[Scorehead, I appreciate the comments. I'm just not motivated enough to spend $10 on a lot of movies these days, knowing I can review the DVD for nothing in about 2-3 months.]
I agree, it seems that the more films that come out the worse the odds get to see a really good film and get your money for al the efforts to get all hussied-up to go to the theater. Cripes, It took a bunch of penguins to get people to the movies this past summer - now I can't wait to see more of those types of films to come out (Anyone see that they're making a FLYING NUN film?). As to the cost to going to movies these days, try doing it with 5 kids (not all mine). This is the real reason that we went, as we missed the start time for WALLACE & GROMIT, otherwise I was going to pass on it and go visit my proctologist. But the wife and I amused our selves greatly by laughing through the whole thing! Should I apologize here to those poor souls that had to sit within ear shoot of us? That's like the whole theater. Sigh... so sorry, folks.
[Don't be embarrased by Welling, either -- quite honestly he does a superb, unheralded job on SMALLVILLE (which is off to a fantastic start this year, with revitalized ratings to match). Something tells me I'll be missing him in Bryan Singer's SUPERMAN RETURNS, but we'll see...[/quote]
Oh, I'm not embarrassed, his acting has actually gotten quite good, enough so that as I watched this film, I too was chagrinned that he wasn't picked for Singer's Superman? He's moving out of that boyish look that made him perfect for SMALLVILLE, it's too bad that he picked this lump of cole to make his jump to the big screen. Since Halloween is upon us, "What'd you get Charlie Brown?" "Uh... all I got was a ticket to the see the FOG." too bad he didn't get a ROCK.
THE FOG: And the composer is...
romanD wrote:that sounds too bad. I really want to like this remake... well, still have to wait a couple weeks until its release over here... I guess they just didn't give the whole thing enough time, the shot and finished this movie in what? 7 months?
Well... still I have hopes that it can't be worse than FLIGHTPLAN (an astounding cure for insomnia, even if you suspend all disbelief) and AMITYVILLE HORROR (which I just saw yesterday and couldn't believe how dreadful that was), can it?
The backlash here is that I made it sound really "Bad," and your expectations will no doubt fall to the lowest common denominator, and when you finally do see it, it will, in no way, be near as bad as I said it was. But trust me, it's as bad and as incoherent a mess as FLIGHTPLAN. Really! I'm not certain that I would have understood what was going on unless I had seen the original. It's unfortunate that this film has become such a missed opportunity, as the original material is good and lends it's self to the telling of a good ol' fashioned ghost story. Dean Cundly, where are you? Remember the scene in the original where we first get to see the ghost ship of the Elisabeth Dane? Back lit with green light and emerging from out of the fog, its was spooky in just the right quantity. Well, it look like (insert directors name here) remembered it too, as he used it so many times that it really grew tiresome by about the 5th use of the same shot - and his first use of the same shot wasn't near as scary as when Carpenter gave birth to it.
Uggg! Such a waste.
Scorehead
well, I finally got to see it and I have to say I fairly liked it. Maybe because my expectations were low after all the negative buzz. I admit it has some problems, mainly due to the damn PG-13 rating (it neede definitely some move blood), but I thought it captured the feeling of a good old ghost story very well, had cool fog-shots, a good pace and a nice different showdown. The lighthouse sequence wouldn't have realyl fitted into it anymore and I guess they thought that it doesn't make much sense that Andy's Mom stays in the lighthouse... every mother would rush out and rescue her son. Sometimes the pace was too quick I think as it jumped from one short scare-scene to the next.. they could have been longer, but I guess those were things they had to do to get the rating.
Still it misses a real climax I think, at least some of the characters could be struggling with the ghosts when the final thing happens (dont wanna spoil anything)...
overall... after all the bad movies (especially horror movies) this comes as a pleasant surprise. It could have been much better with a longer running time and an r-rating... but you don't come out bored or insulted. And that's something not many movie can say of themselves this year!
Still it misses a real climax I think, at least some of the characters could be struggling with the ghosts when the final thing happens (dont wanna spoil anything)...
overall... after all the bad movies (especially horror movies) this comes as a pleasant surprise. It could have been much better with a longer running time and an r-rating... but you don't come out bored or insulted. And that's something not many movie can say of themselves this year!
