"Yes, No, Maybe So" x 4: Elysium, Filth, Rush, Romeo
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 10:00AM The trailers have been flying at us so quickly these days that it could only mean one thing: summer movie season approacheth. All the late summer would be blockbusters and early fall Oscar contenders are waiting to spring from their respective buzz gates.
Left to Right: Brühl in "Rush", Damon in "Elysium", McAvoy in "Filth", Booth in "Romeo and Juliet"
So with so many newbies we'll just get them all out of the way after the jump with a look at the new Romeo and Juliet, the sports bio Rush, the depraved Filth with James McAvoy, and Neil Blomkamp's Elysium, his eagerly awaited sophomore effort post stunner-debut District 9. Ready. Set. Go...
Romeo and Juliet
- Yes: There's a reason people keep remaking it - it's spectacular; Booth looks the part and Hailee doesn't seem too much like Mattie from True Grit which has to be a good sign for a young teenage actress, right?
- No: After Zeffirelli's 1968 version which understood to go youthful, lush and erotic and Luhrmann's version which understood to go everywhere and everywhen Zeffirelli's didn't with anachronistic pizazz and SpectacularSpectacular visuals, what is there left to see here? Both are amazing and daunting for any future film versions hoping to make their mark.
- Maybe So: Execution is everything with Shakespeare since the text is great. It's tough to see that from a trailer but this one doesn't provide it.
- ... I'm a No I suppose. I have nothing against this per se but the trailer doesn't really make a strong case for it either. Why does it exist?
Elysium
- Yes: Some of those establishing shots are really beautiful and intriguing; nice rug pulling text "the rest of us live on Earth"; Matt Damon; Jodie Foster; Neil Blomkamp; Sharlto Copley
- No: Sooooo this is District 9 again and the quarantined 'have nots' are us instead of intruding aliens in South Africa?; Soooo this is District 9 again and Matt Damon is the increasingly less human Sharlto Copley?
- Maybe So: That first shot of Jodie worries me... I don't know why I'm averse to her as power bitches but I think she's usually off her game in this mode by which I mean the Inside Man mode; The takeaway mayhem is less intriguing than the set up. "They will hunt you..." blah blah blah Ka-Boom.
- .... I'm a tentative Yes but I'd turn Maybe So right quick if the buzz is soft.
Filth
- Yes: James McAvoy laughing; James McAvoy sneering; James McAvoy f•••ing; James McWellYouGetThePoint; Jamie Bell!; a few funny lines
- No: But it looks awfully repetitive, doesn't it?
- Maybe So: Stories about men behaving badly and then reforming or not are a dime a dozen in the movies; If reviews are strong, why wouldn't we give it a shot?
- .... which means I'm a Maybe So depending on advance buzz.
Rush
- Yes: Daniel Brühl's continued employment is something we've been rooting for since Good Bye Lenin! (2003); It seems like the cinema is always into the 50s and 60s so it'll be nice to get some 70s stories going for a change
- No: This is a terrible trailer telling the entire true story so we don't need to see the movie now; Ron Howard is not, generally speaking, a strong director no matter what is engraved on that 2001 Oscar statuette when he he beat four world class masters.
- Maybe So: Brühl and Hemsworth might be a strong pairing; Anthony Dod Mantle is behind the camera
- .... which I suppose means I'm firmly in the Maybe So camp, but only if Oscar Buzz is there. Can Ron Howard make a golden comeback after that weird post Oscar foray into utter irrelevance (hi, The Dilemma!) ?
Your turn.
What do you make of these trailers? Are you more or less excited to see these now?
Reader Comments (28)
Maybe So on Romeno & Juliet. The others seem tasteless or dull.
Sorry, forgot Elysium. Maybe So for that one.
Yes on Elysium. I definitely would not say District 9 is the have and the have nots. It's allegory for the Apartheid and a scathing look at immigration policies. Elysium is playing more into the sci-fi trope than District 9 did but the fact that Damon's character is reluctant to take on that role leads me to believe that, once again, Blomkamp is getting into the heart of sci-fi with deeply realized social and political commentary. The reluctant hero is a sci-fi trope, as well, but I can't see Damon signing on to do something as banal as "I don't know...[instant supersoldier transformation] at this point in his career.
