Bullets 'n' Babes

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478304/

Trailers:

SD: http://trailers.apple.com/movies/fox_se ... _h640w.mov
480P: http://trailers.apple.com/movies/fox_se ... _h480p.mov
720P: http://trailers.apple.com/movies/fox_se ... _h720p.mov
1080P: http://trailers.apple.com/movies/fox_se ... h1080p.mov

This looks really good, hopefully it's a return to form after "The New World" (the theatrical cut was pretty rubbish) because The Thin Red Line and Badlands are fantastic films. I really should check out Days of Heaven.

Malick's gotta be one of the easiest identifiable directors in the world. And this looks like his 2001 - A Space Odyssey. That's not to say 2001 is Kubrick's best movie, though.

Wonder of this will be as good as The New World.

And this looks like his 2001 - A Space Odyssey.

I sure hope so.

HungFist wrote:That's not to say 2001 is Kubrick's best movie, though.

It certainly is.

HungFist wrote:Wonder of this will be as good as The New World.

Lets hope not. It was good at first but completely lost it's way in the last part.

Looks like a film that didn't need to be made - there are obvious Kubrickian images there, why bother to pastiche his masterwork?

luckystars wrote:Looks like a film that didn't need to be made - there are obvious Kubrickian images there, why bother to pastiche his masterwork?

WTF! You're saying a film "shouldn't be made" from a trailer!

I seriously doubt Malick is copying Kubrick, he has more than enough talent of his own.

Hmmm I saw filming style and the obvious Planetary alignment shot there too.

Nolen did it with Inception so why not Malick?

P.S. I said didn't need to be made, not Shouldn't. Not the same

OK, someone needs to translate luckystars posts in this thread for me because they make absolutely no logical sense, there's like 5-6 space-bound shots in that trailer and they barely qualify as pastiche of Kubrik, let alone the fact that 99% of that bleedin' trailer is in the quintessential Malick style. If that trailer is guilty of appearing like any film then it's The Fountain (and yes clearly for the trailer the space shots have been chosen to give a deliberate 2001 feel in typical referential style, doesn't mean that's how they will come across in their correct context during the actual film).

Doesn't need to be made? Are you fucking insane? Go watch 2001 again and then that trailer and come back here and argue that The Tree of Life is going to be even remotely similar to either that or any film Kubrik has done.

Have you seen any of Malick's film's luckystar?

What part of my post stating Malick took visual cues from Kubrick doesn't make sense?

The part where you said the film looks like it didn't need to be made because of that, obviously!

Shingster wrote:The part where you said the film looks like it didn't need to be made because of that, obviously!

Well ok.

I'm simply saying a film that's going for that type of story (life the universe and everything in it) 'IMO' doesn't do anything for me if it's rehashing shit from 2001. I'd be impressed if I was blown away by the trailer (it does look like a solid enough film though) but I wasn't, and the shot that almost exactly copied the Planets in 2001 just made me go " ".

Sorry!

You never answered my question about having seen a single Terrence Malick film? If you have you'd know that Tree of Life will be a much more intimate film than 2001, it will be about introspection and contemplation and then evolution, 2001 was pretty much entirely about evolution.

How you can get the impression that it is rehashing anything from 2001 beyond maybe one or two shots of planets in space is completely beyond me.

Just that if it's in the trailer, the Studio or Director wants it to be seen (and help sell the film).

Don't think I've seen any of his films, and to be honest I was surprised to see a fanbase on Bullets! It has been noted

luckystars wrote:Just that if it's in the trailer, the Studio or Director wants it to be seen (and help sell the film)

They're impressive shots, I imagine the studio put them in there, so likely taken completely out of context. Isn't it studios it largely put trailers together? As Shing says Kubrick and Malick are very different directors.

Why are you surprised? This is a film forum and he's a critically acclaimed director.

I'm not sure if anyone misunderstood what I said, but perhaps I should specify just in case.

I did not say this was Malick's copy of 2001.
I said this could be to Malick what 2001 was to Kubrick. That is, the director's exploration of the huge topic of human evolution and human nature (as compared to all other movies and movie genres and stories they have worked on).

The last time I saw 2001 I was in elementary school.

The Thin Red Line I first was when I was 13 or 14... a near life changing experience. Malick could almost be Japanese

Damn this looks good:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/may ... ife-review

Romero's gonna hate it . There's some confusion of it's UK release date. Googling says the 4th of May but that's past, it's the 27th of May in The USA. I'm guessing soon in Britain. Any ideas?

Won Palme d'Or at Cannes.
- http://www.festival-cannes.fr/en/archiv ... ition.html

I saw that but when are they gonna release the darn thing?

Shame he made The New World, as I lost all excitement for the directors work after sitting through that!

The Thin Red Line may be his only film I ever want to watch again, nothing can ever live up to that.

romerojpg wrote:Shame he made The New World

Agreed. Any idea if the Extended Cut improves it?

romerojpg wrote:as I lost all excitement for the directors work after sitting through that!

Don't write him off after only one film. Badlands and Thin Red Line are excellent. I hear Days of Heaven is too.

TBH only Malick film I've seen is The Thin Red Line and I preferred that to Shaving Ryan's Privates which got all the Oscar attention.

bradavon wrote:

romerojpg wrote:Shame he made The New World

Agreed. Any idea if the Extended Cut improves it?

romerojpg wrote:as I lost all excitement for the directors work after sitting through that!

Don't write him off after only one film. Badlands and Thin Red Line are excellent. I hear Days of Heaven is too.

I have zero interest in anything else he has ever made I broke that rule and caved in not to long ago with The New World (extended cut) and frankly I fell asleep it was so average/poor.

I still have no idea if I even want to go near his new film at all, I am not even watching the trailer for it.
I am re-watching The Thin Red Line (for the 50th time) over the next few days, so I may decide after that if I can be arsed with my dreams being shattered by his other films.

Watch Badlands!

I saw this last night and then posted this on Facebook:

"Tree of Life, well that's one mind fuck of a movie. Someone's been watching too many David Lynch films. Parts I got, most I don't have a scooby doo. Lofty themes in abundance."