Weekly Ketchup: Safe House Gets A Sequel

I'm assuming the "prequel" aspect is how they can keep Denzel in the script.

Sep 8 - 07:55 PM

fdjsai iofdsa

welcome to: http://www.famalegoods.com

The website wholesale for many kinds of
fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prada,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time.

free shipping

competitive price

any size available

accept the paypal

http://www.mineokmalls.com

jordan shoes $32

nike shox $32

Christan Audigier bikini $23

Ed Hardy Bikini $23

Smful short_t-shirt_woman $15

ed hardy short_tank_woman $16

Sandal $32

christian louboutin $80

Sunglass $15

COACH_Necklace $27

handbag $33

AF tank woman $17

puma slipper woman $30

http://www.famalegoods.com

Sep 14 - 04:28 AM

Facebook User

Slow news week.... Yeah, that's all I got.

Sep 7 - 07:46 PM

Will Stamp

I would say that 500 Days and Amelie have a fair amount in common, mainly their irritatingly self-conscious and cutesy tone.

Sep 7 - 09:01 PM

Kyle Tolan

I made the instant connection when I saw 500 Days. Its really more about the use of many different film styles throughout the movies as well as the sort of classic narrative over not-so classic stories (not to mention the random backstory montages placed throughout each).

Sep 8 - 01:03 AM

Mohd Syafiq Bin Jabaruddin

I'm not bagging on Ebert, but would an Ebert biopic really be that interesting?

Sep 7 - 10:14 PM

Stepping Razor

Well, seems like it's going to be a documentary, not a biopic. I had thought it was going to be a biopic, too.

Sep 8 - 10:28 AM

Dave Sivertsen

How are movies like Safehouse and Red getting sequels and the A-team is not!? Not only an amazing ensemble piece but it was also awesome at everything!!!

Sep 7 - 10:24 PM

Whereis Reemaal

A-Team was good? Really?

Sep 8 - 12:30 AM

Best action film of 2010.

Sep 8 - 10:38 PM

Stanley Beans

The A-team was average at best nothing to write home about.

Sep 9 - 05:13 PM

Vin Diesel needs a better agent

Sep 7 - 11:54 PM

Really though the Fast movies are cool, and I'm waiting for Riddick 3, and I know he hasn't always been the best actor (as alright as XXX was he seemed kinda wooden at times and he wasn't even in the sequel! he left Fast too but he ended up coming back afterward) but I liked him in Boiler Room and Private Ryan. I think with the proper material and direction he can move between genres quite easily. However, he seems to have The Rock's agent or something because at least half the time these days he's in lame children's movies! He's wasting his talent. But that's just my opinion.

Sep 8 - 12:01 AM

maybe I over-approximated his record as it relates exclusively to childrens movies but Pacifier stands for itself, and taking a lok at his upcoming, i see Riddick 3, Fast 6, XXX 3, aaand.. a movie about a kid finding a robot. Sort of sounds like Iron Giant Redux i guess, which is fine and all but come on!

Sep 8 - 12:07 AM

Stepping Razor

From the sounds of it, maybe he's doing it for the paycheck. As you said, he's not exactly the best of actors out there, and he's working within his range. Not every Hollywood actor (especially these days) is about his/her craft... they're about striking while the iron is hot. Maybe it just sounds fun to him, so he wants to have fun while also getting paid.

Sep 8 - 10:38 AM

mm maybe so

Sep 8 - 03:38 PM

King Simba

You can tell this is a slow week when the #1 fresh development is a documentary. Roger Ebert definitely deserves one though. He may disagree with the general opinion a lot of times, but he almost always manages to make get his point across (though The Prestige was an exception. I'm still not sure what bothered him about that film) and sometimes his reviews even make me appreciate a film more (Knowing was a prime example).

Really looking forward to The World's End. I liked Shaun of the Dead, while Hot Fuzz was one of the best buddy cop movies of all time, so I can't wait for the conclusion to the trilogy.

I actually think dystopian YA fiction has been a pretty solid genre. Regardless of whether or not they're very original, there have been quite a lot of well made novels in the genre, plus it's nice to see strong female characters being produced on such a consistant basis, something Hollywood is still having trouble with.

