CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Basic discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Basic discussion

post #1 of 68
Thread Starter 
On my way to see it. Fingers crossed for Mctiernan.
post #2 of 68
So...what's this movie about, anyway?
post #3 of 68
Samuel L. Jackson is a hard-driving drill instructor who takes his men out on a "training mission" and things go bad. Travolta plays an Airborne Ranger/investigator who goes in to unravel What Really Happened with the help of an MP. Kind of a non-sequel to "The General's Daughter." Great spec script.
post #4 of 68
Thread Starter 
This film was the awkward, cluttered, and mostly benign prequel to what could have been an awesome film series.
post #5 of 68
So it didn't scratch YOUR surface, Nick?
post #6 of 68
I thought this came out in two months.

I think Harry ruined the ending in his script review online. If I am right it has a collosally bizarre twist ending. Is that true Nick?
post #7 of 68
Thread Starter 
It has 11,000 twists. The ending is a doozy, but it turned out to be the only part of the film I liked, as preposterous and pointless as it was.
post #8 of 68
What's with the weird swooping camera movements of Travolta and Empress of Rome swinging their fists around like underhanded pitchers?
post #9 of 68
So is McTiernan losing it or is he just experimenting?
post #10 of 68
Quote:
wade:
So is McTiernan losing it or is he just experimenting?
McTiernan hasn't "had it" since before I grew nuthair.
post #11 of 68
Quote:
Slater Is Your Density:
McTiernan hasn't "had it" since before I grew nuthair.
either your nuthair appeared in the last decade, or you need to go watch Hunt for Red October, Die Hard and Predator again.
post #12 of 68
So you sprouted shortly after DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE?
post #13 of 68
Quote:
Sean Bateman, Samurai Journalist:
I thought this came out in two months.
It actually got pushed up to March 28th.
post #14 of 68
I was twelve when "Red October" came out, which was the last McTiernan joint that I really enjoyed.

Although I guess "Die Hard With a Vengeance" had it's moments...

So I'm a liar. Oh well. That doesn't change the fact that the man hasn't had a good movie in eight years.
post #15 of 68
Hmmm. This makes me sad, though I have to see it thanks to Taye Diggs.
post #16 of 68
Quote:
So I'm a liar. Oh well. That doesn't change the fact that the man hasn't had a good movie in eight years.
"See what happens WHEN YOU LIE!!??? WHEN YOU LIE!!??"

I dunno i.... still kind of want to see this movie
post #17 of 68
I don't see how I can't see it. Primarily I avoid combat films but my dad and I saw the trailer around the same time and both thought it was interesting and I liked the conspiracy thread in it. Plus, Taye Diggs. (I know, I know)
post #18 of 68
McT has done nothing but shit since Last Action Hero, but I am definately going to see this flick.
post #19 of 68
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Sean Bateman, Samurai Journalist:
McT has done nothing but shit since Last Action Hero, but I am definately going to see this flick.
THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR.
post #20 of 68
Quote:
Sean Bateman, Samurai Journalist:
McT has done nothing but shit since Last Action Hero, but I am definately going to see this flick.
Someone needs to go and check Die Hard with a Vengeance again.
post #21 of 68
I'm with you on the Thomas Crowne Affair.
post #22 of 68
I really don't understand the acclaim that The Thomas Crown Affair received. It was decent, sure, but I forgot the movie the second I walked out of the theater, and the direction seemed too sedated, like McT got bored with the material halfway through the flick. I really couldn't find anything particularly original or exciting in the entire flick, with the obvious exception of Russo's funbags.

Anybody care to fill me in on what I obviously missed?
post #23 of 68
Quote:
Blunt:
Quote:
Sean Bateman, Samurai Journalist:
McT has done nothing but shit since Last Action Hero, but I am definately going to see this flick.
Someone needs to go and check Die Hard with a Vengeance again.
Forgot about that. Great film. Slater is 110% right about TCA.
post #24 of 68
First of all, I agree on Die Hard with a Vengance and Thomas Crown Affair. And Last Action Hero has a couple moments of self-awareness about action films that were pretty good. McT hasn't "lost it". Even if he makes a couple average movies, everyone is too quick to jump ship! HELLOO! HE BROUGHT YOU DIE HARD, PREDATOR, HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER!!

