WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

Martin Scorsese on "Raging Bull II"

Posted: April 8th, 2012 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
Martin Scorsese on "Raging Bull II"Submit Comment
A few days ago we reported that director Martin Guigui is planning to begin shooting "Raging Bull II" in June, with William Forsythe starring as an older Jake La Motta, the character Robert De Niro played in the original film. "Raging Bull II" is considered both a prequel and a sequel, since it will take place both before and after Martin Scorsese's version.

GQ magazine now caught up with Scorsese to get his thoughts on the new movie. "At the end of 'Raging Bull,' [Jake La Motta is] looking in a mirror and he's at comfort with himself, to a certain extent," he explained. "He's not fighting, he's not beating himself up. That's all. So, I don't know where they're going to go. I really don't know what 'Raging Bull II' would be."

Scorsese went on to confirm that he's not involved with "Raging Bull II," stating: "I think we said what we had to say at that time. All of us moved on."

Source: GQ

Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 70 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
DaveThePhotoGuy writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:45:14 AM

Nice one Scorsese, kiccked them in the balls but didn't sound like it.
AYT BALL writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:40:44 AM

@ Dave, yeah, a classy put down if ever i heard one! haha
BadChadB33 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 10:41:13 AM

I wonder if this movie will really go thru or not?
pornfly writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 12:39:52 PM

Scorseses diplomatic way of saying,"stop stepping on my movie,wut da f*ck is wrong whichu,retards"
bandolero999 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 12:45:46 PM

does the world need another prequel or sequel to Raging Bull?? nooooooooooooooo

poor William Forsythe he's a great actor but lacks in his looks compared to Brad Pitt and tom Cruise.He was great in the Devil's rejects and Gotti.
Kooky SpunkCaked writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 1:24:59 PM

They are trying to do with Jake LaMotta what they did with Hannibal Lecter ... we'll see how this goes. If they do like they did with Mesterine,
this may not work so well in the theaters, but will probably make its money back, when it goes to DVD.
CelluloidMan writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 3:45:35 PM

You tell'em Marty!!

F*CK THE CHUCK!! (This time, I really mean everyone involved in making RAGING BULL 2)
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:24:36 PM

People apparently feel there's more La Motta story to be told, so what's the big deal?

If this were Star Wars, and someone besides George Lucas wanted to adopt to film a Timothy Zahn storyline that expounded further on Luke Skywalker, hardly any one would complain, they'd only ask it be done right, so why the hell is everyone saying that any more Raging Bull, which isn't exactly a cultural cinematic icon, is immediately the worst idea ever?
struck21 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:36:40 PM

I read this the other day and was telling a friend about when it occurred to me that the movie ended. Not like Rocky but it was over. Nothing more to go on. This explains my thoughts.
Bullit writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:39:38 PM

I really don't understand WHY my posts are getting deleted!?!?

@MINK: tell me what you think about them.


minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:42:46 PM

@Bullit: I hate both of them. Why, you ask? The first, no naked tits. The second, no Kate Winslet naked tits. Not cool bro, not cool at all.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:47:37 PM

I think your way off on this one Minkowski. When you hear the words Raging Bull, two things instantly pop into peoples minds: Scorsese and Deniro. To make a sequel without those two would be a terrible idea and probably go straight to DVD. And it is an iconic American film. Plus, I think a lot of people would complain about the Zahn novels being made into SW films. I could never make it past the first book he wrote.
Bullit writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:48:34 PM

I thought they would be funny. They all like them.

What do you think of Man on a Ledge?
bane writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:49:32 PM

what next ???

a RAGING BULL tv series

people can't leave the classic alone :(
Bullit writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 4:51:01 PM

minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:03:28 PM

"What do you think of Man on a Ledge?"

No comment, Bullit.

And I was joking with you on the pictures and video, dude. Just joking. I thought the image was nice but would have been better if she were drinking milk and had the Got Milk stache, and the video was spot on, just no tits, I regret to say.

@Cress: Most people haven't even heard of the first one, and if a sequel, prequel whatever gets them to watch the first one, fine. I think you confuse the 1%'ers like yourself, who have seen Raging Bull, with the 99% that either haven't or couldn't give a sh*t one way or another, or you confuse the snobs at the AFI or Criterion with the 99% who simply see Raging Bull as some sort of 'cultural icon', when in reality half the f*cking films they adore were enubbed when they debuted.

