Escape to the Movies: Straw Dogs
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Any movie with Ryan Gosling is ruined by dint of him being in it. It's not that I don't like him, it's that somewhere along the line (I apparently missed where) he became 'the Internet's Boyfriend', and women swoon over him for ? reason. Maybe it was The Notebook, I see that in his imdb profile and heard it was a chick flick.
It's like Twilight. The films could be good, but the fans, or apprehension of future fans, keep me from even trying it.
It's like Twilight. The films could be good, but the fans, or apprehension of future fans, keep me from even trying it.
But it won't make money, because the only people who will go to see this early are people who loved the original, and when they inevitably hate this one the will tell everyone else not to go and see it because it's shit. After that, people who never saw the original will just watch the original, and people who did see the original will just watch it again.Lionsfan said:
Oh my God, it's the first news I've got about a Straw Dogs remake. Why do you need to remake a film that is still absolutely relevant and holds up perfectly today? Sure, a little slow paced for some modern audiences that have a 20 second attention span (because that's how long the regular advertisement runs) but fuck that, it's a great film and it is perfectly enjoyable today, as it was back then.
Also, if Alexander Skasgaard is really playing the rapist...excuse me, but I can't think of many people who would not wish to be raped by him. Hell, I'd allow it, "sure man, you want to rape me? I can scream and all if you're into that, but don't you start regreting it halfway...cause I won't!".
...
...no, really.
Also, if Alexander Skasgaard is really playing the rapist...excuse me, but I can't think of many people who would not wish to be raped by him. Hell, I'd allow it, "sure man, you want to rape me? I can scream and all if you're into that, but don't you start regreting it halfway...cause I won't!".
...
...no, really.
The wave of bastardization of truly original or visceral films has taken yet another step over the line. The only small consolation that I can see is that people who know and care about real films would recognize something as preposterous as a Straw Dogs remake as the trash it must be at the first mention of the idea. True, remakes could have the fortunate side effect of bringing the originals into the consciousness of their new target audiences, but I guess I just lack the faith in modern society to believe that this truly happens in more than a handful of cases. The lack of CG seems to be enough of a deal-breaker for the new breed of moviegoers.
The trend has done little to credit itself, from I Spit on Your Grave, through The Hills Have Eyes, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, or even The Poseidon Adventure. But this is more akin to remaking the Mona Lisa with MS Paint and trying to sell it in an art gallery. Aside from casting Shawn William Scott in Rob Zombie's remake of Full Metal Jacket, I don't really know how much worse you could do.
Shame on any director who would have the gall to steal something that was done right the first time and dare to claim that it has anything to do with them. Struggling filmmakers: If you want to make a do-over, pick something that was bad either because it was good idea but had no money for production (El Mariachi to Desperado, good example though done by the same director), or was a ridiculous idea that could be made more foolish with more money(like Motel Hell or Truth or Dare: A Critical Madness).
The trend has done little to credit itself, from I Spit on Your Grave, through The Hills Have Eyes, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, or even The Poseidon Adventure. But this is more akin to remaking the Mona Lisa with MS Paint and trying to sell it in an art gallery. Aside from casting Shawn William Scott in Rob Zombie's remake of Full Metal Jacket, I don't really know how much worse you could do.
Shame on any director who would have the gall to steal something that was done right the first time and dare to claim that it has anything to do with them. Struggling filmmakers: If you want to make a do-over, pick something that was bad either because it was good idea but had no money for production (El Mariachi to Desperado, good example though done by the same director), or was a ridiculous idea that could be made more foolish with more money(like Motel Hell or Truth or Dare: A Critical Madness).
(Please excuse me if I sound like a condescending dick 'cause that's not my intention) Your right he isn't suggesting that, as he's proven in a lot of his gameoverthinker vids, but in the context of the story and the fact that she calls out for the rapist Bob's right, just for that character though.EmperorSubcutaneous said:
Oh no, I'm not suggesting that he was wrong about the motivations of the character in the original. That was a big part of the movie.ProtoChimp said:
What I was talking about was where he said that the fact that the character in the remake didn't tell anyone or report it no longer made sense, because she was no longer potentially willing. But that's far from the only reason a rape victim wouldn't report being raped.