Now with Basic, he has the talent (travolta and Jackson) and I heard the twist at the end is pretty amazing. I'll definitely go see it, and McT will probably not disappoint.
post #25 of 68
Just wanted to resurrect this thread. I've got a major, two-part, all-encompassing, neverending, tangent-filled interview with "Basic" writer/producer Jamie Vanderbilt coming up this week. For budding filmmakers/screenwriters, it really traces the script all the way from the idea stage at USC to the bidding war to the various people attached all the way up through production, re-shoots and release.

Vanderbilt pretty much told me every single last thing I wanted to know about the film, working with McT, working with Travolta, doing a modern military thriller, etc. etc. etc.
post #26 of 68
I'm in the midst of writing a review for Basic, but suffice to say that the movie sucked, misdirection was used so blatantly that by the third time a different version of what happened was told, I was groaning with pain. For a film that spent a good amount of the running time on trying to discover what took place during the training exercise, it was never really resolved in the end. The payoff was ridiculous, another good example how a good cast can't save a poorly scripted movie.
post #27 of 68
Alright so can someone spoil the Surprise ending so i never have to see this ?
post #28 of 68
Please don't spoil it, or I won't be able to come in this thread again.

Jack, when are those going up?
post #29 of 68
Quote:
Zalasta:
I'm in the midst of writing a review for Basic, but suffice to say that the movie sucked, misdirection was used so blatantly that by the third time a different version of what happened was told, I was groaning with pain. For a film that spent a good amount of the running time on trying to discover what took place during the training exercise, it was never really resolved in the end. The payoff was ridiculous, another good example how a good cast can't save a poorly scripted movie.
I heard from one reporter that there are so many twists that it basically negates the entire premise of the movie. Is this true?
post #30 of 68
Quote:
Smilin' Jack Ruby:
I heard from one reporter that there are so many twists that it basically negates the entire premise of the movie. Is this true?
Well, I guess I would agree with that statement, the twists definitely made the premise somewhat pointless. Supposedly the movie was about finding out why 6 men went out but only two returned, but in the end that was only partially answered.
post #31 of 68
This was cut by George Folsey Jr.?! I am getting very confused. McT also said that audiences are starting to realize this film is supposed to be funny on comingsoon.net.
post #32 of 68
Quote:
Can anyone explain why one of this movies ads calls John Travolta "one of the greatest actors of our times."
I wondered about that too...

Then the next time the trailer rolled around I noticed the quote was by the greatest film critic ever to walk this earth : Larry King.
post #33 of 68
Quote:
This was cut by George Folsey Jr.?! I am getting very confused. McT also said that audiences are starting to realize this film is supposed to be funny on comingsoon.net.
Sean do you have a link to that? I'm confused. To me, I figured this was totally a straight miliatary/war drama/suspense.

I'm hoping thats what it will be. Thats what I want to take my dad to....not a comedy "funny" film! (Interesting review on AICN today though.)
post #34 of 68
According to writer/producer Jamie Vanderbilt, it's a straight military suspenser. He designed it like an Agatha Christie mystery, in fact, as an interrogation thriller. The comedy is likely just "wry" bits from Jackson and Travolta. The film isn't a comedy.
post #35 of 68
Thats what I thought. Thanks for the clarification, SJR.
post #36 of 68
So the twist ending. Does Samuel L grab himself a diet pepsi twist, pulls his skin off, and reveals that he was Jack Nicholson all along?

Any word on when the interview will surface SJR? I'm rather intrigued about the script writing process starting from the beginning to actually shooting them, so I eagerly await seeing it on the front page.
post #37 of 68
This interview is great. I'm really excited to see the film now for more than just Sam L. kicking arse.

I'll be in line friday night!
post #38 of 68
Thread Starter 
The interview's great. The movie's SHIT.
post #39 of 68
damn, too bad to hear that Nick. So what exactly was wrong with the flick? Too convoluted or insulting...or can we blame Travolta.

