|
|
Welcome to the Discussion page. This forum is for discussing scenes from mainstream sources, primarily TV shows and movies, but we venture off into newspaper and magazine articles, stage plays, and other areas. Please do not post regarding commercial videos.
|
|
| Friday September 14 01:44:41 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| JJ wrote:
> Funny Games remake has a trailer out. Naomi will > defnately have the treatment. > > http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm??f=msnmovies/64&g=c85a > b50d-6ed1-4ea4-9e72-f281e8d11864 This is great! It looks like an exact, shot-for-shot remake with a far prettier actress. The hopping scene should be a classic. |
| Abu Zalaam |
| Friday September 14 02:01:35 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| Abu Zalaam wrote:
> JJ wrote: > > > Funny Games remake has a trailer out. Naomi will > > defnately have the treatment. > > Looks like packing tape on the feet. Couldn't tell if she was gagged in any of those quick shots. |
| Friday September 14 03:15:35 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| JJ wrote:
> Funny Games remake has a trailer out. Naomi will > defnately have the treatment. > > http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm??f=msnmovies/64&g=c85a > b50d-6ed1-4ea4-9e72-f281e8d11864 This is the same trailer but a little better quality video. MSN's version is kind of grainy. You can zoom this one to full screen in WMP also. Slowing it down there are at least 3 scenes,1 of her shooting the rifle with her hands loosely tied in front, 1 in a hallway with hands tied in front and one of her tied hands behind in her underwear. It goes by so quick it's hard to see everything in there. Looking good! IMDB says release date is Feb 15th 2008 in USA. Thanks JJ for the alert on this much anticipated film! |
| MT |
| http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=611&item=0 |
| Friday September 14 03:24:48 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| Abu Zalaam wrote:
> It looks like an exact, shot-for-shot > remake with a far prettier actress. Yes indeed. A post I read from 5/07 said this: "spoke with producer Linda Moran recently, where she revealed that this will be a relatively pointless shot-for-shot remake". Pointless?????? with Naomi Watts????? No way! |
| Friday September 14 17:19:35 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> Abu Zalaam wrote: > > > It looks like an exact, shot-for-shot > > remake with a far prettier actress. > > Yes indeed. > A post I read from 5/07 said this: > "spoke with producer Linda Moran recently, where she > revealed that this will be a relatively pointless > shot-for-shot remake". > Pointless?????? with Naomi Watts????? No way! Not pointless for us but for general audiences: A one note story, done a countless number of times, for theatrical release in overpriced theaters. As much as Naomi is one of my favorite DID's even I have to think twice about paying to see this in a theater -- although I will more than likely buy the DVD (hopefully an uncut version). Not to compare but I think if they were going to release this in theaters they should have tried (though most likely failed) to get Jodie Foster; the only one outside of *maybe* a couple of others who would get enough people into a theater to make it's money back: Jodie's last couple of films were awful but her name alone helped the studios make their money back. |
| Captureher |
| Friday September 14 18:39:53 2007 days of our lives |
| preview for next week showed a women with what looked
like a wrap around tapegag being taken off |
| Friday September 14 18:56:11 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| (unsigned poster) wrote:
> A post I read from 5/07 said this: > "spoke with producer Linda Moran recently, where she > revealed that this will be a relatively pointless > shot-for-shot remake". > Pointless?????? with Naomi Watts????? Can anyone think of any other film that would benefit more from a shot-for-shot remake with Damsel Upgrade? |
| Abu Zalaam |
| Friday September 14 19:43:24 2007 Flash Gordon-Today 9PM |
| Based on a one second preview I saw before the series started this episode MIGHT be the one where Flash, Dale and K.C. are walking roped together. Am not expecting much. |
| RON |
| Friday September 14 20:57:59 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| Abu Zalaam wrote:
> Can anyone think of any other film that would benefit > more from a shot-for-shot remake with Damsel Upgrade? Your question is an excellent one, and was the occasion for much pleasant reflection. However, what my reflections led to was the firm conviction that on almost all occasions, the upgrade I would rather make is to the director/writer since what I most often find lacking is not the attractiveness of the damsel, but the staging and direction of the scene. For example, I thought about how nice it would be to replace Dorothy Stratten in "Autumn Born" with someone who could act. But then I thought about the way Ms. Stratton's scenes had been handled and concluded that all the acting in the world wouldn't make up for all the other missteps made by the director (Lloyd Simandl). But there are probably some scenes that would benefit greatly from a damsel upgrade. I'm thinking, replace the aging Lynn Redgrave in "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane" with someone younger and prettier and sexier, like maybe Christina Ricci. Ruins the rest of the movie, but who cares, really? |
| Pat Powers |
| Friday September 14 22:36:25 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
| Pat Powers wrote:
> Abu Zalaam wrote: > > > Can anyone think of any other film that would > benefit > > more from a shot-for-shot remake with Damsel > Upgrade? I'm going to beat all the regulars to the punch and say Terror Among Us. I find NONE of the women in that movie particularly attractive, and would love to see a Lifetime Movie remake of it with more attractive girls. |
| SLJ |
| Friday September 14 23:03:11 2007 Re: Naomi Watts |
|
> Can anyone think of any other film that would benefit > more from a shot-for-shot remake with Damsel Upgrade? Not that there was anything terribly wrong with Samantha Eggar, but The Collector would be an obvious choice for a shot-for-shot remake, perhaps with someone like Anne Hathaway in the damsel role. |
| Stephen |
|
|