And let's face it, Twilight is more a cultural icon that f*cking Raging Bull because the mainstream masses determine what's culture, not some 1%'er snob that think his 'refined' tastes have any bearing on the aforementioned 99%. Even I know this, and I consider myself part of the former and less the latter.

As for Star Wars, yeah, you might bitch, but millions would think the idea great, or at least consider it before commencing screaming, and in fact many people have asked that some of Zahn's ideas, or the ideas of other SW authors (I chose Zahn as an example, nothing more) be included in films and video games, and in fact the non-canon Star Wars books are fairly popular, so I have no idea what you're taking about. Even I like some of them and I'm pretty ambivalent to Star Wars in general.

Anyway, you guys sit around and bitch about remakes for and to old-assed films no one but you watches. You forget that other people may not have seen the original or not care for it. You decry remakes and reboots like someone flipping the switch on the back of some ancient robotic nag. Not many people give a sh*t about Raging Bull. The sequel, prequel whatever isn't going to go back in time and kill the original, and no one is going to f*cking make you watch the new film, so stop complaining.

Hell, I'm against remakes and reboots, but this endless knee-jerk bitching to ever remake that comes along is getting tiresome. Don't like the reboot? Don't f*cking watch it, or, better yet, make your own.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:06:18 PM

@Bullit: don't feel offended to what I said. I was just kindly f*cking with you, bro.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:07:02 PM

Oh, and Man on A Ledge: did you like it and why?
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:08:40 PM

"the 99% who simply don't see Raging Bull as some sort of 'cultural icon', when in reality half the f*cking films the AFI and Criterion adore were snubbed when they debuted."

Bullit writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:26:26 PM

I know you were kidding, mate.

As a download, Man a Ledge was good enough for me, little suspense, the plot was okay but the ending was a bit over the top. Overall, it was good like 6.5/10.

As for the Raging Bull II, I didn't comment as the idea to give any prequel or sequel is implicitely stupid. I mean, we are used to see this kind of low initiative just for the sake of money and nothing to do with art. Nobody can make another masterpiece after the original masterpiece. It's pointless and not even worth to pay the attention to it. It will die along the way.

About God Bless America, I really enjoyed it simply for his daring to say some true facts of our current stupid society and it did chip some people off and themes. For a low budget film, it deserve some attention.
pornfly writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:36:36 PM

Is anybody going to this? Theres not one by me

DexterMorgan writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:40:59 PM

my comment got deleted does that mean that im truly part of the wp community
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:47:40 PM

@Bullit: Eh. Man on a Ledge. It has Sam W, so there's that and all it implies. I thought the story was, to be blunt, poorly written, and I thought the edits were haphazard.

In the beginning of the film, Sam tends to a funeral, but he isn't shackled. He's handcuffed in front and the guards, merely two of them, are standing thirty feet away. Then there's this fight with his brother, or friend, or whomever, because even at this early stage I had no clue what was going on, and this other guy gets him free.

Then there's this chase scene that follows immediately from Sam's escape, where the director proved to me he can't do action. He speeds up the car chase artificially, through editing, and it looks like something you'd see on television. NBC perhaps. The brother or friend is never investigated or charged for the fake fight, either, for some inexplicable reason.

Anyway, Elizabeth Banks is just unwatchable, the dialogue isn't natural and the film has virtually no tension because in the end it's all over some jewel, and no one gets sent to prison for 25 years over a f*cking jewel. Then there's this cop that is to Richard Gere what Clint Howard is to Ron, and he has no use in the film. Plus you have all these other characters that have no existential motivation. They just slap down some generic dialogue and move through the motions. They're wallpaper in motion. On the side, you have the brother/friend and the chick, doing the The Perfect Score thing, and the humor and banter between them has virtually no chemistry.

The only thing that kept me watching Man on A Ledge was to see if Genesis Rodriguez would ever, ever give us some nudity, but no, all we got was some lame tease for the men, because god knows Sam provided no leading man action fodder and Elizabeth Banks, nice legs or not, isn't attractive in the face imo. So as soft core porn or action film fodder, Man on a Ledge fails.

As for Raging Bull II, my point is that people bitch without thinking. It gets old. They don't like the remake to Judge Dredd, but they'll see it anyway and then say, damn that was awesome. They don't like the Total Recall remake and want to tell us the original is just totally gnarly dude and unsurpassed, but they'll sing the remake's praise five seconds after they hit the lobby exit doors. They'll do the same for Raging Bull II, probably Triplets too, because really, 99% of these so-called 1%'ers aren't the refined connoisseurs of film they like to make us believe, they just like to stake a claim on all the films other people call classics to set themselves apart from the mainstream masses.

Oooh, elitism, it's so cool, dude.

On the other hand, I can tell you why I like a film, old or not, and sometimes I agree with the 1%, and sometimes I agree with the 99%, and some times I agree with neither, but I can tell you why. Case in point, Citizen Kane. Don't care for it. Boring. Hit back then, boring as f*ck now. Whatever made it special then has been surpassed by newer films. Another: 2001. Lame. Three f*cking hours of classical music over space visuals. It's like Star Wars for insomniacs. The book was great, the movie, not so much. But people say, oh my, these are 'classics'. And? Why do YOU like them? because someone tells you must? Either think for yourself or go get hit by a f*cking bus I say.
DexterMorgan writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:48:59 PM

i hope i can become more like you guys,seriously its f*cking fun
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:55:44 PM

"As a download, Man a Ledge was good enough for me"

Ah, well, download. Free. That makes a bad film better, imo. I downloaded it as well.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 5:59:36 PM

@MinkowskBullMost people havent heard of Raging Bull? Yeah, if your referring to the f*cking Twilight tweens then you're right. Problem is, they aren't most people dumbass. So, I guess you are in favor of the guys who want to remake Back to the Future? You know, since today's youth probably isn't familiar with it, lets dumb it down a bit. It'll get remade and then you'll bash it and criticize the Hollywood machine, as usual. Ah, the circle of life.
Bullit writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:01:04 PM

@Mink: "Then there's this cop that is to Richard Gere what Clint Howard is to Ron"

Lol & Touché.

Your overall view is quite true as I have nothing to add or change about it. It's worth actually a 6/10 just because we got teased with this hot chick but she did get on my nerves during the heist scenes as I just hate amateurs or incompetent people on a serious business.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:11:16 PM

@Bullit: Genesis Rodriguez has nice tits, I agree, but she never did more than climb into a skin tight suit, so unless she's going to give us something to merit her inclusion into films in which she does not belong, I don't see that she has any use.

That may sound and look sexist, but I don't think I've ever been confused with either a gentleman or a diplomat.

@cress: Not everyone watches Twilight, and even before that teeniebopper franchise, most people had either never seen Raging Bull or they had and were indifferent to it.

Most people, in fact, aren't hung up on films because most people have more important things to do than glorify old Scorsese movie into 'culture icons' because some elitist film club says so. If that makes them 'dumb', then that's your view but it isn't represented by the majority.

As for Back to the Future, well according to Vincere, that will never happen, but I remain unconvinced.

Regardless, I don't give a sh*t. It's like complaining that the Las Vegas replica of the Eiffel Tower somehow cheapens the one in France, and that's just an irrational attitude.

Art get's remade. It inspires, it compels others to extend a work further. But it doesn't destroy the original, and if you think otherwise, well, that's just a weird point of view..

Anyway, if they do remake Back to the Future, guess what? I'll either choose to watch it and make a decision as to whether or not it's any good, or I'll ignore it, but bitching about it won't do much but make me sound like the proverbial broken record.

minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:15:26 PM

"I just hate amateurs or incompetent people on a serious business."

You must really love our politicians, then.
trailertrash writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:26:24 PM

On the topic of sequels/remakes

I watched The Thing last night, I love the original one of my all time fav scfi/horror's.

And this prequel was pretty darn good if you ask me, even though it seemed just as much remake as prequel.

They had the feel of the original spot on, Story was good and there were some nice little nods to the original Thing too.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead carried the film well, In the female Kurt Russell role.

Soild 7/10 for me.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:26:39 PM

@minkowski. You don't have to be a slave to the source material to see when a remake or sequel to some properties is a bad f*cking idea, period. Once again, I totally disagree with your assessment about 2001. Just because you didn't get it or were bored by it, don't dismiss others praise for it as misguided cultural attatchment. We didn't all drink the koolaid. Some people have the actual ability to use their own discernment when critiquing. Who knew? You rail against the hollywood machine, yet seem ready to embrace the idea of remakes or sequels if the first attempt didn't meet your standards. The PSYCHO remake turned out well didn't it? Did you greenlight that turd as well?
trailertrash writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:29:07 PM


my comment got deleted does that mean that im truly part of the wp community

Welcome to the party pal ...
DexterMorgan writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:30:52 PM

sweet,that's been my goal for a while
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:34:11 PM

@Trailer: I agree. I thought, think, The Thing prequel is actually pretty outstanding in that they chose to do a prequel and not a remake, and that they paid great detail to the John Carpenter film in order to ensure the highest level of continuity.

