Bullets 'n' Babes

...is out next week!

Looks lush but it has the potential to be whack. I regret looking at the trailer (I'm usually good at avoiding trailers at the cinema). Spoilers everywhere. :x

Read some good reviews...

It's VENdetta btw...

Seriously?

I might see it. Hopefully it'll be a return to form for the Wachoski's after those shitty Matrix sequels (I know they didn't direct VfV, but I suspect they had a large controlling influence over it. Like Spielberg did with Poltergeist.)

BiscLimpkit wrote:Seriously?

Yeah...

Really looking forward to this. I read the graphic novel a little while ago, and thought that it had a lot to say. If the film can draw across those points, then I think we're onto a winner.
I've read a review that said that Natalie Portman's accent is a little ropey. I can live with that because, well, she's Natalie Portman
It also said that the film is not an action-fest, despite the trailers making it seem as such. Again, I don't have a problem with that; some may walk in expecting fights and shoot-outs every couple of minutes but it's really not how it goes down in the book, and again, I'm glad for it.

I, unlike others, didn't have a problem with The Matrix series of films as a whole at all. The Wachowskis had a very definite set of ideas that they wanted to get across and I personally feel that they did. Even the little things were put in the films on purpose, so as long as they've paid that much attention to detail to this one, I'll be happy

The first Matrix was OK, the second was pretty dreadful; have no desire to see the third.

Just one thing... If you guys start raving about the Wachowskis on this flick I'm gonna bitch slap y'all. This is Alan Moores book. Return to form my ass (what have they done? Bound and The Matrix...) :shock:

He wrote it.
He designed it.

The W's "just" made a screenplay of it. And McTeigue directed it. As far as I hear Moore was heavily involved in the flick aswell.

If anything this is a Moore/McTeigue flick.

Nuff said.

In that case, this is entirely a McTeigue film (not story) as Moore had no involvement and had his name taken off the credits. (source: Empire Online review)

Though McTeigue is officially the director, I would be surprised if there wasn't an element of Poltergeist, in that the brothers had a rather large influence on the film regarding filming it (à la Spielberg and Hooper). Perhaps not for the same reasons (contracts and whatnot), or to the same levels, but they are writers/producers on the film, with a bit of clout, aren't they?
Pure conjecture, obviously.

I liked BOUND, better than any of THE MATRIX films.

Hmmm... Jonathan Ross wasnt exactly enthousiastic about this movie, was he!?
I think he might have set a new record in the amount of 'burns' in the limited amount of time available to him for a review.

Bound... Mmmmm Jennifer Tilly and Gina Gershon.

Yi-Long wrote:I think he might have set a new record in the amount of 'burns' in the limited amount of time available to him for a review.

Burns??

Kurgan wrote:In that case, this is entirely a McTeigue film (not story) as Moore had no involvement and had his name taken off the credits. (source: Empire Online review)

What?! That contradicts what I heard, and for me atleast puts this film in a bad light...

Or maybe just Moore is very picky...

NYTimes wrote:"I've read the screenplay," Mr. Moore said. "It's rubbish."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/movie ... 0&emc=eta1

ComicBookResources.com wrote:"It was imbecilic; it had plot holes you couldn't have got away with in Whizzer And Chips in the nineteen sixties. Plot holes no one had noticed."

What Moore found most laughable however were the details. "They don't know what British people have for breakfast, they couldn't be bothered. 'Eggy in a basket' apparently. Now the US have 'eggs in a basket,' whish is fried bread with a fried egg in a hole in the middle. I guess they thought we must eat that as well, and thought 'eggy in a basket' was a quaint and Olde Worlde version. And they decided that the British postal service is called Fedco. They'll have thought something like, 'well, what's a British version of FedEx... how about FedCo? A friend of mine had to point out to them that the Fed, in FedEx comes from 'Federal Express.' America is a federal republic, Britain is not."

http://comicbookresources.com/columns/i ... ticle=2153

His co-creator of VfV, David Lloyd, seems to think it's a decent action thriller, that doesn't have very much in common with the comic. This entire ordeal though has led to Moore severing all ties with publisher DC Comics. (The proverbial last straw though...)

I wish fanboys would just get over it. Works are always altered in some way when adapted into other mediums.

Markgway wrote:

Yi-Long wrote:I think he might have set a new record in the amount of 'burns' in the limited amount of time available to him for a review.

Burns??

Insulting negative observations

Just seen a review by Channel 4 and it does make you think:

. Although, in this near-future, America is written off as basically a "giant leper colony", it is very much the target of this film; essentially America is attacked through the oblique strategy of disguising the Bush regime as a British one. This makes V For Vendetta a troubling, if deliciously irresponsible experience for a UK audience - the sensibilities of the British establishment are laid into without a second thought, committing the kind of heresies that, 20 years ago, would have had MI5 ransacking the edit suite.

Climaxing with a London Underground train packed full of homemade explosive, a mere six months after the terrorist attacks of 7/7, it makes you wonder why Hollywood considers British sensibilities so robust. Or do they just not care? How long will we wait for a sci-fi film that ends with the terrorist heroes flying a 747 into the Pentagon?

Source: Channel 4 Review

most reviews of this seem to make it sound decidedly average-still want to see it though

I thought it was superb. 4.5/5

I like the bit with the masks.

By the way, I'm really angry about the theatrical trailer.

It spoiled everything...

I'm pretty disappointed with myself, as I usually avoid trailers in the cinema. Oh well.

Damn, I read a review yesterday that REALLY slaughtered this. I mean, I'm talking "dumb as a bag of hammers" bad. Like Politics for people who still suck their thumbs. I don't always agree with reviewers (who does?) but I suspect the critic is probably right. Most Hollywood "serious issue" movies are as thick as shit.

Pfft never listen to critics. You gonna catch this at the cinema?

Markgway wrote: Most Hollywood "serious issue" movies are as thick as shit.

Go watch some American films from the late 60's-1980 then.

BiscLimpkit wrote:Pfft never listen to critics. You gonna catch this at the cinema?

Nah! Takes a lot to get me off my arse.

Watched this the other day. I'll just say I wasn't disappointed in the slightest.