Go

Filmism.net Dispatch April 13, 2009

  • Share
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

One of the most enduring marketing questions a filmmaker or studio must grapple with is 'how much do we show?' Jaws famously (and unintentionally, thanks to it simply not working for most of the shoot) set the standard for not showing the creature until the climax. An American Werewolf in London hardly gave us a clear picture of the monster at all, and that's probably one of the reasons its popularity endures today in an era when the technical effects of the time would show up too many flaws.

But the trailer is a different matter. When it came to Roland Emmerich's Godzilla remake, he and prodiucer Dean Devlin had specific instructions that the monster not be shown in the trailer except for fleeting glimpses and teasing comments about its size. Peter Jackson and Universal went the opposite for 2005's King Kong, giving us a glorious full frontal glimpse of the titular hero defending Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) from an attacking tyrannosaur. And any excitement about a movie based on Maurice Sendak's Where the Wild Things Are must surely lie in seeing what director Spike Jonze is going to do with the creatures Max meets. Watching the trailer recently for what's reported to have been a troubled film, I was struck by how much Jonze (or Warner Bros) gives away. We see most of the creatures in full flight and activity quite clearly, and it makes you wonder what secrets the movie has left to give away.

I also haven't seen Gregor (Ned Kelly, Two Hands) Jordan's name around for ages, thinking that maybe the woeful September 11 victim Buffalo Soldiers had scuttled his career for good, but he's popping up soon with another Bret Easton Ellis adaptation called The Informers, which features beautiful LA twentysomethings with too much money spiritually lost in materialism and drugs in the early 80s. What it'll have that Less Than Zero didn't remains to be seen.

I also heard rumblings about a possible new Men in Black. Some will think it a bad idea, but I'm one of the few who thought the second one was as good as the first simply because the first – while funny and exciting – wasn't the worldbeater many think.

Jackie Earle Hayley has done well out of playing driven psychos. After standing out as a child molester in Little Children and the enigmatic Rorschach in Watchmen, he's now the new Fred Krueger for the inevitable Nightmare on Elm Street remake. Sticking with horror, there's also going to be another version of Stephen King's It which the director promises will be better than the miniseries, but here's what everyone forgets about Stephen King adaptations. The closer to King's vision they are the worse they are. Is that because King's books aren't good? On thecontrary, they're brilliant, and It was no exception. But the way he writes them makes them unfilmable, and to make them any good, directors have to veer too far away from the immersive detail King loads his stories with. My prediction; expect a glitzy Hollywood thriller with little of King let in it.

I heard a story that a certain Mr Cruise and a certain Mr Travolta were circling (or at least had talked about) a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid remake, and Rick Moranis is said to have been talked about of retirement for the slowly-approaching Ghostbusters 3.

© 2011-2018 Filmism.net. Site design and programming by psipublishinganddesign.com | adambraimbridge.com | humaan.com.au