I'm no on Romeo & Juliet because it doesn't look like it's offering anything different on film.
I'm no on Filth because it's a dime a dozen premise and this doesn't seem to be exploring any new ground.
I'm maybe so on Rush. The real story is fascinating, but I rarely enjoy sports films or films directed by Ron Howard. The last sports film I got into at all was Warrior and that's because it was an over the top melodrama that just happened to be centered around a sport. The genre does nothing for me.
maybe so/hell yes/maybe so/god no
Have you seen the two Elite Squad movies (the first one won the Golden Bear in Berlin)? The lead is fantastic, and is the villain in Elysium, Wagner Moura. Terrific, incredible actor.
I wish Howard could do something as special as Splash again. It's a masterpiece.
I'm with you Nathaniel on Elysium, both from the lukewarm D9 feelings and on Jodie.
No, Maybe so, no, no
Romeo and Juiet
I was about to say yes, because I was gettng some Game of Thrones vibe, but then they came: the sword fighting scene as if this was Fast and Furious medieval edition, and the anachronic pop song. Know thy target audience, people. Young guys know this is a love story, not a sword fighting video game. They're young, not stupid. And the anachronic song! It took me first by surprise back when Ladyhawke happened. It seems nothing has changed since then, only now Thatcher is dead. And anyway, young girls also know this is a love story, not need to underline it.
Elysium.
Maybe so, leaning yo yes. The only case where I'm completely open to remakes (official or not) is when directors have another take on their own stories. I always try to believe that they want to retell the same story because they want to improve something or add something new.
Filth.
Yes. That title? In a James Mc Avoy movie? Hell, yes. And those thighs... It doesn't hurt that the material comes from the Trainspotting guy, the movie that made me fall in love with Ewan McGregor. And those thighs .... My only worry, sometimes it looks like a Guy Ritchie movie.
Rush.
Just no. Only Hollywood could make Niki Lauda a supporting character next to Hemsworth in his own story (or that's what the trailer sells) to have the handsome guy as the lead. Plus, I don't like men with long hair, so Hemsworth is doing nothing for me in that regard, which would have been the only reason to give this Days of Thunder a chance.
Agreed on the "cheers" for the continued employment of Bruhl. I really wish that guy could get a better toehold in this market.
Ditto for seeing Booth from R&J again -- I thought I'd never see him again after "Christopher and his Kind."
With "Trance" and "Filth" coming out in the same year I'm inclined to ask 'What happened to my sweet, sweet James MacAvoy?'
Surprisingly "Filth" is the only movie that maybe interests me out of the four. It has the early Boyle/Neveldine Taylor kind of B-movie. But then again, I don't have a good track record of paying to see those in theatres.
Love James McAvoy, and I'm itching to love one of his movies after Trance was .... so YES.
Romeo and Juliet: Should I be worried that Juliet barely speaks in her own trailer?
Rush: Such a great story, and I can't wait to see the racing scenes, but this is not a good trailer. It doesn't tell the WHOLE story, I don't think. Interested to see if a certain movie star makes an appearance as a character in the movie.
Um, can we talk about "Swarovski Entertainment?"
I'm so glad that you love Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet, Nathaniel. The amount of vitriol that gets thrown at that movie (and Luhrmann in general) is really quite baffling to me.
Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet is one of my favorite movies of all time, and this new adaptation seems to be taking a lot of its visual cues from that lush, beautiful masterpiece, so I'll definitely see it. I know that Booth and Steinfeld get along really well off-set (as friends), and their chemistry looks pretty sensual from the trailer.
Romeo & Juliet: Yes for the supporting cast, the sumptuous visuals, and Shakespeare's masterpiece of love.
Elysium: Maybe so; the opening shots are beautiful and the 99 versus 1% is a tale for our times, but it could be a lot of bang boom and nothing more.
Filth: Maybe so; it looks like everything else but I like a filthy movie done right.
