|
Post by Viced on Oct 3, 2019 0:50:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Oct 3, 2019 1:44:07 GMT
Trailer tmrw. Warner Bros with one article has already campaigned more for this than The Mule last year. If it works, it could really work - already buzz on Olivia Wilde and the cast, true story, 90y/o Clint who might be right up against that young feller, whats-his-name, Marty....
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Oct 3, 2019 8:18:55 GMT
First article about this was in mid April...
Took about 5 months for pre-production, filming and post-production. Yeah, he did it again!!
|
|
|
Post by thomasjerome on Oct 3, 2019 13:15:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 3, 2019 13:23:33 GMT
I'm sure I'll get ripped for this but that trailer really is laying out the story too thick imo. The tragedy of the story is how he was callously used and tossed aside, not so much as he was vilified in that way that played out here. This is a problem for later Clint actually - The Mule could have been great instead of merely good if he eased up a little, and American Sniper could have been good and not merely adequate if he pulled back. Also, I don't see Wilde doing anything but I sure see Bates as a possible BSA contender. I dunno, maybe I'm misreading it. Looks very 7.5-ish which is not a bad thing .....at all.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 3, 2019 15:24:40 GMT
I actually think it looks pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Oct 3, 2019 15:49:06 GMT
I liked it. I guess it will follow the route of Sully: courts of law and police investigations with the incident shown in flashbacks.
I'd like to see Wilde getting some love award-wise but I guess Bates will actually be the wild card (pun intended?).
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Oct 3, 2019 16:53:18 GMT
This looks melodramatic and editorialized as hell, as was Sully. I wish Clint had an interest in telling hard-hitting fact-based docudramas about these events instead of imparting onto them agendas with boring black/white moral lines (in Sully, it was NTSB = BAD, in this it's going to be: media and government = BAD), and just like Sully was taken to task by those involved in the real event as being inaccurate (including the real Sullenberger), I'm sure this is going to get taken apart too.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Oct 3, 2019 17:11:08 GMT
I'm sure I'll get ripped for this but that trailer really is laying out the story too thick imo. The tragedy of the story is how he was callously used and tossed aside, not so much as he was vilified in that way that played out here. This is a problem for later Clint actually - The Mule could have been great instead of merely good if he eased up a little, and American Sniper could have been good and not merely adequate if he pulled back. Also, I don't see Wilde doing anything but I sure see Bates as a possible BSA contender. I dunno, maybe I'm misreading it. Looks very 7.5-ish which is not a bad thing .....at all. I don't think this will be award player. I don't think it will be either aside from maybe Bates just because she's a former winner, and this is such a weak year in Supporting Actress. Although if Richard Jewell's reception is like The Mule's, she won't happen either because Wiest wouldn't have happened this year even with being a former winner. I think that the story looked interesting enough so it's a good trailer, but the message seems to be screaming "fake news" to me, and I don't think most voters are going to be there for that. I agree with pacinoyes that if Eastwood would just ease up, I think his recent output would be a lot better, but everything is so heavy-handed. Sometimes that can work like with Green Book's racism is bad, but I think critics are going to have their knives out again if it's very heavy handed on the "fake news" angle.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Oct 3, 2019 17:13:43 GMT
I actually think it looks pretty good. Same. If Eastwood wasn't on shaky ground with a lot of SJW leaning film critics, I might have confidence that it could upset the Oscar race. 10 years ago, I would have had complete confidence. But I think critics will more than likely nitpick/over think it to death and give it a barely passing grade.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Oct 3, 2019 17:20:31 GMT
I don't think this will be award player. I don't think it will be either aside from maybe Bates just because she's a former winner, and this is such a weak year in Supporting Actress. Although if Richard Jewell's reception is like The Mule's, she won't happen either because Wiest wouldn't have happened this year even with being a former winner. I think that the story looked interesting enough so it's a good trailer, but the message seems to be screaming "fake news" to me, and I don't think most voters are going to be there for that. I agree with pacinoyes that if Eastwood would just ease up, I think his recent output would be a lot better, but everything is so heavy-handed. Sometimes that can work like with Green Book's racism is bad, but I think critics are going to have their knives out again if it's very heavy handed on the "fake news" angle. Eastwood has always been heavy handed. Million Dollar Baby and Mystic River ain't subtle. To be honest, I don't think there's has been a major decrease in the quality of his output since he was getting BP nods every other year in the 2000's. I thought a lot of that work that was getting Oscars love was overrated, but critics loved it anyway. What's changed is the way critics now react to that output (I believe in part because he's become more open about his right-wing politics).
|
|
|
Post by Viced on Oct 3, 2019 18:58:47 GMT
Can't wait for Clint to deliver the goods yet again!