As for the interview. Sounds like a great healthy talk there, great read SJR.

So you can just get yourself a manager and whore your story out? Honestly, I doubt script writing is my thing these days. God. It took me a good 5 months to pump out my first play. I can't imagine doing anything on that scale in 3 weeks.

It's nice to hear these kinds of stories though, about the other process different writers go through. Interesting to hear that the guy didn't have any director or stars in mind when making it all. I've read that statement before elsewhere about, 'oh yeah, I wrote this with Spacey in mind'...what if Spacey doesn't want to do it, what if a certain director doesn't want to do it. What if they said get lost kid, you're no good. So it seems some professionals out there just concentrate on the story at hand, and leave the details for later.

Look forward to part 2.
post #40 of 68
Ah, well. I'll probably still see this. I want to see what in Travolta's universe "happens to liars," which looks to involve an airplane propeller.

"S.J.R.: These three weeks – what month/year was that?

Jamie: It was March of 2000."

This is the kind of info I hunger for. I'm not kidding. I was struggling through some sort of advanced math class in school to get the AA back in March or 2000. I remember sitting by a window in an empty room after class and looking at a loose screw on the floor in March of 2000. Basic was being written at that some time somewhere else in the world.
post #41 of 68
Just caught a screening of this tonight. This film made no damn sense. Well acted, directed and shot. Not to mention that the propeller scene was great. It was convulted for no particular reason. The four of us tried to make sense of it for a few minutes and it just doesn't add up. I think, maybe, I don't know, did he do it?, could be, but I thought he was dead, who was dead?, that guy, but he knew all along, no he was just pretending he did, what? Aw fuck it.
post #42 of 68
Caught this one tonight. It's not McTiernan in top form, but I don't have nearly as much bile to spew at it as Nick did. I will agree with his use of 'cluttered' to describe it. SO MANY semi-generic characters doing SO MANY things in SO MANY FLASHBACKS...

That being said, I thought it was a decent, if confusing military suspense flick. Regarding the humor discussion above, there are a few good lines that got laughs, but it's by no means a comedy. Sam Jackson entertained me as an ass of a Sgt./instructor. If you like him and are in the mood for a military drama, I'd hit a matinee.

Giovanni Ribisi and Harry Connick Jr. are in it, if that makes a difference to anyone.

Oh, I will also mention that it was THE LONGEST 95 MINUTES OF MY LIFE. I truly do not understand how I sat there for 2.5 hours, and emerged from the theater a mere 97 minutes later. Travolta must have pulled some strings to get access to that sweet Hubbard Time-Warping technology. That is my only explanation.
post #43 of 68
McTiernan losing his edge? Hmm...

"IT'S TIME TO PLAY...ROLLERBALL!!!!!!!!!!"

Nuff' said.
post #44 of 68
Even Johnny McT has to pay the bills. But this looks like a return to top visual form, and the fact that people are saying they left the theater talking about how to figure out the movie makes me think want to see it. I like movie that actually make you think a little. After all, if I wanted MINDLESS entertainment, I could watch tv.
post #45 of 68
Rangers go on black ops?? I thought they were more like glorified paratroopers. Better trained than a regular soldier, but not the type who get sent on secret small unit missions and all that.
post #46 of 68
Crap crap crap crap crap crap crap. I hated this film. I liked the first 3/4 a lot. After that it all went to shit. The ending was fucking horendous. Do not see this movie.
post #47 of 68
so.... was Giovanni Ribisi channeling Dr. Evil or what?
post #48 of 68
Actually, watch this mindboglins interview with "Commodore" L. Ron Hubbard and tell me Ribisi wasn't channeling his fearless scientology leader.

<a href="http://lisatrust.bogie.nl/Media/int-shrinking.htm" target="_blank">http://lisatrust.bogie.nl/Media/int-shrinking.htm</a>
post #49 of 68
Spoilers I guess....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Ribisi was actually pretty good, and I loved his death scene. Why in the hell did they keep cutting to shots of their mouths in the final scene with Tim Daly?
post #50 of 68
Tell me I can like this so I can put some money in McT's pocket. Worth a sit, even if it's chaotic?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Basic discussion