Rush: Race car driverzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. No.
Elysium- With caution. Strength of reviews may be clincher of whether or not I see it. I think Blomkamp is in too much familiar territory in his District 9 follow-up.
Romeo & Juliet- Nope. That play bores me. Not even Baz's adaptation had me interested.
Rush- Feel like I found out about everything in the trailer, although I find Hemsworth and Bruhl each charming. Howard has not ever been my favorite director. Senna is probably the closest to a race car sports movie that I'll come to really like.
Filth- Yes. Fan of Welsh and McAvoy doing crazy out of character stuff has me interested as long as it does not feel too try-hard.
I'll see ELYSIUM because the talent involved seems to demand it.
Having seen the needless, if pretty, retelling of GREAT EXPECTATIONS I can't help but have the same fear that it'll do nothing new with the text. However, it does indeed look gorgeous and on the big screen could look "sweeping" and romantic.
Rush...? Well, Hemsworth is charismatic and Bruhl is great. I like the last 20 seconds of the trailer with its rapid editing and clicking sounds. The rest looks blah.
Filth...? Where does the love for McAvoy and Bell end and the worry for that writer begin?
R&J. Maybe to No--Zef and Baz covered this so beautifully already. Trailer--B+
Elysium. Yes to Maybe--Love the cast and like Jodie as bitch and Matt as warrior. Trailer--B+
Filth. Yes--Unless we have already seen all the good stuff, what's not to like? Trailer--A-
Rush. No to NO--Dead horses couldn't drag me to a Ron Howard movie let alone one about race car drivers. Last sports picture I cared about was Hoop Dreams. Trailer--C
Romeo & Juliet
Yes - Lewis and Giamatti.
No - the play itself. Sorry, I hate it. Teenagers killing themselves after a whirlwind romance always makes me think "what a bunch of dummies", not "tragedy". That's why I like west side story so much better- it replaces two teenagers killing themselves with one wishing to die and the other resolving to live after he is killed.
Maybe so - I guess I want to see what Steinfeld is up to?
Elysium
Yes - Damon. Foster. Blonnkampp- he took District 9 in such interesting directions from where it started and made such excellent, clear action scenes.
No - sick of Foster as an ice queen. She can do much more.
Maybe so - Beneicio del Toro in what could be an actual role hasnt happened in awhile. If they don't p,at the allegory too heavy handed it could be good.
Filth
Yes - McAvoy
No - Bad Lieutenant already came out.
Maybe So - the trailer pretty much nails it, but it will also either have to move at a constant breakneck pace (hard with the plot the trailer is selling) or slow down and deepen the story. There is definite potential there.
Rush
No.
Rebecca, actually from what I've heard, Shakespeare meant for Romeo & Juliet to be a dark comedy, not a romance. It's about young lovers who barely know each other and the stupid things they do because they think they're in love, which include killing each other. Somewhere along the line it was considered one of the most romantic stories ever told and a tragedy because back then, if everyone dies at the end it was a tragedy, if everyone gets married it was a comedy, but Shakespeare was making a commentary on the utter stupidity of young love. That's why I think the younger the actors are, the better it is. I'm a YES on Romeo & Juliet because to me Sheakespeare is, first and foremost, about performance and as such I don't mind how many times a Shakespeare play is re-made, it's always fascinating to see new actors take on these roles (and movies are a way for these performances to travel all over the world without the actors having to do so). And seriously, if we can have endless reboots of every superhero movie, why not Shakespeare (or other playwrights)? Personally I'll take Shakespeare any day (plus, Damian Lewis and Paul Giamatti are definitely worth watching and I would love to see what Hailee Steinfeld brings to this role, since I actually thought she was amazing in True Grit)....
Rome & Juliet - snooze city. No.
Elysium - maybe so. I'm sick of dystopian futures. It's passe. I like the 2001-esque shots of the space station, and I like Matt Damon's abs, but I didn't much like District 9 and I expect more of the same ham handed social commentary/boring video game action here.
Filth - yes. It probably won't be that good, but I'm definitely intrigued. Good teaser.
