The Hopkinator
Sr Member
Colin Farrell ?? Seriously ??? Sighhh.....
Fright Night.....
- Thread starter The Hopkinator
- Start date
the_batdemon
Sr Member
Yep....it's his year.....next it Total Recall.
The Hopkinator
Sr Member
Well,,, I have to admit I raised an eyebrow at Brad Pitt for the role of Achilles and ATE that one. Maybe Ill be wrong about farrell...
EvilRocketeer
Master Member
discussions on it in these threads:
http://www.therpf.com/f47/fright-night-remake-trailer-115854/
http://www.therpf.com/f47/latest-remake-fright-night-91000/?highlight=fright+night
http://www.therpf.com/f47/fright-night-remake-trailer-115854/
http://www.therpf.com/f47/latest-remake-fright-night-91000/?highlight=fright+night
The Hopkinator
Sr Member
From the trailer their doesnt look to be much comic relief as in the original. Anyone have any insight?
CB2001
Master Member
Because he's British, and has only been seen in a Sci-Fi show and a fantasy movie in the U.S.
Seriously, even now, when it comes to Mary McDonald, she's still cited for her award nominated role in the Academy Award-winning Dances with Wolves, not the critically acclaimed, world renowned, hit series Battlestar Galactica. When it comes to Edward James Olmos, it's the same thing, "Academy Award nominated Edward James Olmos", not "Battlestar Galactica's Edward James Olmos." The only time I've ever heard Battlestar Galactica referred to for any actors or actresses have been for Tricia Helfer and James Callis, and both of them have been on channels (USA and SyFy) that are owned by the same company. Most "normal" people, when they hear the terms "sci-fi" and "fantasy", they think of the B-Grade stuff from the 1950s. Hell, when I was trying to pitch the RIS Battlestar Galactica as a show they should watch to my classmates, they looked at me blankly and said, "But it's science fiction." I explained that the show was more than that, about the drama, about the issues that the show discussed. Again, they looked at me blankly and said, "But it's science fiction." For some reason, most of our society views science fiction and fantasy as something terrible when it comes to view. Yet, no one wants to admit that if it wasn't because of science fiction like Star Trek, those viewers who hadn't seen the show wouldn't have caused major advancements in science and technology as we know it. We wouldn't have the iPad and smartphones without Star Trek.
Also, the fact that in the U.S. he's known in only two known British productions (Doctor Who and Harry Potter), any American Hollywood studio would be cautious to not include him because, unless you're a die-hard fan of him and all of his performances, he's only been in two titles that people recognize in the U.S. Basically, those that people know more are going to end up more in the advertisements. Don't believe me? Look at the trailers again: You've got the red-head kid from Abrams' "Star Trek" and Terminator Salvation, the mom from The Sixth Sense and the guy from S.W.A.T., Phone Booth and The Recruit. As far as they're concerned, if he doesn't have an Academy Award, they have to use the well known names to draw in an audience, and he's not a well known name expect for sci-fi and fantasy fans.
And it's BS like this that makes me say that we need a second Counter-Culture movement in the Hollywood film industry, where filmmakers and actors can be given a chance based on their abilities. Spielberg and Lucas wouldn't survive in the current film industry if they were starting out for the first time.
Of course, that's just my opinion and interpretation of information.
spatcave
Well-Known Member
Just saw a Press Screening (I've been getting invited to a lot of those lately).
I was planning to hate it. I was (and am) a huge fan of the original, and didn't think that it needed a remake.
The new one took only the most basic bits of the original and ran it into a whole new direction.
The 3D was good (shot in 3D).
Colin Farrell was great!
David Tennant absolutely stole the show.
McLovin (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) had a very small part, which helped him not become annoying.
Anton Yelchin and Imogen Poots (the two leads) were great.
Toni Collette held her own as the mom.
Great story, nice twists, and one quickie homage to the original.
All in all, I really liked it!
I was planning to hate it. I was (and am) a huge fan of the original, and didn't think that it needed a remake.
The new one took only the most basic bits of the original and ran it into a whole new direction.
The 3D was good (shot in 3D).
Colin Farrell was great!
David Tennant absolutely stole the show.
McLovin (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) had a very small part, which helped him not become annoying.
Anton Yelchin and Imogen Poots (the two leads) were great.
Toni Collette held her own as the mom.
Great story, nice twists, and one quickie homage to the original.
All in all, I really liked it!
EvilRocketeer
Master Member
I saw it several months ago for a test screening and got to discuss about it with a producer and some studio people.....
i enjoyed the film....it was very entertaining and well acted......
spatcave nailed most of my feelings toward the film....
i will definitely see it again in theaters
i enjoyed the film....it was very entertaining and well acted......
spatcave nailed most of my feelings toward the film....
i will definitely see it again in theaters
darthgordon
Sr Member
So in other words... they could have just called it completely different and didn't use the original characters' names.
Rupert_Angier
Sr Member
I saw a free preview of it as well a few weeks ago, and if I had to pay for it, I felt that I would have gotten more than my money's worth. I plan on seeing it again.
The Hopkinator
Sr Member
Well,, the nerd consensus so far is good,, They will be able to tally in my money too...
will slacker
Member
i plan on seeing it this weekend
Amish Trooper
Sr Member
It was meh. I went in thinking that so I wasn't disappointed. It had it's lol moments. My favorite part was the cameo but besides that it is a renter.
lollollol:lolI'm sorry, I'm not intentionally trying to derail this thread but I almost passed out from laughing when I read this line!!!
Let me get this straight: Do you REALLY believe that if there was no Star Trek that iPads and smartphones would have never been created???!!!
lollollol
CB2001
Master Member
I'm sorry, I'm not intentionally trying to derail this thread but I almost passed out from laughing when I read this line!!!
Let me get this straight: Do you REALLY believe that if there was no Star Trek that iPads and smartphones would have never been created???!!!
Yes. Why? Because if it wasn't for the show, it wouldn't have inspired people to aim higher. It wouldn't have inspired those who became scientists and those who went into the medical field. Flip phones in the 1990s were obvious inspired by the classic communicators. There are other medical equipment that exists now that were inspired by some of the technology in the classic show. Seriously, if you're laughing, you obviously don't realize how much of an impact on technology that Star Trek has had.
For your reading:
Link.
Link.
Now, let's get back on topic.
Last edited:
