Hard to imagine Sylvester Stallone is 67. He looks thirty-something in this 'Expendables 3' poster. Those arms...
Showing posts with label Sylvester Stallone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sylvester Stallone. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
How Old Is Sly Again?
Friday, February 21, 2014
Is There A Market For That?
You have to wonder where Gina Carano's career is going. 'Haywire' was a piece of work but, I'll admit, I never expected to see her in anything on that level again. Not that 'In the Blood' is on that level. The film, directed by John Stockwell, certainly doesn't bring to mind the polish of Soderbergh's filmmaking, but the plot has what it takes to hook an audience of giggling, popcorn munching kids, so who cares what it looks like.
Carano is already headlining an untitled project by Adi Shankar, a producer whose credits speak for themselves: The Grey, Killing Them Softly, Lone Survivor. With a cast that includes Katee Sackhoff, and is rumored to include Sharni Vinson, Linda Hamilton, and Pam Grier, this could be a turning point for tough girl movies. Considering Shankar's track record, the result may very well be on a par with 'Haywire', adjusting for genre, and we might have the next Sylvester Stallone -- this one female.
The question, ultimately, is "Does anyone want to see this stuff?" Will Shankar snag a helmer that can deliver? Without a director like Steven Soderbergh behind another girls-can-kick-ass-too movie, will anyone care? Does the quality of direction matter for such projects? Will girls be able to drag their boyfriends to the theater for another Carano flick? Will guys go to see movies like this without a date?
So many variables.
They might catch the 'Haywire' lightning in a bottle once or twice again, but more than that? I have no problem with a girl Rambo but don't see people turning out for movies like this year after year.
I could be so wrong, though. Who knows. Didn't they say that every Stallone movie surely had to be his last? Thing is, Sly was the new thing so long ago, and he did so many movies that got bad reviews. They might have said that, however, I can't remember. Could be, in twenty years, after twenty movies with girls stomping dicks into the dirt, we'll wonder if they said that about Gina Carano when she started out.
Carano is already headlining an untitled project by Adi Shankar, a producer whose credits speak for themselves: The Grey, Killing Them Softly, Lone Survivor. With a cast that includes Katee Sackhoff, and is rumored to include Sharni Vinson, Linda Hamilton, and Pam Grier, this could be a turning point for tough girl movies. Considering Shankar's track record, the result may very well be on a par with 'Haywire', adjusting for genre, and we might have the next Sylvester Stallone -- this one female.
The question, ultimately, is "Does anyone want to see this stuff?" Will Shankar snag a helmer that can deliver? Without a director like Steven Soderbergh behind another girls-can-kick-ass-too movie, will anyone care? Does the quality of direction matter for such projects? Will girls be able to drag their boyfriends to the theater for another Carano flick? Will guys go to see movies like this without a date?
So many variables.
They might catch the 'Haywire' lightning in a bottle once or twice again, but more than that? I have no problem with a girl Rambo but don't see people turning out for movies like this year after year.
I could be so wrong, though. Who knows. Didn't they say that every Stallone movie surely had to be his last? Thing is, Sly was the new thing so long ago, and he did so many movies that got bad reviews. They might have said that, however, I can't remember. Could be, in twenty years, after twenty movies with girls stomping dicks into the dirt, we'll wonder if they said that about Gina Carano when she started out.
Friday, October 18, 2013
Red Band 'Homefront' Trailer -- Not What I Was Expecting
'Homefront' doesn't pull its punches but the violence is so graphic you have to wonder whether it's necessary, and whether people want to see this.
Not that I'm against violence in movies. I'm for it when it's done responsibly and, with a cast of this caliber (Winona Ryder, James Franco, Kate Bosworth), you might have reason to believe this is gritty because it has to go there, has to have a certain verisimilitude, or risk looking cheap. The violence in this movie may be integral to character, needed for story, or it may be eye candy, though I have to admit, that seems unlikely.
Jason Statham is the wild card. Does his involvement mean 'Homefront' is just another in a long line of superficial action flicks? If not, if this is a crafted story, 'Homefront' would represent something of a turning point for his career. Perhaps not a bad thing. You can't help but wonder how long he can keep doing the same role. For me, it would be pretty cool if Statham has decided to do pieces with solid character. I've always thought he could and sensed he wants to.
