Red

JP Liz V1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1245526/

Trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxiVGDgh8vo

More trailers here

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/summit/red/

Looks good and its got a great cast

Mickeroo

looks like a blast. Helen Mirren with a machine gun, yes please

Anyone read the comic?

filmfan

Love the cast for this one, so hope it's good!

Basq

Great cast.. and looks good fun!

Nevyn

The comic was just 3 issues it was a short story bases around Paul Moses (simular char played by Bruce Willis). So the film is that as a starting concept but had been fleshed out and with more chars added.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_%28comics%29


http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=8099

Some Notes On RED

December 8th, 2009 | Work, comics talk

I’ve had a bunch of questions on the forthcoming movie version of mine and Cully Hamner’s graphic novel RED, which starts shooting next month (I think). Let me try to field a couple of them.

First off: RED, the book, is 66 pages long. If you were to film 66 pages of comics, you might, might just about get 40 minutes of film out of it. If you added a musical number. The comics-page to film-minute ratio is pretty bad. A straight adaptation of a 150-page graphic novel might, if you squint at it, get you a 100-minute film. But it’s unlikely, because comics and films use time so differently. One page with four lines of dialogue on it can be slowed to a crawl to the point where you have to spend several minutes digesting the information on it. In film, however, four lines of dialogue is four lines of dialogue, and you can’t just pronounce it very slowly for the same time consumption. Beyond filmic/dramatic effects like the pause or montage or whatever, film is timelocked.

So, yes, RED the film is very different. Not least because it needed to generate more material than the book itself actually constituted.

It is in fact best to consider RED as a short story being adapted into film.

Next, and related: RED-the-book is also something of a chamber piece. There are essentially only four characters. (And a lot of people who get killed.) Now, while you can perfectly well make a film with only four characters in — or even just one character — those films tend not to be massive commercial propositions. And Summit is in the business of making commercial films. Also, they needed to expand RED from a half-hour to an hour-and-a-half. So, yes, there are a lot of new characters.

The new characters are all in theme, all in the same line of work as (Paul in the book, Frank in the film) Moses. The theme being, in part (and also poked at in my other books GLOBAL FREQUENCY and RELOAD) the unexploded bombs of the 20th Century.

(This actually gave the Hoebers the excuse to have fun with old spy tropes like CIA Nutter Guy — there’s a lovely piece of business with him in the first half-hour that amused me no end.)

I don’t think any of them are bad. Also, did you see the goddamn cast list that’s signed on for those characters? Bruce Willis as Moses, yes. But also: Morgan Freeman, Mary-Louise Parker, John C Reilly, Helen Mirren, Julian McMahon, Brian Cox, Ernest Borgnine and Richard Dreyfus. It reminds me a bit of those 70s films like THE TOWERING INFERNO, that had in them everyone you wanted to see in a film, all at once. RED is a bit like that, only with more automatic weapons.

Bruce Willis: when you look back over his filmography, that man’s actually had an incredibly weird career. DIE HARD and all that, sure… but also FIFTH ELEMENT, TWELVE MONKEYS, PULP FICTION, an adaptation of a Harlan Ellison short story for TV and getting a film adaptation of a Kurt Vonnegut book made by sheer force of will. Not bad.

The tone: no, the film isn’t as grim as the book. The book is pretty grim. But it’s also pretty small. When I sell the rights to a book, they buy the right to adapt it in whatever way they see fit. I can accept that they wanted a lighter film, and, as I’ve said before, the script is very enjoyable and tight as a drum. They haven’t adapted it badly, by any means. People who’ve enjoyed the graphic novel will have to accept that it’s an adaptation and that by definition means that it’s going to be a different beast from the book. The film has the same DNA. It retains bits that are very clearly from the book, as well as, of course, the overall plotline. But it is, yes, lighter, and funnier. And if anyone has a real problem with that, I say to you once again:

Helen Mirren with a sniper rifle.

I mean, if you don’t want to see a film with Helen Mirren with a sniper rifle, I’m not sure I want to know you.

Mickeroo

Still sounds like its closer to the source material than Wanted was, which i enjoyed regardless.