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 10554
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
Seriously, go check...there's not a drop of spilled plasma in that entire movie.Watching horror movies now a days is like sitting in a flickering movie house with someone standing in front of you and, at the appropriate moments, repeatedly kneeing you in the groin. As with all contemporary movies, filmmakers have to find those new ways to make it fresh and exciting and different enough to make their results stand out and be noticed from what come before. Kind of like: "Lets see if we can find the last possible way to make this thing boring." Seriously, there are moments in the new FOG that make you wonder just what the filmmakers were thinking. "Oh, it would be so cool if the shattered glass fell into a swirling cloud of broken shards and then shreds the priest." Yeah, so cool. But why? "What? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't catch that, what with your knee pile driving me in my crotch." I recently felt much the same way while watching "WAR OF THE WORLDS," but then we're not suppose to mind getting flogged, because it's Steven Speilberg. Another thing that drives me crazy is the "younging" (I know that's not a word) of these films, meaning they cast them with teens and young twenty somethings. Selma Blair was completely unconvincing in her portrayal of lighthouse Disc Jockey - flat chested with her bra stuffed and trying to sound sexy just didn't work. Adrienne Barbeau's age suited her character and she was naturally trashy in just the right quantities to fit her perfectly to the roll of Stevie Wayne, the sultry voice of Antonio Bay's air waves. "Selma Blair, would you please remove your foot form my crotch?" And while I'm bitching (yes - I am), what was up with re-envisioning the scene of the old coots out late on their fishing troller that was replaced with two guys partying on their buddies boat with two buxom blonds and then one of them changes their hair color from blond to brunette? If you remember, the scene originally had some great dialogue, all be it a bit droll. After Stevie Wayne announces that there is a fog bank headed toward their fishing troller, an drunk old geezer looking out a port hole, and taking a swig from his flask, says "She' doesn't know what she's tawking 'bout. There's no fog bank out there." A few seconds goes by... "Say... there's a fog bank out there."
Now, by no means does this argue that the original film was any better off, as it fails in making sense most of the time. But it had a great premise, which is probably what drew filmmakers to want to remake it, but they failed completely in updating it with any sense of intelligence, style or scares.
~ Scorehead
Now, by no means does this argue that the original film was any better off, as it fails in making sense most of the time. But it had a great premise, which is probably what drew filmmakers to want to remake it, but they failed completely in updating it with any sense of intelligence, style or scares.
~ Scorehead
I think the original is fairly graphic sometimes, when the fishermen inthe beginning get the swords right through their bodies or the eyes squashed out. Yeah, no blood, but still I think that is quite disturbing.
It's just that the remake has scenes which needed to be bloody in a way.. .like the mentioned glass swirl. That would have been so cool and scary in a way, when suddenly all glass splinters swirl to that guy and he falls apart in many pieces. You expect that to happen and then just one lousy little splinter goes through him...
It just feels like they build up sometimes to splatter and then puss out, like in RESIDENT EVIL... I dont need violence, but then direct a scene like splatter is not necessary, please!
Btw, I liked the glass swirl scene, it had a much more supernatural feel than just a pirate with a sword gutting people...
It's just that the remake has scenes which needed to be bloody in a way.. .like the mentioned glass swirl. That would have been so cool and scary in a way, when suddenly all glass splinters swirl to that guy and he falls apart in many pieces. You expect that to happen and then just one lousy little splinter goes through him...
It just feels like they build up sometimes to splatter and then puss out, like in RESIDENT EVIL... I dont need violence, but then direct a scene like splatter is not necessary, please!
Btw, I liked the glass swirl scene, it had a much more supernatural feel than just a pirate with a sword gutting people...
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 35765
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Still haven't seen it (it'll probably be on DVD before Christmas), but I believe it's one of the lowest rated films of the last couple of years that's been released here 
The thing that gets me is that here was a horror movie you COULD improve upon. I agree with Scorehead, the original FOG is no classic in any regard but it has its moments and some fine Dean Cundey cinematography. The story, though, could have easily been reworked....and instead by most all accounts they went totally backwards.
I'll be interested in seeing it on disc, but it sure doesn't help out the long line of remakes currently going out there....
The thing that gets me is that here was a horror movie you COULD improve upon. I agree with Scorehead, the original FOG is no classic in any regard but it has its moments and some fine Dean Cundey cinematography. The story, though, could have easily been reworked....and instead by most all accounts they went totally backwards.
I'll be interested in seeing it on disc, but it sure doesn't help out the long line of remakes currently going out there....