Regarding Matched, I'm actually reading it right now, though so far I haven't been very impressed with it. It's a little too heavy on the romance aspect, which wouldn't be a problem except like Twilight it doesn't give us much of a reason to care for the love triangle. Hopefully it starts to pick up later on because the first half has been pretty uneventful.

Sep 8 - 01:13 AM

I didn't like The Prestige the first time I watched it and even now I only find it tolerably interesting. My main problems with it were despite the ridiculousness of the ending I totally saw "the twist" coming 30 minutes before it arrived. I mean of course the Jackman-centric twist. The Bale-centric one I saw about two hours before it happened. I mean honestly did no one recognize that both those characters were Christian Bale? For a movie largely based on it's surprise twist, those are pretty glaring flaws. Also, thought they buried the most interesting storyline. Thought the movie would have been better had it been based on the "Current Wars" between Tesla and Edison. The story of the two rival magicians is strong aside from the conclusion which is why I've come to mildly enjoy it and Bowie as Tesla is well worth the price of admission alone though sadly underused.

Sep 8 - 07:53 PM

I don't believe you. The second character you mentioned doesn't show up until halfway through the movie, so you could have figured it out an hour in at best.

Sep 8 - 08:03 PM

Joshua Caylor

"The secret impresses no one.". Unfortunately, while that is true about illusions, usually those tricks are not given away at the end. The Prestige revealed the secret and it was a disappointment, as most truths behind illusions are. I personally find this film very well done and perfectly structured, dividing the three acts into the stages of an illusion (pledge, turn, prestige), but it disappoints after the prestige, when the trick is revealed (I don't mind the ending). Just because you guessed the ending doesn't make it a bad one, just as figuring out how an illusion is done does not make the illusion itself bad. I remember reading an interview where Christopher Nolan said he would have preferred if he didn't reveal the secret, but it seemed necessary.

Also, you can't blame the Nolans or the film for the simplicity of the illusion. Remember, this was an adaptation of a novel, and Christopher Priest was responsible for that element of this adaptation. I thought the film was well acted, well structured, and well directed. I don't fault the movie for its ending. "The secret impresses no one", but the illusion itself (the movie) is still worth the watch and can be quite entertaining. That's how I feel about "The Prestige."

Sep 8 - 11:07 PM

Come on guys you're stretching pretty hard to defend Nolan here. I love the man too, but he's not above having flaws. The most obvious one for me was fully on display in The Prestige. He's way to deliberate in his approach to his endings. If The Sixth Sense would have been figured out half way thru it would have seriously detracted from the movie. If you knew who Kaiser Soze was half way thru The Usual Suspects it would have been been a detriment to the movie. Nolan was going for that and he failed I think for anyone who was paying attention. It wasn't that the ending was revealed and it was disappointing, it was that I figured out the disappointing ending and he didn't cover it up well enough and didn't come up with something better. I'm sorry if the illusion is easy to figure out then it's a bad illusion. I believe that was actually one of the points made in the movie. Janson, you caught me I was guilty of exaggeration, but the central point still remains valid. Lastly, I can't blame the director for faults I find in the direction of the film? That's a new one. He couldn't have gotten better make-up for Bale or made sure they never shared screentime? he couldn't have made the concious decision to change the ending to make it more adaptable for film. Again that's news to me. Directors do it all the time. As I said, I think you guys are trying very hard to cover for Nolan with excuses that basically come down to "you just don't get it" which is the go to response for the indefensible.

Sep 9 - 11:54 PM

PS I agree with you about it being well acted and give Nolan and the cast full credit for the performance aspect of the direction. That's what makes it watchable for me now.

Sep 10 - 04:47 PM

I agree with your PS, BB. I thought it was a superbly well made movie in all respects. And for the record, I figured "Sixth Sense" out within about 15 minutes. I didn't even intend to. I just thought it was funny *spoiler* how we never saw Willis go to the hospital before we transistion into years later. I thought, "well, wouldn't that be something IF..." Then I started noticing that no one except the kid was talking to him. I thought, "Oh, no, I hope I'm wrong, that would be so lame". In the end, I don't hold it against the film. But I don't think it's anywhere near as masterful a movie as "Prestige".

