Movie Lull Season

[Stewball]

It really is appalling right now. I haven't been to the theater to see a movie since The Grey in the first week of February...

There's nothing playing at the moment that's worth more than 10 seconds of my time, and there's nothing coming out that looks remotely interesting until Mid April. The Cabin in the Woods looks to have some potential, and Safe looks like another "entertaining if nothing overly amazing" Jason Statham actioner.

And none of the "big" releases for May or June look interesting to me at all. *sigh* This could be the worst summer blockbuster season in years. I hope to be proven wrong....

Am I detecting a dis for Hunger Games? If you're right I may open the vein I inject it into.

It's 16 for 16 so far at RT, and I love this character's name and her quote: Katniss Everdeen: "I am not pretty. I am not beautiful. I am as radiant as the sun." Damn!

Moonrise Kingdom looks like it might but up your ally--an Island of Evil against two 12 year-olds.

[Stewball]

Oh yeah, I saved Wrath of the Titans to single out for it particular blockbuster suckiness. (Cue the Lone Ranger Music*) "Release the Kracken....again!" (in time with "Hi Yo Silver.....Away!")

*Which is the finale of the 12 minute symphonic William Tell Overture, which opens (overtures ) the William Tell Opera--for those who care.

[TheDenizen]

Am I detecting a dis for Hunger Games?

not an overt dis, but it certainly doesn't appeal to me. An adaptation of a novel written for preteens, centered on the youth of a future society being forced to play homicidal games for the entertainment of the masses, but with a PG-13 rating...which means all the graphic violence will be edited. Reviews I've read have borne this out, saying all the grisly death is merely implied by showing blood splatters, smoking gun barrels, etc, but nothing shown on screen.

I don't have much interest in a neutered, American version of Battle Royale...regardless how clever or inspirational the lead character is.

Moonrise Kingdom looks like it might but up your ally--an Island of Evil against two 12 year-olds.

sounds like an interesting enough premise, but unless those 12 year olds are being horribly killed....

[Stewball]

Am I detecting a dis for Hunger Games?

not an overt dis, but it certainly doesn't appeal to me. An adaptation of a novel written for preteens, centered on the youth of a future society being forced to play homicidal games for the entertainment of the masses, but with a PG-13 rating...which means all the graphic violence will be edited. Reviews I've read have borne this out, saying all the grisly death is merely implied by showing blood splatters, smoking gun barrels, etc, but nothing shown on screen.

I don't have much interest in a neutered, American version of Battle Royale...regardless how clever or inspirational the lead character is.

Moonrise Kingdom looks like it might but up your ally--an Island of Evil against two 12 year-olds.

sounds like an interesting enough premise, but unless those 12 year olds are being horribly killed....

OOOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK, gotcah. No major graphic violence, no Denizen, I did not know that. You must not go to the movies very often.

BTW I am picking up that teens are targeted by this which I hadn't seen evidence of in the writeups (18) at R/T etc or the preview. I normally stay away from mindless teen slashers, which I dont' think this is. I was in Wal-Mart today and noticed the box of Hunger Games posters was sold out--and I did so want one for my living room.

Whatever, I'm sure you and all of TFS will be waiting with bated breath for my review.

[TheDenizen]

OOOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK, gotcah. No major graphic violence, no Denizen, I did not know that.

Allow me to direct your attention to my topic about movies with Children Being Killed:
http://www.criticker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2323

You must not go to the movies very often.

I do, but I mostly only see horror and action movies, so I'm usually covered on the graphic violence front.

[ShogunRua]

I don't have much interest in a neutered, American version of Battle Royale...regardless how clever or inspirational the lead character is.

Exactly. "The Hunger Games" is nothing more than a shamelessly plagiarized version of "Battle Royale".

Teens fighting to the death? Check.
On an abandoned island? Check.
Because a futuristic, despotic government forced them to? Check.
With love triangles developing between the students? Check.

Unfortunately, they couldn't even get that right, and "The Hunger Games" book is nothing more than a watered-down, shitty version of Battle Royale, with none of the depth, intelligence, or even action of the original. 13 year-olds who read "The Hunger Games" like to pride themselves on how much "better" they are than the Twilight crowd.

Not really. Your brand of shit might be a little less smelly (but by that token, blatantly stolen), but at the end of the day, they're both shit.

[Stewball]

So, HG isn't as good as BR because the one "plagiarized" the other, HG violence isn't as graphic therefore can't possibly have anything worthwhile to say, putting it on a level with Twilight? And I think we need to define cinematic plagiarism; that's a strong word I can't find anyone else using--especially not the BR franchise. If it were, I imagine there'd have been lawsuits filed. In any case, is remaking a book or cinematic story for a different audience, artistic setting, culture, or language, plagiarism? Is The Magnificent Seven plagiarism? Or Alice in Wonderland, Mutiny on the Bounty, Funny Games, The Manchurian Candidate, Red Dawn or thousands of others?

In any case, I appreciate y'all lowering my expectations. Now I won't come out mumbling WTF? On the other hand, it might backfire and I might overrate it. Maybe that's what's happening at R/T.

[ShogunRua]

So, HG isn't as good as BR because the one "plagiarized" the other, HG violence isn't as graphic therefore can't possibly have anything worthwhile to say,

That, and the fact that the story and characters are vastly dumbed-down, insultingly stupid versions of what they were in the original.

You should try reading "Battle Royale", Stewball. As it is, it seems like you've only read "The Hunger Games".

And I think we need to define cinematic plagiarism; that's a strong word I can't find anyone else using--especially not the BR franchise. If it were, I imagine there'd have been lawsuits filed.

It's not so simple. Plagiarism is one of the most difficult things to prove in court, even when it seems glaringly obvious to any neutral observer.

In any case, is remaking a book or cinematic story for a different audience, artistic setting, culture, or language, plagiarism? Is The Magnificent Seven plagiarism?

Yes.

Or Alice in Wonderland, Mutiny on the Bounty, Funny Games, The Manchurian Candidate, Red Dawn or thousands of others?

Both versions of Funny Games were made by the same writer and director. Not sure how he plagiarized himself. The rest are just remakes and thus, irrelevant to two differently titled stories by two different authors.

On the other hand, it might backfire and I might overrate it. Maybe that's what's happening at R/T.

Reviews now, more than ever, especially on bullshit metacritic aggregate sites like RT, have nothing to do with the actual quality of the picture.

[TheDenizen]

The writer of the Hunger Games book claims she had never heard of Battle Royale until after she finished her novel...but just about every review I've read (of the book, not the movie) has commented on the unusually high number of similarities between the two stories. Even if the similarities were just completely coincidental and Suzanne Collins is being truthful about her lack of exposure to BR, the fact remains that it's essentially the same thing. BR was full of gory violence, and HG is not. Hence, I can't see how HG will be anything to get too excited about.

Like I said, I'm not dissing HG, but I'm not particularly keen to see it, either.

[Pickpocket]

Yeah but surely she read Lord of the Flies which is what Battle Royale ripped off