2nd trailer out now, looks better and better I have to say. Malkovich looks great in the trailers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsajB0SHlOo

paddyismaddy

looks good and as said it has a top class cast plus mirren and parker are milfs

Basq

paddyismaddy wrote: »

looks good and as said it has a top class cast plus mirren and parker are milfs

Parker.. yeah!

Mirren's practically a grandmother FFS! :eek:

Dermo

basquille wrote: »

Mirren's practically a grandmother FFS! :eek:

Then we shall refer to her as a gilf

paddyismaddy

basquille wrote: »

Parker.. yeah!

Mirren's practically a grandmother FFS! :eek:

she ages well like fine wine

Brendog

old people don't use guns....






















except bruce willis...

BopNiblets

Clint Eastwood's on his way to your house with a shotgun... hide.

Looks great, will definitely want to see this.

JP Liz V1

Its out here on the 22/10 and I cant wait

senordingdong

Looks very good.

Tongue in cheek action/comedy has finally established itself as a genre worth reckoning with.

the_syco

Looks like an awesome film. Hope a lot more of these sort of films come out.

gazzer

Watched this last night and I thought it was brilliant. Great action movie and pretty funny too.

losthorizon

Saw a good feature on the film on Euronews this morning. Its one of those films which will be either really realy bad or really really good I think

http://www.euronews.net/2010/10/15/red-alert-for-retired-spies/

Cianan2

Watched it this morning, there are dvd screeners available in certain places online. Its pretty enjoyable!

missingtime

I cannot believe they have ruined one of my favourite books with this rubbish. So disappointed.

senordingdong

missingtime wrote: »

I cannot believe they have ruined one of my favourite books with this rubbish. So disappointed.

Well maybe if more people would pay to see films these days then more effort might be put into them.

Sir Gallagher

senordingdong wrote: »

Well maybe if more people would pay to see films these days then more effort might be put into them.

Not really, i'd say the opposite, there is a low standard out there because people are willing to pay to watch any old sh1te

senordingdong

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Not really, i'd say the opposite, there is a low standard out there because people are willing to pay to watch any old sh1te

I disagree.
It seems to me that decent movies are being downloaded en masse by their target audiences.
Whereas all the three percenters, who might not know how to download movies illeagally, and may not know their arse from their elbow, will continue to pay to see stupid films like, say.....Vampires Suck. As a result, more favour will be put onto films like these.

MisterAnarchy

senordingdong wrote: »

Well maybe if more people would pay to see films these days then more effort might be put into them.

If the studios actually started making decent movies people would pay to watch them.
The vast majority of films showing in cinemas are absolute garbage .
I could count on one hand the number of films that were worth seeing in the cinema this year.

As for Red,I enjoyed it .
Its very similar to Knight and Day ,same kind of tongue in cheek humour and action/comedy genre.

Cantona's Collars

Enjoyed it-doesn't take itself seriously.Thought John Malkovich was very funny and over the top.

senordingdong

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

If the studios actually started making decent movies people would pay to watch them.
The vast majority of films showing in cinemas are absolute garbage .
I could count on one hand the number of films that were worth seeing in the cinema this year.

As for Red,I enjoyed it .
Its very similar to Knight and Day ,same kind of tongue in cheek humour and action/comedy genre.

So you liked Red?
Did you pay to see it?

paddyismaddy

i really enjoyed this - loved helen mirren and brian cox

Duggy747

I thought it was ok, nothing special but killed time fine. What ruined it constantly for me was that godawful organ, sub bank-heistish soundtrack. Dunno why but that music really irritates me in movies. :pac:

saintsaltynuts

Its your average run of the mill popcorn action movie.5/10

constitutionus

senordingdong wrote: »

I disagree.
It seems to me that decent movies are being downloaded en masse by their target audiences.
Whereas all the three percenters, who might not know how to download movies illeagally, and may not know their arse from their elbow, will continue to pay to see stupid films like, say.....Vampires Suck. As a result, more favour will be put onto films like these.

i'd actually think its the opposite.

i saw red on pirate a week or so ago and im going to see it in the cinema this week as i like to reward the films i enjoy (besides its a different experience in the cinema to watching at home)

the brother has vampire sucks too and despite being a coniseur of shyte even HE admitted it was crap so i wont be going to see that one, let alone watch his copy.