I also thought Winstead did a great job. She was stoic in that Sigourney Weaver-esque role which has become a staple of modern action films. (Die Hard remake with a female lead coming soon!)

I did think though that the film suffers because it didn't choose to innovate, and it couldn't innovate because it was hamstrung story-wise by the Carpenter film. Continuity kept it in a box, so to speak.

Gripes: the CGI. Same problems with The Mist. Bad textures and lighting. Comes off as old-school superimposed. Also, the spaceship and it's position in the snow didn't mesh well with Carpenter's film, though I was able to convince myself with a few quick explanations.

All in all, a VERY surprising film, one I think took a lot of hate initially but come to be respected eventually, which just goes to show you the whole shoot now, ask questions later George Zimmerman style of film fandom doesn't work.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:35:25 PM

@trailertrash. I wanted to like The Thing sequel, but it lacked any suspense. It really was almost identical to Carpenters but this director could not generate any real suspense. Winstead, who I like, was comatose in her role. She bored the sh*t out of me. I liked the fx, the nods to Carpenters music at times, and the ending leading into Carpenters film. But it didn't differentiate itself enough from Carpenters' film, and once again, no suspense.
Bullit writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:38:49 PM

Yes I do "love" them, especially the republicans, thanks to W. Bush & Cheney. But as I'm not an American citizen, I don't have the right to criticize them, so that's all I can say about them.

Tomorrow is Easter Monday and thanks to JESUS, it's a holyday. We were watching some of the best shows of George Carlin and besides that I was litterally laughing in tears, he was the greatest stand up comedian of all time. I just realized how many lines or phrases were used from him in so many films or tv shows. That man was & still is a genius of being truly funny. Also, very objective, legendary punch lines about politics of his time concerning Reagan, Bush Sr & Jr. If we didn't have a natural genius of comedy like him, entertainment & sports would not have been enough to keep us thinking that we should keep looking at the bright side of the road.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:47:34 PM

@Cress: the only people that can say they truly enjoyed 2001 are either new age hippie types, film snobs and elitists (people that can only be fed opinion, they can't grow their own) and potheads. Any other person with other things to do, like laundry or rearranging their sock drawer, would, will, find 2001 an epic bore and a pretentious bore at that.

Kubrick goes on to ruin the book's pacing, and the story to boot, with slow scenes and overlays of music that are, to put it bluntly, out of place to anyone not on some form of anti-psychotic, and in fact, the Clarke book, good read that it is, is a simple-minded piece of science fiction any fourth grader could and would understand.

I mean, we f*cking get it. This giant tombstone from space mutates monkeys into men, a stupid regression of ancient astronaut theorizing that begs the question: where the f*ck did the aliens get their intelligence? A cracker jack box?

Immediately the monkeys use their new found intelligence to start killing each other, thus showing us that Clarke is a hack of cynicism, simply because he's not saying anything more fresh than what's been said long before Darwin. Yawn.

Fast forward, they find a monolith in space, so they send Dave and company, along with the killer app HAL, to do some research, but HAL, who's nothing more than an assemblage of his programming, goes ape in the most human way and begins offing his human crew. Yawn.

Can't recall if the book did the fetus finale thing, but regardless, that addition is nothing more than the cultural addition of a generation hyped up on barbiturates and new age infantilistic mumbo jumbo in a preening attempt to reject traditionalism. Yawn.

With all these flaws, the book still works, because of the pacing and narrative, but then Kubrick gets all hung up on his auteuristic sense of genius and takes what was an interesting but imperfect book and turns into a commercial for killing yourself with ease through hours of absolutely no tension and endless Waltz of Stars bullsh*t that would make Beethoven skewer both his ears with a rusted tuning fork.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:49:39 PM

I guess some us are just institutionalized negative film people, and others are more open to the possibility that a remake/reboot can be good, despite what one might label a built-in juvenile community bias...
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 6:58:19 PM

@Bullit: I hate them all, Democrat, Republican.

