?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Choke - Multiplayer vi [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Tomas Gallucci

counter customisable

[ flavors | Meta Profile ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Value for Value Politics Tech Reads ]

Choke [Feb. 17th, 2009|07:32 am]
Tomas Gallucci
[Tags|, , , , , , , , ]
[music |Mary Poppins]

choke-poster-big


Nothing bothers me more than movies that only get limited release and then go straight to home video. It's not that I don't "get it"--on the contrary. There are some movies that the suits just don't think will make money in the theater, so they decide to print a bunch of discs and hope they can sell them to some big box store and let them get stuck trying to offload the merchandise.

Take Brick for instance. That was an indy film that was done right and could have made money in the theater if marketed right, but Brick was another one of those movies that the suits just didn't know how to market because it didn't fit nicely into a category. It was a high-school drama, a mystery, thriller and noir all in one. Granted, there wasn't a lot of star power in the film. Joseph Gordon-Levitt was the film's biggest star by far, and yet, I'm betting that if I didn't go down the list of his filmography you wouldn't know him. That's a shame too given he's made some pretty damned good films.

The Weatherman was another example of this phenomenon. I still haven't stopped scratching my head over this one four years later. The Weather Man starting Nicolas Cage, Michael Cane and Hope Davis (amongst others) was directed by Gore Verbinski. There was plenty of star power in this film. Verbinski had just finished the first Pirates movie so there was no reason for this film to get play. It was supposed to come out in March of '05, but I vividly remember the release date slipping at least three times. When it finally came out in October, it only played at the art house in town for three weeks then left. The DVD was also a soft release.

So now we come to Choke staring Sam Rockwell. The trailer looked great and had everyone stoked since Q3 last year. It was an adaptation of the Chuck Palahniuk's book of the same title. Now granted, it was a first time writer/director at the helm of the project, but we're talking about a project based on a book by the guy who wrote Fight Club. How could it be doomed to fail?

The business is getting screwy I tell you. Remember Opie's Ron Howard's film Frost/Nixon that was supposed to come out at Christmas but didn't do so until well after the first of the year? It got one showtime a day in town. I didn't get to see it because of the poor scheduling. The Soloist got bumped as well--now we're looking at an April 24th date, the third such date for the film! (If you're looking for the music in the trailer, click here.) Hell, even Darren Aronofsky's The Wrestler had a hard time finding a wide release date.

So as much as I'd love to talk to you about Choke today, I'm afraid I just can't do that because I haven't had the opportunity to see the movie until today--the movie's DVD release date. Some days, I feel like the studios are to release dates what Elmer Fudd is to hunting rabbits.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2009-02-17 11:53 am (UTC)
How could it be doomed to fail?

Wow! Seriously? Well, first of all, some (not all) films which have a star-studded cast fail due to lack of synergy. Just because there are a bunch of great stars doesn't mean that they're going to work together well, or generate that on-screen charisma which helps a movie succeed.

Myself, using only this film as an example, will be turned off by Sam Rockwell. I don't care for him or many of the movies he's been in. He's like the actor studios use when they can't find an A-list actor. Why would I pay money to see some hack perform? The short answer is that I wouldn't. I did like him in Galaxy Quest but I enjoyed the character moreso than the actor. I've disliked just about everything else I've seen him in. A second rate actor in second-rate movies.

Your assertion that just because the source material is good the movie will also be, greatly discredits the role of director. There are times I will see a movie *only* because of the director, or avoid a film because of ones, as in the case of Aronofsky or that piggish liberal fuck Olive Stone. A director's role is very important in the success of a film, and different directors are chosen for projects based on their vision, style, and past successes.

Of course another reason a movie fails is that its just not a good movie. My thoughts on The Weatherman as an example.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-17 12:10 pm (UTC)
See, I like Rockwell. I liked him in The Green Mile, Matchstick Men, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy to name a few. I'd go see the film just because he's in it.

As the record bears, however, I have more reason that that. I both read the book and throughly enjoyed Fight Club and intend to do the same with Choke. The trailer was great and I think that from what I've read in reviews the film would have done great with the 30 and under crowd. Palahniuk really knows how to write to that crowd.

In this case, however, we're talking about movies not getting their day in the theaters when they have potential unlike drivel such as Son of the Mask. Bomb with a capital "B".

I think that The Weather Man was geared for a specific audience--one that wants to no simply be amused and entertained but also want to have a gem they can keep turning over to find new meaning and epiphanies.

I know you weren't the biggest fan of The Fountain, but what do you have against Aronofsky? I don't think you can pass judgement until you've seen Requiem for a Dream and Pi to help settle the balance. Aronofsky is a genius at what he does even if his material at first comes off as pedantic. Then again, I'm talking to the guy who wasn't moved by The Soloist trailer.

Here's a bit of news that might make you giddy: Pink Panther 2 starring Steve Martin came out Feburary 6. Sadly (for you) it's only getting a 4.3 on IMDB.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ehowton
2009-02-18 02:08 am (UTC)
Sadly (for you) it's only getting a 4.3 on IMDB.

I don't know what that means.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-18 02:29 am (UTC)
It means people hate it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: fabrizzo
2009-02-23 07:25 am (UTC)
Pi sucked.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-23 10:44 am (UTC)
In what way?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: fabrizzo
2009-02-23 09:47 pm (UTC)
Wait... was PI the one with that Stock Analyst? And how math was all cool and stuff?

Stock Market + Math - Eddie Murphy - Dan Akroid = Sucked.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-23 09:49 pm (UTC)
What the hell is so great about Dan Akroid?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-23 09:51 pm (UTC)
Personally, I enjoyed Sean Gullette's performance.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: fabrizzo
2009-02-23 09:49 pm (UTC)
I also think the foundation of the story is obviously bunk. Like 'The Core'. Except it was worse x10. Might be my least favorite movie EVAR!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-23 09:50 pm (UTC)
Of course it wasn't real! I thought it was a wonderful way of taking something that so little people konw about and being able to tell a story that people would believe because of their lack of understanding. I'm not talking about duping. I'm talking about illusion.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: fabrizzo
2009-02-23 10:18 pm (UTC)
For other fiction pieces, there's a theme to follow. A story and lesson to learn. I didn't find that in Pi. I reckon it was there, but I really didn't enjoy the film. I'd explain further, but I don't like typing a bunch.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: schpydurx
2009-02-23 10:24 pm (UTC)
I'd explain further, but I don't like typing a bunch.
I've been feeling like that a lot lately myself.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)