn't that long enough.

post #60 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie View Post
 

 

Plummer did win for Beginners and that wasn't that long enough.

 

I know, and he earned that Oscar too.  There's nothing to keep him from winning again, though.  

post #61 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
 

 

Honestly, I bet he was fantastic as Getty.  In a few years, it'd be interesting to see a SPACEY CUT of the film to see just how good he was (remember, they were going to push heavily for a Best Supporting Oscar for Spacey's work in this prior to the scandal erupting).


Yeah it just seems like Spacey would work really well in this role (which I guess, duh).  But Plummer is brilliant and looks great in the stuf I've seen so far.

post #62 of 79
The poster with Spacey's name on it was still up at the drive-in last Sunday.
post #63 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

The poster with Spacey's name on it was still up at the drive-in last Sunday.

I want to say they played a trailer with his name and him in it before Murder on the Orient Express, when I saw that a few weeks ago. And that was after the news he'd be replaced.
post #64 of 79

I just caught up with the new trailer, and I'm really liking the vibe of the thing.  Feels very "paranoid '70s thriller" to me.  Hopefully we get good Ridley here, not bad Ridley.

 

Then again, I'm the resident ROBIN HOOD apologist, so I'll probably like it no matter which Ridley Scott shows up!

post #65 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

I

Then again, I'm the resident ROBIN HOOD apologist, so I'll probably like it no matter which Ridley Scott shows up!

Move over, I’ll join you in the penalty box.
post #66 of 79
Robin Hood was an OK medieval revenge film and a bad Robin Hood film IMO.

Kingdom of Heaven DC is where it's at though.
post #67 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codename View Post

Robin Hood was an OK medieval revenge film and a bad Robin Hood film IMO.

Kingdom of Heaven DC is where it's at though.


ROBIN HOOD's primary flaw lies in the knowledge that it rose from the ashes of a far more interesting screenplay that Scott and Crowe tinkered with to such an extent that it ceased to be the original concept in basically every way.  And yet... I still think it's ambitious in the way it tries to marry the politics of the era even more explicitly to the Robin Hood legend than ever before.  It's got a terrific cast, and some striking imagery throughout.  I enjoy it.

 

You're absolutely right that KINGDOM OF HEAVEN's Director's Cut is where it's at.  I maintain it's one of the finest films of Ridley Scott's career, and of the 2000s in general.

post #68 of 79
Quote:

Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

 

You're absolutely right that KINGDOM OF HEAVEN's Director's Cut is where it's at.  I maintain it's one of the finest films of Ridley Scott's career, and of the 2000s in general.

 

 

Kingdom of Heaven DC is so evocative of the Epics of the 50's and 60's. Both in scope, look, themes and feel. Waaaaaay more than Gladiator ever did. 

post #69 of 79

Funny thing about the new trailer is they've spliced in Plummer after the fact and the overall effect is less distracting than Spacey's weird Odo face.

 

But yes it would be nice to one day see the now-mythical Spacey cut. I still love a good Spacey performance!

 

Incidentally it's Rid's 80th birthday today.

post #70 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Codename View Post

Robin Hood was an OK medieval revenge film and a bad Robin Hood film IMO.


Kingdom of Heaven DC is where it's at though.


ROBIN HOOD's primary flaw lies in the knowledge that it rose from the ashes of a far more interesting screenplay that Scott and Crowe tinkered with to such an extent that it ceased to be the original concept in basically every way.  And yet... I still think it's ambitious in the way it tries to marry the politics of the era even more explicitly to the Robin Hood legend than ever before.  It's got a terrific cast, and some striking imagery throughout.  I enjoy it.

You're absolutely right that KINGDOM OF HEAVEN's Director's Cut is where it's at.  I maintain it's one of the finest films of Ridley Scott's career, and of the 2000s in general.

I'd say it's primary flaw is it's called Robin Hood. Since basically everyone over the age of 25 probably has a pretty good understanding of who Robin Hood is and what he's all about, when watching this weird war movie called Robin Hood a lot of them were probably just like: What the fuck is this shit?

The thing you're talking about is just another blow to it. But it's not really something I think most anyone outside of movie nerds know about, and that Robin Hood movie didn't seem to go over well with most people.

I want to say it also felt like we were getting a lot of similar stuff like that too around that time. Movies that took some fun thing and made it gritty, sucked all the fun out, but I can really only think of King Arthur movie from like five years before it. Although I want to say there may have been a lot of tv doc type stuff around that time that was like: This is what these characters would have really been like if they were really alive. Think comics were getting into the draining the fun out game too around that time.
post #71 of 79

Ridley talks about the whole situation.

 

That interview shows why I love that guy no matter how many misfires he puts out. The man doesn't have a self-doubting bone in his body.

post #72 of 79

Based on the tiny pieces of footage compared to one another, it would seem like Christopher Plummer is accentuating the decadence of his character. Kevin Spacey seemed downright mummified, whereas Plummer's Getty appears fully-formed and, his age notwithstanding, rather coyly vibrant in his own way.

post #73 of 79

Scott's doing an adaptation of The Cartel?

 

Noice. 

 

Got to love his energy in that interview. 

post #74 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 .

 

You're absolutely right that KINGDOM OF HEAVEN's Director's Cut is where it's at.  I maintain it's one of the finest films of Ridley Scott's career, and of the 2000s in general.

 



Absolutely. It's criminally underrated and I get the impression that many people, if they're even aware of its existence, don't fully appreciate the difference between the theatrical cut and the DC. There are so many wonderful little moments sprinkled throughout the film, it's a testament to what you can achieve when not aiming for a 2 hour runtime.

Speaking of KOH and its wonderful script….what the hell happened to William Monahan? He wrote two fantastic scripts in as many years, without a co-writer, mind you. It's a shame his career has taken a turn for the worse, he seemed like a major talent in the mid 2000s.
Edited by Kevin Macken - 11/30/17 at 1:18pm
post #75 of 79
Maybe someone read his JP4 script and decided he was terrible.
post #76 of 79
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

Ridley talks about the whole situation.

 

That interview shows why I love that guy no matter how many misfires he puts out. The man doesn't have a self-doubting bone in his body.

 

That's a really great interview. 

post #77 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Macken View Post

Speaking of KOH and its wonderful script….what the hell happened to William Monahan? He wrote two fantastic scripts in as many years, without a co-writer, mind you. It's a shame his career has taken a turn for the worse, he seemed liked a major talent in mid 2000s.

His KINGDOM OF HEAVEN and DEPARTED scripts are world class, and it's kind of baffling that nothing he's attempted since (which hasn't been much, unfortunately) has come anywhere close to that level.  THE GAMBLER does have some good dialogue, but nothing even approaching the insane quotability of THE DEPARTED.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post

Maybe someone read his JP4 script and decided he was terrible.

He wasn't the primary creative force there, though.  Spielberg and Sayles set the direction, and there was little Monahan could do with what he was given.  ALL the various drafts based on that concept are awful.  Ballsy, but awful.

post #78 of 79

Sayles' draft is indeed bad. He also had no clue about the name of the Dilophosaurus while writing it. 

post #79 of 79

Body Of Lies is pretty good. Some of the scenes they deleted took a little of the bite out of it.

 

Tried watching Mojave, didn't make it to the 30 minute mark. Emo Garrett Hedlund was too much for me.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › All The Money In The World (Pre-Release)