Weinstein Co, You're on Notice
by Brian
All right, Weinsteins. You did a great deal of damage to your image in my eyes when you dumped a bunch of crap on the market right before you left Miramax. Proof was respectable, but An Unfinished Life, The Brothers Grimm, and, especially, Secuestro Express pretty much sucked. And that's not even to mention Underclassman and Venom, which I wisely skipped.
Since then, you've not helped yourselves by releasing a bunch of crap under your own names. Granted, I didn't see Derailed or Doogal or Wolf Creek or Hoodwinked, so they may be high art for all I know. You'll permit me to remain skeptical, however.
On the other hand, I did see The Matador, as well as Transamerica, The Libertine, and Mrs. Henderson Presents, and they were all crap. Oh sure, a few of them got decent reviews but I saw right through them. You can't hide from me.
Which brings us to what may be the final straw: Lucky Number Slevin. No, of course I haven't seen it yet, since it's not out for two more weeks. And no, I'm not complaining about the dumb-ass faux-clever use of "Slevin" in the title, although I do find plays on words in titles annoying. And even though I think you guys are really pushing it with the upside-down "7" in the title on the poster, I won't make a big deal out of it.
No, no, the big problem is something I noticed when I came across the film's website. That's right, I'm calling you out on the "#" in the title - "Lucky # Slevin".
I think I speak for the entire sane world when I say that this, quite simply, cannot stand. It makes no sense, and even if it does make sense, it's just not right. Slevin is not a number! It cheapens your movie, like it tries too hard to look clever and cool and instead becomes tedious and gimmicky. As if the world needs another dumb Elmore Leonard/Tarantino ripoff.
So here's the deal. By the time the movie opens, the title on the film better be "Lucky Number Slevin". Or else you're cowards.
Since then, you've not helped yourselves by releasing a bunch of crap under your own names. Granted, I didn't see Derailed or Doogal or Wolf Creek or Hoodwinked, so they may be high art for all I know. You'll permit me to remain skeptical, however.
On the other hand, I did see The Matador, as well as Transamerica, The Libertine, and Mrs. Henderson Presents, and they were all crap. Oh sure, a few of them got decent reviews but I saw right through them. You can't hide from me.
Which brings us to what may be the final straw: Lucky Number Slevin. No, of course I haven't seen it yet, since it's not out for two more weeks. And no, I'm not complaining about the dumb-ass faux-clever use of "Slevin" in the title, although I do find plays on words in titles annoying. And even though I think you guys are really pushing it with the upside-down "7" in the title on the poster, I won't make a big deal out of it.
No, no, the big problem is something I noticed when I came across the film's website. That's right, I'm calling you out on the "#" in the title - "Lucky # Slevin".
I think I speak for the entire sane world when I say that this, quite simply, cannot stand. It makes no sense, and even if it does make sense, it's just not right. Slevin is not a number! It cheapens your movie, like it tries too hard to look clever and cool and instead becomes tedious and gimmicky. As if the world needs another dumb Elmore Leonard/Tarantino ripoff.
So here's the deal. By the time the movie opens, the title on the film better be "Lucky Number Slevin". Or else you're cowards.
|Link|9:02 PM
11 Comments:
The Matador was all right. Not great, mind you, but good enough.
Otherwise I'm shocked to discover that I to a large extent agree. 2005 being as bad a year for movies almost exclusively due to the Weinsteins? Who would have predicted that? Fucking embarrassing. (so maybe Chicago should've been a hint)
Lucky # 7levin? Folks! Do you realize what this means? We already have a winner for the dumbest title of the year!
I am still looking forward to the film, though. Paul McGuigan's Gangster was pretty cool. On the other hand, I am admittedly one of the worlds greatest apologists when it comes to gangster movies. Can't help it. I love 'em, the ugly bastards.
But will Feast be out by Hallowe'en 2006???
Jaydro, I think Feast was rumored to be going DTV, but I haven’t heard anything since Christmas. Poor Gullagher.
In terms of the Weinstein's: surely the quality of Scary Movie 4, Pulse, Scream 4 and the Halloween remake will make up for a lackluster Winter/Spring. Robert Rodriguez must have another 3-4 awful CGI kid's flicks in the pipeline, as well.
Worst case: Mimic 6 and The Prophecy 9.
In terms of the Weinstein's: surely the quality of Scary Movie 4, Pulse, Scream 4 and the Halloween remake will make up for a lackluster Winter/Spring. Robert Rodriguez must have another 3-4 awful CGI kid's flicks in the pipeline, as well.
So when you say "quality", what you're really saying is "quantity" (?).
Worst case: Mimic 6 and The Prophecy 9.
See, that doesn't sound "worst case" to me, because the Mimic and Prophecy sequels have been going direct to video. And direct to video movies don't really exist.
The problem with the Scary Movies is that they keep arriving in theaters. So I have to sit through trailers and TV spots and see posters all over the place. So while I'd like for them not to exist, I'm constantly reminded of their insidious presence.
Kinda like Fall Out Boy.
Just kidding, Nick - although "quantity" does hit it right on the head.
I don't think anyone can really expect much out of Weinstein Co. for a few years. From what I’ve read - Bob and Harvey are strictly focused on filling the coffers right now. The easiest and fastest way to do so is produce cheap horror sequels, teen comedies and Robert Rodriguez pictures.
They'll certainly intermittently release some forgettable, mid-quality indie fare (like The Matador, Slevin) - but I'd imagine we're a good 2-3 years away from greatness.
Yeah, you could say the above strategy describes the last 6 years of Miramax (with no payoff) but I'm thinking there's a master plan here.
Yeah, you could say the above strategy describes the last 6 years of Miramax (with no payoff) but I'm thinking there's a master plan here.
Well, maybe, but a bad movie is a bad movie, and master plan or not, you are what you put out there.
Is it bad that I have seen 4 of the Prophecy movies?
Hell, yes! It's bad just knowing that there are 4 Prophecy movies.
Yeah, I can. I don't think Walken is all that into rejecting roles. But that's OK, since he's Christopher Walken.
I don't think Walken is all that into rejecting roles. But that's OK, since he's Christopher Walken.
From what I've heard he wouldn't be Christopher Walken if he rejected roles. Apparently he'll take whatever part is offered him as long as schedule permits and they pay him his going salary. Says it's all work to him.
Claims his most rewarding role to be Puss in a modern (1988) update of Puss in Boots.
The great - at the same time most disturbing - thing about Walken, is that you never know if he's kidding or not. Which probably explains the greatness.
There are 4 Prophecy movies?
I saw that Puss in Boots movie! Back when I was in college, it randmomly showed up on TV one day. I bet it was rewarding for him. He got to dance, and turn into a cat!
Post a Comment
<< Home