Rush - no. Seriously - every beat of the movie is in the trailer. Horrible miscalculation, I assume born out of the studio's anxiety that nobody in America knows the history behind this and won't show up for the movie as a result. They're probably right on both counts, but this trailer is not the answer!
Romeo and Juliet: No. The director's last theatrical release was the talking dog film Fluke.
Elysium: No. I wasn't entirely sold on District 9 (though it's still better than Avatar), but this trailer looks like it's accentuating everything wrong with that movie and cutting what was right (the true sense of bitter humour).
Filth: Maybe. If the reviews aren't strong, I'll just stream Werner's Bad Lieutenant.
Rush: Um...Maybe. Again strong reviews or Oscar buzz are required, but Daniel Bruhl deserves a big career.
"Hi, The Dilemma" LOL.
It's true when I watched The Dilemma (yes, I watched lots of crap movies) I can never associate it with Ron Howard. I mean, even in his worst he could've directed a better movie? I thought that movie was directed by Adam Sandler (I know I know, he's not a director, but you get my point).
I actually think Ron Howard is a pretty good director, he's just not an auteur and I don't think he really wants to be. He's a craftsman more than anything and that's why I think most people seem to dislike his work. There doesn't seem to be anything distinctive about it, but when he has a good script, he directs it with a sure hand and professionalism that make his films maybe feel a little too standard. I actually really liked Cinderella Man (yes, it's a tried-and-true formula, but the film works beautifully I think) and Frost/Nixon (which is at the very least incredibly entertaining. I even think there are some very inspired aspects of A Beautiful Mind, particularly the thriller section of it (that film suffers more than anything from the biopic conventions it ultimately traps itself into, but there's a ot to enjoy in that film, even if I don't think it should have won Best Picture at all). As for Rush, I'll probably give it a look.
Elysium: Maybe so - It looks like it won't suffer District 9's metaphorical weakness, and the sci-fi tropes are neat. But it doesn't look that distinctive
Filth: Maybe so leaning towards yes - McAvoy is far too interesting a talent to go untapped for as long as it has. Reviews could sway me, because as Nathaniel pointed out - the trailer is VERY repetitive.
Romeo and Juliet: Maybe so leaning towards no. I hope directors look at other Shakespeare plays for inspiration (thank you, Ralph Fiennes, for a thrilling Coriolanus).
Rush: Blind no on the basis of Ron Howard.
Oh, by the way, does anyone find it interesting that Damian Lewis is playing Lord Capulet when Claire Danes was Juliet in the Luhrmann version. I don't know if the filmmakers meant to make that connection, but there it is.
As for the other two, I'm a Maybe So on Elysium leaning toward Yes (I liked District 9 a lot and this one looks interesting, it might even be entertaining) and I'm a Wait and See on Filth. It doesn't really seem like my kind of movie, no matter how much you want to relish on James McAvoy.
Romeo & Juliet - I never buy this when the titles roles are cast at the appropriate age, and while Steinfeld and Booth are actually a bit older, they look young, so I'm probably a No. If the reviews are stellar, they could turn me into a Maybe So.
Elysium - I'm not even looking at that trailer because I don't want to be spoiled. I like the mystery around it and want to keep it that way. YES!
Filth - I adore that cheeky little trailer (and the inspired music choice!), but... yeah, it's kind of been there, done that, isn't it? Maybe So.
Rush - I might have been interested if the trailer showed any hint of visual flair at all. Instead, it just looks like a Clint Eastwood film by way of Ron Howard (or maybe the other way around?). I like the cast, but nearly everything in that trailer made me want to barf. No.
Well the Elysium looks interesting and the story seems to have some layers. I do however worry that Jodie Foster may be miscast as the Ice Queen/ hardcore motherbitch. I really like Foster but why oh why did he not cast Weaver, Olivia Williams, Kristin Scott Thomas, Gong Li, Glenn Close, Cate Blanchett, Emily Watson instead? So many edgy actresses out there.
Thanks to the long trailer I have now seen Rush. Hemsworth is a good actor. I hope he wiill choose to star in an independent movie with an auteur director in the future