Sep 10 - 07:02 PM

Flash T

Safehouse was awful, 80m it cost and it was bland, unimaginitive and worse of all perdictable. The only real twist is that some dull fucker green lit a sequel.

Sep 8 - 01:18 AM

Zach Wisz

Why is Roger Ebert so special? He's a film critic who hates some of the greatest movies ever made. I'd rather see a movie about Chuck Norris making a sandwich instead.

Sep 8 - 09:19 AM

Stepping Razor

I'm sure someone in Hollywood would oblige you on the Chuck Norris special, but I'm interested in seeing a documentary on Ebert. That you're basically calling Ebert a hater emphasizes that critical thinking is probably not your thing. There are plenty of mindless, dumb movies out there to scratch your itch.

Sep 8 - 10:31 AM

Zach Wisz

Oh well. If it's a documentary I guess I have no problem. If it was an actual FILM I'd be like, WTF?

Sep 8 - 08:13 PM

Cole Jaeger

What? Clockwork Orange, Blue Velvet, To Kill A Mockingbird, that's about it. And the only one of those he HATED was Vlue Velvet.

Sep 8 - 10:43 AM

Dave J

As you all probably know by now, Ebert hated "Blue Velvet" because of the humiliation of it's actress Isabelle Rosselini which some of those scenes didn't really have anything to do with the mystery itself! I originally liked the film because I was very young and liked to see some of my favorite actresses naked and so forth... but after reading about Lynch's reasons for showcasing some of those shocking scenes I decided that Ebert was right on the money!

Sep 10 - 12:35 PM

Dave J

Actually, on a live telecast- he did change his opinion to a thumbs up on "A Clockwork Orange" but haven't submitted a proper rewritten review on it yet. At least as far as I know anyway!

Sep 10 - 04:22 PM

King Simba

Everyone is bound to hate a few films that most people think are great. Besides, a lot of films that are now considered great weren't exactly very hotly recieved when they were first release. In fact, in cases like Blade Runner and Clockwork Orange he was just reflecting the general opinion of the time. In fact, there were actually some cases where he would give a film its due well before most other critics (2001 being a prime example. His original 4 star rating was one of a the rare raves the film recieved upon release).

Sep 8 - 12:52 PM

Michael Arnold

Chuck Norris doesn't make sandwhiches. He waits for them to materialize. They always do.

Sep 9 - 11:53 AM

Greg Dean Schmitz

About the Ebert documentary, I think that one interesting take that could be incorporated could be the "mentor" position that he established with many of the new generation of Internet film writers in the 1990s and early 2000s. When UpcomingMovies.com was in its early years, it was a huge deal when I would be quoted in the Movie Answer Man column, or shared the stage with Roger at the EbertFest to talk about "Grave of the Fireflies." And I'm just one of probably dozens of writers who could tell similar stories.

Sep 8 - 12:15 PM

Ebert also has a reputation for engaging readers in discussion, including some RT members.

Sep 8 - 08:00 PM

Lance Reeder

Please anyone who's actually seen Priest, was it really that bad? I really enjoyed it and at the time it seemed to be buried by a tide of folks who had never seen it and assumed it was stupid based on synopsis'. Yes, it was a bit derivative of movie's like Mad Max, Blade Runner and Judge Dredd, but honestly there are worse things than being derivative of Mad Max and Blade Runner. I thought it was a really enjoyable action film with an interesting premise and elevated above its budget by Paul Bettany's leading role. Maybe I'm alone here, but there are about a dozen movie's in recent years that have come out with worse executions of this or similar premises.

Sep 8 - 07:41 PM

I thought it was an insightful examination of homosexuality in the Catholic Church. Oh, you mean the Bettany thing? Total POS. Sorry.

Sep 8 - 07:59 PM

Mitch Jones

I've seen the movie but I can't remember much about it except that I didn't enjoy it. It's mostly just forgettable to me, which is a shame because the cast was good and it's usually the type of movie I like.

Sep 8 - 08:32 PM

Please expound you two. I seriously interested in figuring out how I had such a different take on the movie. It had it's flaws and is far from perfect, but I still enjoyed it and thought the action in particular was very well done especially on the budget it was given.

Sep 10 - 12:06 AM