Director Gary Fleder has been doing TV for a while but back in the day, with 'Kiss the Girls' and 'What to do in Denver When You're Dead', he had a flare for edgy plots. I was surprised to see that, along with first-time screenwriter Chuck Logan (who wrote the novel of the same name), Sylvester Stallone is a credited writer. Sly can handle touchy character-driven stuff -- 'Rocky' had believable rhythm -- but he can also pen some pure action movies which are devoid of any depth, like 'Expendables', 'Cobra', etc. To be fair, though, such movies are expected to be free of character development.
We read about horrible crimes in the paper every day, but conventions of plot and story in movies demand a reason to have such hardcore violence. You can't just toss that in. If the violence depicted is supported by characters we care about this will be a new kind of Statham movie.
The first trailer made 'Homefront' look like a pure formulaic B-thriller (precisely because it did not show graphic violence), but with this new trailer it's difficult to tell which way the story will go. 'Homefront' could, in fact, be another by-the-numbers Statham shoot-em-up which will not be memorable in any way, or it could be something new for him. 'Homefront' might be a movie that's perhaps difficult to watch but well worth it in the end, something that will have meaning and stay with the viewer, and I wasn't expecting that.
Not that I'm against violence in movies. I'm for it when it's done responsibly and, with a cast of this caliber (Winona Ryder, James Franco, Kate Bosworth), you might have reason to believe this is gritty because it has to go there, has to have a certain verisimilitude, or risk looking cheap. The violence in this movie may be integral to character, needed for story, or it may be eye candy, though I have to admit, that seems unlikely.
Jason Statham is the wild card. Does his involvement mean 'Homefront' is just another in a long line of superficial action flicks? If not, if this is a crafted story, 'Homefront' would represent something of a turning point for his career. Perhaps not a bad thing. You can't help but wonder how long he can keep doing the same role. For me, it would be pretty cool if Statham has decided to do pieces with solid character. I've always thought he could and sensed he wants to.
Director Gary Fleder has been doing TV for a while but back in the day, with 'Kiss the Girls' and 'What to do in Denver When You're Dead', he had a flare for edgy plots. I was surprised to see that, along with first-time screenwriter Chuck Logan (who wrote the novel of the same name), Sylvester Stallone is a credited writer. Sly can handle touchy character-driven stuff -- 'Rocky' had believable rhythm -- but he can also pen some pure action movies which are devoid of any depth, like 'Expendables', 'Cobra', etc. To be fair, though, such movies are expected to be free of character development.
We read about horrible crimes in the paper every day, but conventions of plot and story in movies demand a reason to have such hardcore violence. You can't just toss that in. If the violence depicted is supported by characters we care about this will be a new kind of Statham movie.
The first trailer made 'Homefront' look like a pure formulaic B-thriller (precisely because it did not show graphic violence), but with this new trailer it's difficult to tell which way the story will go. 'Homefront' could, in fact, be another by-the-numbers Statham shoot-em-up which will not be memorable in any way, or it could be something new for him. 'Homefront' might be a movie that's perhaps difficult to watch but well worth it in the end, something that will have meaning and stay with the viewer, and I wasn't expecting that.
Friday, September 13, 2013
Kinda Dumb But, Yeah, It Looks Good
Okay, don't admit it. Just keep telling yourself, "This is too dumb for me. This is too dumb for me."
I love it. They got it right.
I love it. They got it right.
Labels:
Grudge Match,
Robert De Niro,
Sylvester Stallone
Thursday, September 12, 2013
In 'Grudge Match' Somebody Dies In The End Or Ties In The End?
In Scott Bowles' write up about Robert De Niro and Sylvester Stallone's new romp 'Grudge Match' director Peter Segal mentions using old footage of both actors training for 'Raging Bull' and 'Rocky'. Cool. That alone would be interesting to see. I'm looking forward.
Segal also mentions shooting multiple endings in order to keep the real ending secret. In one, during the boxing match Stallone's character wins. In another, De Niro's character wins. In a third, they both die.
That's right. Die.
Here's a clip from the link above:
That also appeared in the printed newspaper.
I find it hard to believe either of these actors would agree to have his character die in the end. However, how could one win and the other lose? For comedic value, and seeing how there's not too many other choices, I could see both guys dying in the ring. That would be funny. I can hear them laughing now.
However, at this link it says they tie at the end.
Ties, not dies. Ties. T-ies.
Okay, that's better. How else could you end a movie like this? It has to be a tie, right? De Niro vs. Stallone = tie. Has to be.
But maybe, they both collapse and it looks like they're dead, and the crowd is shocked, then they wake up and realize what's happened and it's really embarrassing and they agree their boxing days are over, shake hands and go have a cup of tea. That would be good. That's what I'd go with. If it were me.
Now that that's settled, on to the really important stuff.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


