Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

League of... Trialer up

Old 02-14-03, 08:54 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Weird New Jersey
Posts: 8,493
League of... Trialer up

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Trailer
Samuel is offline  
Old 02-14-03, 09:18 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
I'll take the rapist for $100 tribek!
Jackskeleton is offline  
Old 02-14-03, 09:32 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 23,460
whoa - cool. Never heard of it. I'll be sure to shut my brain off and go see this.
Trigger is offline  
Old 02-14-03, 09:49 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Reminds me of the avengers.. only with people in the background now.
Jackskeleton is offline  
Old 02-14-03, 11:44 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Saint Clair Shores, MI, USA
Posts: 2,639
Originally posted by Trigger
whoa - cool. Never heard of it. I'll be sure to shut my brain off and go see this.
A better idea might be to leave your brain on and read Alan Moore's exciting, intelligent, suspenseful, and witty comic that was the basis for this film.

Before I saw the trailer, I had concerns that the movie would be awful. Now that I've seen the trailer, I'm nearly convinced that the movie will be awful. (Of course, that may not stop me from seeing it anyway.)

Then again, it's going to be pretty hard for "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" to be the worst comic book film of the year. They'll have to try very hard for it to be worse than "Daredevil".

jim
Gamblor187 is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:19 AM
  #6  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,754
Originally posted by Jackskeleton
Reminds me of the avengers.. only with people in the background now.
beat me to it. Looks exactly like the avengers (which was horrible)
ClarkKentKY is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:26 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,462
doesn't look all that great..then again i have no prior knowledge to these characters so that could be part of it
the narrator is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:36 AM
  #8  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 1,754
Looks good, but I never read the original comic (quit the hobby over 10 years ago). Alan Moore is great though, I'd love to see The Watchmen...
necros is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:38 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Kal-El's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 7,976
Looked good. I'm in.
Kal-El is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 01:43 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Saint Clair Shores, MI, USA
Posts: 2,639
Originally posted by the narrator
doesn't look all that great..then again i have no prior knowledge to these characters so that could be part of it
You may not have read the comics, but you should still have knowledge of the characters.

The Invisible Man. Captain Nemo. Alan Quartermain. Dr. Jeckyl (and Mr. Hyde, of course). Mina Murray (from "Dracula").

All of these characters (plus Sherlock Holmes and a few other surprises for those with a keen eye) were in the book. Of course, the studio felt that they had to "Americanize" the movie, so they have added Tom Sawyer and, I believe, Dorian Gray.

I should also note that "The League Of Extraordinary Gentleman: Volume 2" is now available. They are up to issue #4 (of 6, I believe), and it's shaping up to be even better than the first.

jim
Gamblor187 is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 01:55 AM
  #11  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 70,819
Trailer makes it look like "Avengers" meets "Wild Wild West." Not a good combo.

The big mistake in the trailer is that it doesn't tell you who the famous "gentlemen" are. Readers of the comic book know, but not the general public.
Groucho is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 02:42 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 1,809
Originally posted by Groucho
The big mistake in the trailer is that it doesn't tell you who the famous "gentlemen" are. Readers of the comic book know, but not the general public.
I saw the trailer before "Daredevil" this morning, and thought to myself, "Are they making a Fantastic Four movie where they go back in time?"

Then I saw the title and went, "Ok, then".
freedexter is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 11:11 AM
  #13  
MrN
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: B.W.I.
Posts: 3,699
I'm a big fan of Alan Moore, so I'll probably see it even though the trailer looks god-awful. Especially when they say 'L X G' - sigh. Hopefully it won't just be an action film.

This seems more like a teaser trailer - I think the next trailer will name the characters etc.
MrN is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 11:44 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,044
With From Hell, fox took away the entire meaning of Moore's book; judging from the trailer, the adaptation of League . . . is even more messed up. Tom Sawyer? Vampires? Immortal men? LXG? Oh well, I can't complain. At least it is being brought to the screen and helping Moore sell more books...
diacritic is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 11:56 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 23,460
Originally posted by Gamblor187
A better idea might be to leave your brain on and read Alan Moore's exciting, intelligent, suspenseful, and witty comic that was the basis for this film.

Before I saw the trailer, I had concerns that the movie would be awful. Now that I've seen the trailer, I'm nearly convinced that the movie will be awful. (Of course, that may not stop me from seeing it anyway.)