i admit ive only got my own anecadote to go by but i cant be the only one that does this.

look at back to the futures re release. there CANT be anyone that didnt see that on telly or owns it on DVD by now yet from what ive seen a good number of people ponyed up the 20 odd quid to see it in the cinema again. i was one of them and i have to say it was one of the more enjoyable experiences of the year

the core problem is people PAY to see shyte aimed at the lowest common denominator in far greater numbers than to see say.. inception.

as the suits are only interested in money theyll pump out the far cheaper and reliable option everytime. i fear were stuck with the idiotfests as they make money hand over fist where as if we want more inceptions or even stuff like red itll have more to do with the directors clout and the cast involved than the caliber of the script/concept.

on the OP.

I believe the comic differs greatly in tone to the film which is probably why its upset some of its fans, but as i didnt read that i thought it was charming and genuinly funny with some nice action peices and enjoyable characters.

i'd like more like this, hence why ill support it.

senordingdong

constitutionus wrote: »

the core problem is people PAY to see shyte aimed at the lowest common denominator in far greater numbers than to see say.. inception.

as the suits are only interested in money theyll pump out the far cheaper and reliable option everytime. i fear were stuck with the idiotfests as they make money hand over fist where as if we want more inceptions or even stuff like red itll have more to do with the directors clout and the cast involved than the caliber of the script/concept.

That's pretty much my point.
Shyte films are constantly made because they are constantly financial successful.
Good films aren't being made because people are watching them from their computers and as a result they see diminished returns.

constitutionus wrote:

saw red on pirate a week or so ago and im going to see it in the cinema this week as i like to reward the films i enjoy (besides its a different experience in the cinema to watching at home)

Yeah I'd agree with this policy.

MickShamrock

I want to see this.

missingtime

senordingdong wrote: »

Well maybe if more people would pay to see films these days then more effort might be put into them.

That really wasnt the point I was making.

Its not the same story at all. Its been totally changed and ruined imo.

Carl.Gustav

Went to this the other day, a bit like a roadrunner cartoon but not as funny

jesus_thats_gre

Went last night. Found it to be an extremely enjoyable film.

Savman

Well, this was a disappointing, unfunny mess of a film. Malkovich, what are you doing??? :eek: Butchering your credibility, that's what.

Very hammy acting all around, starring Bruce Willis as Bruce Willis and Morgan Freeman as Morgan Freeman.

Could've been so much better IMHO.

Evac105

Saw this last night, was exactly the vein I expected and I was happy with it No knowledge of the graphic novel to influence how it 'should have been' and have no aspirations of being a director or critic so no 'how it should have been made' gripes with it*.

There could have been improvements but overall I went to see a popcorn movie and I got a decent one. This maybe the difference between me and some of the other commentators - I enjoy movies, maybe you guys prefer cinema?


*I'm not saying that any old trash will do, I prefer my fare to have plot, dialogue, etc but I watch films primarily to relax. The reading analogue would, for me, be that I'll probably never undertake an Umberto Ecco book (or on the other end of the spectrum a Mills and Boon novel) but I enjoy a well written fantasy book by Erikkson or the early, multi-layered, Pratchett books.

constitutionus

well went to see it like i said i would on sunday.

i went to see it for an action movie but was surprised to see how well it works as a romantic comedy as well.

there was ALOT of people there as couples which i didnt see coming TBH.

FULL house too which is nice to see. the film has a real heart to it in places. loved the "did you ever think you''d end up here" moments between willis and freemans characters at the nursing home.

i gotta say this is the kind of film i can see people getting on DVD and taking down off the shelf every now and again to enjoy with a few beers come the odd weekend .

few enough films i can say that about recently.

kraggy

Awful awful awful.

One of the worst films I've seen in a long time. I've only left the cinema early about 3 times in my life. Last night was one of them.

Do not waste your money and go to this.

Richard Dower

Just watched it, dreadful film all round....from acting to script. It reminded me alot of Undercovers, another hack crapfest. Good cast but they totally wasted all round.

omahaid

Just watched it myself, light hearted entertainment, perfect for a Saturday night, can leave the brain outside

senordingdong

Too many comic book fanboys.