Wait, so it's a sequel to an intelligent, thought provoking piece of media that, while competent as pure action, throws away all subtlety - giving the impression that the creators didn't understand that subtlety in the first place - and disrespects the audience by shouting all of its preachings at them with a background of gunfire and explosions?
My God. It's a video game sequel.
My God. It's a video game sequel.
I think it can be summarized as "the left wing does not get it".Clonekiller said:
The problem is that the US is polarized about 50-50 between the two major idealogies, despite the maps people draw, the bottom line is that our elections are being decided by a hairs breadth for the most part, and guys like Obama came into office with a scant 7% lead that was as dependant on trying to win over the other side (and also quashing dissent within the party) more than the central ideals the party was supposed to stand for.
In general the Democrats, who control most of the media (like it or not) are working to try and obtain an actual clear majority a lot more vigorously than they were beforehand, by demonizing the other side, which has been meeting with mixed results becayse while people who are already liberal might cheer for movies with these kinds of premises, it's hardly doing much to convince the other side and is causing even more lines to be drawn.
The outcries against violence are darkly amusing, given that when most of the media was run by conservatices, years ago, liberals were the ones who were engaging in terrorist acts and violent behavior to get their message out. It's just that with liberals now controlling the media, such things are presented in a more positive light. Someone who engages in domestic terrorism for a liberal objective can be a sympathetic anti-hero, or maybe an outright hero, someone who does it for conservative reasons is a flat out villain.
Things like the "Anarchist's Cookbook" were designed to perpetuate violence and domestic terrorism in pursuit of the liberal agenda. If you read about various groups back in the 1960s and 1970s arson, bombings, kidnappings, and murder were common behaviors by those following the left wing, who were even worse than most of the militia groups we see now. Those who weren't involved tried to pretend they were, because being on an FBI watch list was almost a sign of honor. The big differance between a lot of left wing hippies, and someone like Timothy Mcveigh was that the hippies would hang out, make bombs, and talk a lot of crap with only a few of them only doing something (who they saw as heroes). Mcveigh actually had the guts and abillity to do it. Intent-wise the left wing was just as bad though, you just didn't see many major acts (though they did happen).
I point this out largely because of all the rhetoric about how nice and peaceful the left wing is, when really i's been just as militant as the so-called right wing, probably more so. All stereotypes about violent rednecks, and gun-hating pacifist liberals, tends to overlook the huge amount of left wing terrorism (and conspiricies to commit it) we've seen in the US. The left wing sits around and talks about freedom, but generally means "the freedom to say what I agree with, and while we embrace peace, anyone who disagrees with us to a major degree should be killed for the greater good".
Really, for all the rhetoric, I think your extreme militant Rednecks are better... largely because they are at least honest about what they are and what they stand for. Even the ones too extreme for me to empathize with at least get some respect from me for their self-honesty.
I was thinking of going to see the new Straw Dogs... but the way it's presented in this review just doesn't make me want to see it at all. Meh. I liked the first though it's been a decade since I last saw it.
I will be extremely surprised if the Point Break remake doesn't suck absolute donkey scrotum :/
I will be extremely surprised if the Point Break remake doesn't suck absolute donkey scrotum :/
Point Break was a great movie
It Stared Keanu Reaves as an FBI agent turned surfer, and Gary Busey playing Gary Busey as an FBI agent
It Stared Keanu Reaves as an FBI agent turned surfer, and Gary Busey playing Gary Busey as an FBI agent
I could only watch half the video, the original Straw Dogs simply sounds excellent and frankly and I didn't want to spoil it in-case i ever got the chance to see it. But by removing that moral dilemma of how far can you really take your pacifist values, I see the new one as a failure already. I don't see why it has to exist at all. If it removes this whole problem, it sounds like it's removing the soul of the movie and re-animating it's corpse. All that's left is an abomination that only bears the semblance of the original.
Is it too much to ask that directors have a little creativity and make up their own worlds if they want to blow stuff up? Idk, I guess they're hoping that the popularity of the old one will get it an extra attendance boost, and it's harder to pitch a new idea than to ride on the shoulders of past successes. But it's still sad to see it happen.
Is it too much to ask that directors have a little creativity and make up their own worlds if they want to blow stuff up? Idk, I guess they're hoping that the popularity of the old one will get it an extra attendance boost, and it's harder to pitch a new idea than to ride on the shoulders of past successes. But it's still sad to see it happen.