Then again, it's going to be pretty hard for "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" to be the worst comic book film of the year. They'll have to try very hard for it to be worse than "Daredevil".

jim
Well, I don't read comics... The only comics I ever read were the kind that made my parents sick. I thought this just looked like some new incarnation of the Fantastic Four... I'm not a big fan of comic book based movies and it seems like there are plenty this year... Daredevil, Hulk, LXG, Xmen2... I'll go see em for the special effects because I have an appreciation for stuff like that.

As for your second comment... I simply don't listen to people who develop negative opinions about movies before they even see them. If you wanna convince yourself a movie is awful without even seeing it, then go ahead... me, I'll reserve judgement until I actually see it. If a movie's subject matter doesn't look appealing to me, then I'll avoid it - but I guess I just try to keep an open mind.

The fact that you disliked Daredevil so much when everyone else seems to be singing praises kinda makes me think you're difficult to please. It's too bad because you're probably the type of person these Hollywood types are making these comic book movies for.
Trigger is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:24 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 17,628
Originally posted by Trigger
As for your second comment... I simply don't listen to people who develop negative opinions about movies before they even see them. If you wanna convince yourself a movie is awful without even seeing it, then go ahead... me, I'll reserve judgement until I actually see it. If a movie's subject matter doesn't look appealing to me, then I'll avoid it - but I guess I just try to keep an open mind.
To be fair, Gamblor did say he was almost convinced, so he's still allowing for the possiblity it will be good. However, a trailer of a film is a resonable basis for forming an opinion of a film. Trailers are used by studios to try and sell a film to you, and if the trailer is unappealing, it's reasonable to assume that the film won't be that great either. Of course, there can be trailers that are not good indicators of the actual film's quality, but the same could be said of some reviews, which are another source for basing a decision to see a film on.

You yourself said that you don't go and see films that don't 'look appealing.' How do you form the opinion of whether or not the film looks appealing to you?

The fact that you disliked Daredevil so much when everyone else seems to be singing praises kinda makes me think you're difficult to please.
Hardly 'everyone' has been singing its praises. A quick look at it's tomatoreader rating ( http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/Daredevil-1120302/ ) shows that it's gotten an average of 50% good reviews, which qualifies it as 'rotten.' From what I've read, and from the trailers, the film is very much middle-of-the-road. It's not awful, but it's not that great either.
Jay G. is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:41 PM
  #17  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Flava-Country!
Posts: 3,964
L X G?!? The hell???

(Note to studio heads: Extraordinary starts with an E, not an X)

Dear lord, this looks like the League of Extraordinary Crap! I loved the comic, and was thrilled to hear about the movie - until what the studio was doing to the concept started to trickle in. Ladies and gents - this is just about off the mark as much as Superman wrestling polar bears in his Fortress of Solitude while his guards look on.

Looks like I'm going to avoid this one at all costs.
El-Kabong is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 12:41 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 23,460
Originally posted by Jay G.
To be fair, Gamblor did say he was almost convinced, so he's still allowing for the possiblity it will be good. However, a trailer of a film is a resonable basis for forming an opinion of a film. Trailers are used by studios to try and sell a film to you, and if the trailer is unappealing, it's reasonable to assume that the film won't be that great either. Of course, there can be trailers that are not good indicators of the actual film's quality, but the same could be said of some reviews, which are another source for basing a decision to see a film on.

You yourself said that you don't go and see films that don't 'look appealing.' How do you form the opinion of whether or not the film looks appealing to you?
Hardly 'everyone' has been singing its praises. A quick look at it's tomatoreader rating ( http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/Daredevil-1120302/ ) shows that it's gotten an average of 50% good reviews, which qualifies it as 'rotten.' From what I've read, and from the trailers, the film is very much middle-of-the-road. It's not awful, but it's not that great either.
First off, I guess I might've come off like I was ripping into that guy - I didn't mean to. I was kinda using his comments as a springboard to go into my little rant... Anyway - I know he was just trying to share his opinions with me and I didn't mean to be a jerk.

You're misquoting me... I said "if the subject matter doesn't interest me"... like if it's about wagon wheels or bullriding or civil war or something else I have no interest in. I'm also not saying that this movie is bad because the subject matter doesn't interest me... it could be an excellent movie and I'm missing out on something great. It's just what I use to decide.

I completely disagree with you also about knowing whether a film is good or not based only on seeing a trailer. You simply cannot know if a film is good or bad based on the trailer... all you can say is whether it looks interesting to you or not. Yeah - it's a marketing tool. If the trailer doesn't grab you, then it's a fair bet to say the film won't grab you either. It just irritates me to know end how people say some movie sucks before they've even see it. Some say so even before they see a trailer... all they have to hear is "Billy Zane has joined the cast of this... " and they go off on how much the movie sucks (replace Billy Zane with whoever, it doesn't matter to these people). They say a movie sucks before filming even starts. That kind of attitude irritates me.

