New trailers, posters, promotional media, and general movie/tv news - v1 - Film, Television and Music

[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;50679881]B-Movies are just low budget movies that get distribution.[/QUOTE] no? because then all independent films are b movies? arthouse is b-movie? a b-movie is a vibe. it's a feeling. it's the actors. it's everything. you can't just go 'well it's low budget and a bit hammy, it's B-MOVIE!' that's nowhere near enough

[QUOTE=Rusty100;50683128]no? because then all independent films are b movies? arthouse is b-movie? a b-movie is a vibe. it's a feeling. it's the actors. it's everything. you can't just go 'well it's low budget and a bit hammy, it's B-MOVIE!' that's nowhere near enough[/QUOTE] hammy is definitely a big part of it, look at the burton/schumacher batman flicks. like i said before, budget isn't a factor. realistically, all the marvel movies are b-movies, even with their big star casting and budgets.

[QUOTE=shott;50680529]Gonna rant here. Movie adaptation for Death Note anime is in the works. And there's a character named L [img_thumb]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/nCfqZ2trMOc/maxresdefault.jpg[/img_thumb] Well, who's gonna play L? Him. [img]http://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Stanfield-News-618x400.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] "Who should we get to play the pale white character?" "I know, a black man!"

[QUOTE=Pops;50683196]hammy is definitely a big part of it, look at the burton/schumacher batman flicks. like i said before, budget isn't a factor. realistically, all the marvel movies are b-movies, even with their big star casting and budgets.[/QUOTE] what the fuck? none of those movies are b-movies. yall have no idea what they even are. a bit of ham does not make something b. [editline]10th July 2016[/editline] your definition seems to be 'anything that isn't played totally serious'

interesting thing from wikipedia here A B movie is a low-budget commercial motion picture that is not an arthouse film. In its original usage, during the Golden Age of Hollywood, the term more precisely identified a film intended for distribution as the less-publicized, bottom half of a double feature. Although the U.S. production of movies intended as second features largely ceased by the end of the 1950s, the term B movie continued to be used in the broader sense it maintains today. In its post–Golden Age usage, there is ambiguity on both sides of the definition: on the one hand, the primary interest of many inexpensive exploitation films is prurient; on the other, many B movies display a high degree of craft and aesthetic ingenuity. In either usage, most B movies represent a particular genre—the Western was a Golden Age B movie staple, while low-budget science-fiction and horror films became more popular in the 1950s. Early B movies were often part of series in which the star repeatedly played the same character. Almost always shorter than the top-billed films they were paired with, many had running times of 70 minutes or less. The term connoted a general perception that B movies were inferior to the more handsomely budgeted headliners; individual B films were often ignored by critics. Latter-day B movies still sometimes inspire multiple sequels, but series are less common. As the average running time of top-of-the-line films increased, so did that of B pictures. In its current usage, the term has somewhat contradictory connotations: it may signal an opinion that a certain movie is (a) a genre film with minimal artistic ambitions or (b) a lively, energetic film uninhibited by the constraints imposed on more expensive projects and unburdened by the conventions of putatively "serious" independent film. The term is also now used loosely to refer to some higher-budgeted, mainstream films with exploitation-style content, usually in genres traditionally associated with the B movie. From their beginnings to the present day, B movies have provided opportunities both for those coming up in the profession and others whose careers are waning. Celebrated filmmakers such as Anthony Mann and Jonathan Demme learned their craft in B movies. They are where actors such as John Wayne and Jack Nicholson first became established, and they have provided work for former A movie actors, such as Vincent Price and Karen Black. Some actors, such as Béla Lugosi, Eddie Constantine and Pam Grier, worked in B movies for most of their careers. The term B actor is sometimes used to refer to a performer who finds work primarily or exclusively in B pictures.

it literally says there is two sides to the argument and we are on different ones

alright, i guess we'll never come to a full agreement on what defines a B film, seeing as how its definition has changed throughout the years.

think we all can agree this is a b movie though [t]http://www.simbasible.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Bee-Movie.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=megafat;50683348]"Who should we get to play the pale white character?" "I know, a black man!"[/QUOTE] is him being white relevant to the plot, to the tone, or to any underlying messages in the story?

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50685124]is him being white relevant to the plot, to the tone, or to any underlying messages in the story?[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure L's appearance is iconic to the point where people who never heard about Death Note can recognise him.

Maybe they thought they would never be able to capture what L looks like in live action without it looking cheesy so they thought it would be better to say fuck it and just do whatever they want. As long as the character is still the same, I don't really mind. [editline]10th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Damjen;50685198]I'm pretty sure L's appearance is iconic to the point where people who never heard about Death Note can recognise him.[/QUOTE] It's iconic but it isn't relevant to the plot.