I'm small government, or next to no government. I hate intrusiveness. I want the states to take back their individual rights and kick the federal government back to funding its own f*cking bullsh*t wars. I hate the modern nanny-entitlement state. I hate the modern Big Brother eye-in-the-sky bi-partisan surveillance society both Republicans and Democrats are constructing. I hate regulation. I hate the f*cking FDA telling me what's in my milk and cookies. I don't give a f*ck. I hate the NEA begging for billions more when the teacher's they have couldn't educate a monkey to scratch its ass. I hate the high taxes; I f*cking hate taxes period. Why the f*ck should I pay for my own noose?

America needs to go back 150 years (sans slavery of course, because I know some nitwit will mention that little unpleasantry), get the f*ck out of everyone else's backyard, make our own sh*t, get the government out of both my paycheck AND my life and turn back the tide of tyranny that's slowly eroding all our rights.

I hate Democrats, I hate Republicans.
trailertrash writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:01:07 PM

Mink / Cress

Think Mink hit the nail on the head where this film always under the constraints of having to fit into Carpenters movie at the end

We all know the story, But for me they added new suspense with the charcters they introduced and sometimes knowing whats going to happen can bring it's own suspense and anticpation.

Yeah the alien effects were a let down, less is more sometimes, It also showed what a unbelievable job the special effects team did on the original.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:01:24 PM

@Bullit: And you thought '1984' was paranoid?


Not paranoid enough, apparently. It's bull(sh*t), and it's raging here in America (on-topic f*ckers).
trailertrash writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:04:30 PM

Have to agree with Mink on 2001 just never did it for me either, Same as Clockwork Orange f*ck that nasty movie.

But if someone else said it was their fav film i would totally respect that.

One of Kubrick's best films for me is Paths of Glory with Kurt Douglas, The battle scenes when they storm out the trenchs to near certain death are brilliant !!

And of course Dr Strange is wonderful also.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:05:32 PM

@trailer: Let me tell you, what the guys did on the prequel, in terms of alien character modeling, is truly outstanding. I was absolutely impressed, and yes, the animatronic stop-motion stuff from the Carpenter film is an amazing testament to the patience of that era's artists.

Where they failed with the remake imo is on the integration. You just don't get the impression the creatures are in the same room with the actors so your imagination has to make the leap and do some extra work. But the modeling and animation? f*cking absolutely awesome.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:06:44 PM

@trailer: I respect cress's opinion too, but I respect my right to vehemently disagree even more.
trailertrash writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:08:08 PM

lol, Wouldn't be the same if you didn't mate ..
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:14:12 PM

@minkowski. You haven't a clue as to the types of people who like 2001. You may think you do, and that's nice. But don't put people in YOUR box of pre-conceived notions. You can't paint everyone with the same colors. So, enjoy your opinion of others. I f*cking wrong. But enjoy it!
trailertrash writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:17:46 PM


An interesting list of effect shots from over the years

Funny one of the scenes that i always remember looking awesome when i was a kid was from The Spy Who Loved Me, The bad guys base at the end which comes out of the water, No 5 on this list.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:17:57 PM

"Its f*cking wrong." Maybe that was a Freudian slip. Lol
Darksider4477 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:20:40 PM

Mink your right for once . I too agree that the american goverment is corrupt and its only going to keep getting worst
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:21:43 PM

@trailer: lol

@cress: You got me there, but in my experience, which is as scientifically empirical as I can get without a grant and an annoying telephone survey, people aren't inclined to enjoy boring drivel, and that's 2001. Boring drivel.

It's like Corn Flakes without milk and sugar.

It's barnyard feed in a crystal cookie jar.

No one I have ever known liked 2001 for any other reason that those I listed, and I suspect part of the reason you like the film is because you believe that liking it makes you somehow 'superior' and 'elevated' and 'enlightened' over the masses,

Your whole "I hate hollywood, I hate all remakes, I hate all reboots" attitude, while often amusing here at WP, but not authentically substantive or mature or progressive, pretty much dovetails with my assessment as well.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:22:20 PM

I respect Minks' opinions as well. Its called a healthy debate. Even if Mink is 100 % wrong. :)
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:24:09 PM

"Mink your right for once . I too agree that the american goverment is corrupt and its only going to keep getting worst"

Can I convince you to commit suicide by driving a truck bomb into the Capitol's rotunda? That would be like two epic wins for humanity right there.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:24:51 PM

"Even if Mink is 100 % wrong"

But you said it's all a matter of opinion...
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:32:16 PM

@minkowski. First of all, I'm not against remakes or sequels. Just bad ideas for some. Like Raging Bull 2 is aa bad idea. This will never get a theatrical release, so why bother. To satisfy some bloated producer who managed
to get his hands on the sequel rights? Bad f*cking idea.