Hope he keeps making movies until he's 100.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Oct 3, 2019 19:10:05 GMT
Looks decent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2019 19:23:58 GMT
The trailer’s “media’s white male victim” angle is something I’m hoping is merely a cynical marketing appeal towards what most would characterize the core audience to a late period Eastwood film to be.
Worst case scenario is that Eric Rudolph’s presence and any acknowledgment made towards his motives are relegated to a mere title card before the credits.
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Oct 3, 2019 19:28:14 GMT
They kept Wilde’s role very much under wraps in that trailer. I’m betting we’ll see more of her in the second; it really is a juicy part.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Oct 3, 2019 19:43:00 GMT
Looks solid. I can see nods for Bates and Rockwell should the film do well.
|
|
wattsnew
Full Member
Posts: 712
Likes: 347
|
Post by wattsnew on Oct 3, 2019 20:04:26 GMT
Looks terrible and like it lacks any nuance. So pretty much every late period Eastwood film. Just retire already, Clint.
|
|
|
Post by mattfincher on Oct 3, 2019 22:11:45 GMT
The incoming inevitable controversy about the Olivia Wilde character will sink this movie’s awards hopes, I’m guessing.
|
|
rhodoraonline
Badass
Your Generosity Hides Something Dirtier and Meaner
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 499
|
Post by rhodoraonline on Oct 4, 2019 2:23:41 GMT
I liked it. Seems to have more energy and suspense than Sully had.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Oct 4, 2019 2:23:57 GMT
Looks pretty solid, looking forward to this one.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Oct 8, 2019 21:39:28 GMT
Perhaps I dismissed this too soon, but I don't expect 3 late films to make it (1917, Little Women, and this) especially with a shorter awards season.
|
|
|
Post by sterlingarcher86 on Oct 8, 2019 22:26:55 GMT
The trailer’s “media’s white male victim” angle is something I’m hoping is merely a cynical marketing appeal towards what most would characterize the core audience to a late period Eastwood film to be. Worst case scenario is that Eric Rudolph’s presence and any acknowledgment made towards his motives are relegated to a mere title card before the credits. Is this really gonna be a thing? This really happened and this guy was fucked over. He deserves a movie. Does literally every movie have to be controversial now? This has been soooo many movies about falsely accused people and it’s all the sudden a problem now because he’s white and it’s 2019?
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Oct 8, 2019 23:20:18 GMT
The trailer’s “media’s white male victim” angle is something I’m hoping is merely a cynical marketing appeal towards what most would characterize the core audience to a late period Eastwood film to be. Worst case scenario is that Eric Rudolph’s presence and any acknowledgment made towards his motives are relegated to a mere title card before the credits. Is this really gonna be a thing? This really happened and this guy was fucked over. He deserves a movie. Does literally every movie have to be controversial now? This has been soooo many movies about falsely accused people and it’s all the sudden a problem now because he’s white and it’s 2019? Exactly. And why does every film's story has to mean something broader? If the film is telling the story of Richard Jewell, it's doesn't mean that it's saying 'FUCK ALL MEDIA, POOR WHITE DUDES, THEY ARE ALL VICTIMS'. It's simply telling the story of Richard Jewell. Who was indeed fucked over.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Oct 8, 2019 23:58:21 GMT
I want this to be good. Then again, I’ve seen what Clint thinks to be entertaining nowadays, and how hard he’s been leaning into and pandering to his demographic, so I’m not expecting it to be.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Oct 9, 2019 9:34:53 GMT
Is this really gonna be a thing? This really happened and this guy was fucked over. He deserves a movie. Does literally every movie have to be controversial now? This has been soooo many movies about falsely accused people and it’s all the sudden a problem now because he’s white and it’s 2019? Exactly. And why does every film's story has to mean something broader? If the film is telling the story of Richard Jewell, it's doesn't mean that it's saying 'FUCK ALL MEDIA, POOR WHITE DUDES, THEY ARE ALL VICTIMS'. It's simply telling the story of Richard Jewell. Who was indeed fucked over. Indeed. Our society really has a problem with generalisation so much, it's incredible how stupid it has become. You don't have to transform issues into every single event. We know that they exist, but context matters.
I remember for example when Serena Williams at the 2018 US Open final played the gender card after her conflict with umpire Carlos Ramos at a time, when "me too" was at a peak, claiming she was "only penalized because she was a woman". That was one of the most stupid things I've ever heard, because it actually had nothing to do with the rules and she was obviously playing against another woman as well...
|
|