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50685124]is him being white relevant to the plot, to the tone, or to any underlying messages in the story?[/QUOTE] Idk, it appears that his appearance shows him as someone who's locked up, and his pale skin suggests that he doesn't go out much, and it is accentuated by the bags under his eyes and his skeleton-like appearance. The guy chosen to play him meets literally nonnnne of that

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;50685486]Idk, it appears that his appearance shows him as someone who's locked up, and his pale skin suggests that he doesn't go out much, and it is accentuated by the bags under his eyes and his skeleton-like appearance. The guy chosen to play him meets literally nonnnne of that[/QUOTE] I get the point about pale skin, it's hard to make a black guy pale, but there are plenty of ways to make him look reclusive without needing him to be white. It's straight up idiotic to assume they're just going to pop him into the film as he looks in that press photo.

[QUOTE=megafat;50678104]Alien 3 was a decent film and manages to end the series in a decent way. I'm annoyed that people still shit all over that film. It doesn't shit over a franchise like other films have, like the majority of the Highlander films.[/QUOTE] Iv'e seen it dozens of times now (again last night infact) I don't dislike 3, it's actually a fairly competent movie in it's own right. Problem is that 3 shit all over the end off Aliens film (even if it was somewhat out of their hands). That was never going to sit right with the 'new' fans, you cannot just kill an incredibly popular charecter in Hicks, off screen and expect people to like it (bonus hate for such a terriblly boring and un heroic death too), to a lesser extent the same goes for both newt and bishop. I honestly feel that 3 would have been received better if ripley and by extension the audience never found out what happened to Hicks or Newt, leaving their fate ambiguous.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;50685486]Idk, it appears that his appearance shows him as someone who's locked up, and his pale skin suggests that he doesn't go out much, and it is accentuated by the bags under his eyes and his skeleton-like appearance. The guy chosen to play him meets literally nonnnne of that[/QUOTE] yeah, that's a legit reason if it plays into the story's themes. though unless cheap out on costumes and makeup, and/or completely miss the fact that he's supposed to look like a recluse, it probably won't really matter

[QUOTE=squids_eye;50685349]It's iconic but it isn't relevant to the plot.[/QUOTE] Pretty much this. There's really no point in changing something iconic.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;50678976]Alien is the only truly great one, but it's pretty much perfect.[/QUOTE] You neglect Aliens way too much

It doesn't matter which Alien is the best, because deep down we all love it to death.

[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;50688553]You neglect Aliens way too much[/QUOTE] It's the best movie Cameron ever made, but that's not really a high bar. It has not aged as well as the first or third, and it's responsible for completely removing any mystery or depth the Alien might have had. The simple truth is you can stick any other monster in there and it works and plays out exactly the same. The film doesn't require the Alien to exist.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;50688663]Except Resurrection.[/QUOTE] Resurrection who?

Nice new trailers, love all the posters.

What is the best place for a european to buy posters?

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;50688663]Except Resurrection.[/QUOTE] Walmart bought Weyland Corp on this one. What's not to love?

[QUOTE=shott;50680529]Gonna rant here. Movie adaptation for Death Note anime is in the works. And there's a character named L [img_thumb]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/nCfqZ2trMOc/maxresdefault.jpg[/img_thumb] Well, who's gonna play L? Him. [img]http://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Stanfield-News-618x400.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Fucking Hollywood once again neglecting Asian actors, when will this racism end?

[QUOTE=usaokay;50691281]It's always about black or white actors whilst severely neglecting Asians and Indians.[/QUOTE] nobody watches westerns anymore why the heck would they hire indians for???

there were native americans in that movie? i don't really count jake from twilight.

[QUOTE=usaokay;50691334]I found The Ridiculous 6 to be extremely racist because they neglected hiring Indian actors and instead went with Native Americans.[/QUOTE] Hindi* ;^)

[QUOTE=Joz;50691303]nobody watches westerns anymore why the heck would they hire indians for???[/QUOTE] You just talked about asian racism and now ask why they would hire indians lol

[QUOTE=Joz;50691303]nobody watches westerns anymore why the heck would they hire indians for???[/QUOTE] even if this is a joke post, western films have had a big resurgence

[QUOTE=Rusty100;50693036]even if this is a joke post, western films have had a big resurgence[/QUOTE] They did but surprisingly without Native Americans, with the exception of gory Bone Tomahawk. Apparently some people at film business think it's racist to hire NA to play members of the Indian tribes (as it implies that's the only role they deserve) and it's even more racist to hire anyone else - thus it's better to omit the subject altogether. Does that make any sense? Absolutely fucking not. To be honest it's a really hypocritical and fucked up business.