As for Daredevil - I haven't read much about it, I just assumed it was getting good reviews from the small amount of buzz I'd seen. It's not something that I'd go see because I'm not into comic books or Ben Affleck or superhero movies in general (although I usually give them a chance anyway). I'd never heard of this Daredevil guy before either... I'll probably end up seeing it anyway because my cousin's in it.

edit - Kabong illustrates my point above.

Last edited by Trigger; 02-15-03 at 12:43 PM.
Trigger is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 03:53 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 17,628
Originally posted by Trigger
You're misquoting me... I said "if the subject matter doesn't interest me"... like if it's about wagon wheels or bullriding or civil war or something else I have no interest in. I'm also not saying that this movie is bad because the subject matter doesn't interest me... it could be an excellent movie and I'm missing out on something great. It's just what I use to decide.
You're right, I did misquote you, because I honestly did not think that could possibly be what you meant. Seriously, basing a decision on whether or not to see a movie on a plot description sounds a lot worse than judging it by the trailer or reviews for the film.

I completely disagree with you also about knowing whether a film is good or not based only on seeing a trailer. You simply cannot know if a film is good or bad based on the trailer... all you can say is whether it looks interesting to you or not. Yeah - it's a marketing tool. If the trailer doesn't grab you, then it's a fair bet to say the film won't grab you either. It just irritates me to know end how people say some movie sucks before they've even see it. Some say so even before they see a trailer... all they have to hear is "Billy Zane has joined the cast of this... " and they go off on how much the movie sucks (replace Billy Zane with whoever, it doesn't matter to these people). They say a movie sucks before filming even starts. That kind of attitude irritates me.
Neither I nor ElKabong or Gamblor have said in any absolute terms that LXG (sic) will suck. Gamblor said he's 'nearly convinced,' and ElKabong said it 'looks like' suck. So your rant about people saying a film they haven't seen sucks is not applicable to this thread.

I was perhaps a bit unlear though. When I said that trailers help people form an opinion of a film, that opinion is whether or not they will see the film. I didn't mean to imply that you one can say a film is good/bad with certainty from a trailer, but in most cases it's a good indicator.

As for Daredevil - I haven't read much about it, I just assumed it was getting good reviews from the small amount of buzz I'd seen. It's not something that I'd go see because I'm not into comic books or Ben Affleck or superhero movies in general (although I usually give them a chance anyway).
OK, now you're just contradicting yourself. You critisize people who moan when a certain actor joins a film, yet you yourself admit that you're not into Ben Affleck, and cite him as a reason for your disinterest in Daredevil. Also the way you prejudge comic books and superhero movies is worse than any judging of LXG that has gone on so far.

Last edited by Jay G.; 02-15-03 at 04:02 PM.
Jay G. is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 05:01 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Thoradin
Posts: 1,468
Sigh looks like another bad adaptation of a comic book. The public is going to get really tired of this soon.
Krug is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 05:13 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 17,628
What, like how they're tired of uninspired action films or romantic comedies?
Jay G. is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 05:27 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,515
It's directed by Stephen Norrington (Blade, Death Machine). I've got faith.

I think the premise is delicious. It may not match the book, but that doesn't mean the movie will be crap. Re-imagining Tom Sawyer as a trigger-happy gunman adventurer looks like a "The Mummy"-style bit of cheesy fun.
ipkevin is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 05:32 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: east texas
Posts: 5,473
i really realy enjoyed the miniseries but the trailer out now is really bad. the LXG logo thing is absolutely ridiculous. however, that being said, i hope that it is a really good movie. i will definately be there to see it as the miniseries was so different than your normal comics fare.
kevin75 is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 06:28 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Where the sky is always Carolina Blue! (Currently VA - again...)
Posts: 5,167
You know, the least they could have done was to keep it in the proper time period -- Victorian, 1890's -- instead they have it in what seems to be a weird, alternate 30's -- fancy cars, submachine guns, etc. What a joke. I'll hold off judgement for the moment, but it looks like they've already wrecked it. One of the coolest things in the comic was how subtle everything was -- cool, calm and collected characters. oh well.

Tuan Jim
Tuan Jim is offline  
Old 02-15-03, 06:37 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
thats one thing I noticed tuan.. the sub machine guns when the rest of the look had the victorian feel to it.

?
Jackskeleton is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.