And I liked 2001 as a kid. So what box you want to put me in now?
Darksider4477 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:37:11 PM

@ I see making peace with you mink is harder than trying to make peace with a wall
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:41:32 PM


Well, you say it will never get a theatrical release and maybe you're right, but I don't see why that matters.

Many a films have either went straight to television (back in the day), or Video On-Demand as they call it now, and not all of them are horrible, and in fact some of the better, more impressive cinematic story-telling never saw the cold light of a theater.

So I think whether or not Raging Bull II goes to theater is irrelevant, and more an indication you think only good films get a theatrical debut, which is patently false imo.

You also say it's a bad idea, but really, step back for a minute and ask yourself how you or I or anyone else can possibly know that without actually seeing the trailer, much less the final film? How many good films had bad trailers, and how many bad films had good trailers, and yet you haven't seen either.

You seem to hate the idea of a Raging Bull sequel, prequel, whatever the f*ck they're calling it, because you hold the original in some sort of virginal state, and the making of another, in your opinion, is like a raging room of men ripping off your sister's chastity belt.

You think the first film is pure and idyllic, and adding another film somehow impugns the first film's purity, and I think that's just a bit this side of wacky.

minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 7:44:06 PM

@dark: Making peace? You can make peace with me and all the rest, Dark, by simply renouncing the daily, repetitive assaults.

Do that, and I think everyone here is more than kind enough to move on and put all that sh*t behind them, no Tom Six pun intended.
cress writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 8:05:14 PM

Minkowski you ignorant slut. There is such an awful track record for straight -to-video sequels. I would list them here, but it would rival the lengthy list of names your mother has banged in her lifetime.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 8:13:22 PM

@cress: I don't believe my mother ever f*cked a list of names, but let me check with her, cress, and I'll get back to you on that.

And yeah, straight to DVD, when you get that list, we'll trade, ok? But you don't even know Raging Bull II is going straight to video, that's just your opinion, so why don't you wait before you get your panties in a wad?
BadChadB33 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 8:15:39 PM

TT and Mink- I thought the The Thing prequel was done pretty well myself. Nice to know where the axe came from.
minkowski writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 8:24:49 PM

@badchad: me too. I think by clearing up the original film mysteries they made more of a story that actually makes the Carpenter film more enjoyable and not less.

Now all they need to do is make a sequel to Carpenter film with as much tact and respect as the prequel.
DexterMorgan writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 8:59:39 PM

anybody watching game of thrones tonight?
BadChadB33 writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 9:23:42 PM

Mink- Ive always woundered what they could do with a sequel. Any thoughts?
TonyWalnuts writes:
on April 8th, 2012 at 9:42:32 PM

I personally am open to remakes/prequels if I think they will add anything to the story however I dont believe this film will do that. I also have to disagree with some people and say that Raging Bull is a classic made by a man who truly appreciates cinema but also have to agree with those who write 2001 off as boring drivel. I have to say I think this film will be much along the lines of carlitos way: rise to power in that it is a highly unneccessary prequel just cashing in on its forebearers name based purely on the fact that I dont believe the story will progress in any way. Another example I can give is Chopper, I read the book and seen the film and while the book was wriiten in the style and prose of a pre schooler I found the film excellent but the book has spawned a whole host of sequels cashing in on the first ones success and I believe that if these were made into films with a lesser actor than eric bana than it would cheapen the impressive firt. But than that is all my opinion.
DrugDealingMonkey writes:
on April 9th, 2012 at 8:18:46 AM

Quite interesting.
Burn Me Long Time writes:
on April 11th, 2012 at 12:10:32 PM

@ Mink: You're full of it. Pretension, elitism, and favoritism aside, the production of a Raging Bull II, or Badlands: The Early Years, or The Breakfast Club: Weekend Brunch, is nothing more than cashing in on another production's success.

The projected ROI is the only element greasing the wheels of this poorly considered idea.
seveltoto writes:
on November 3rd, 2017 at 11:37:32 AM

recreator9 writes:
on November 29th, 2017 at 9:46:35 PM

nikitavirza writes:
on February 1st, 2018 at 1:56:44 AM

nikitavirza writes:
on February 1st, 2018 at 1:56:44 AM

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

"The Flash" Movie Hires Director

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"

Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved