Jupiter Ascending - Wachowski Siblings

Bullseye1

Did a search but the title came up blank. Apologies if thread already exists. Anyway new trailer is up. I think I will be giving this one a miss. Not a fan of either Mila Kunis or Channing Tatum. How those two get roles is beyond me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlgOeYrr-vk

the whole year inn

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Did a search but the title came up blank. Apologies if thread already exists. Anyway new trailer is up. I think I will be giving this one a miss. Not a fan of either Mila Kunis or Channing Tatum. How those two get roles is beyond me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlgOeYrr-vk

Thought it wasnt that bad of a trailer,going to give it a spin if only because they made the matrix!
Not being funny but its not the Wachowski brothers anymore.Larry is now Lana.

Otacon

I actually really like Tatum - though mostly for his comedic roles. No idea why he seems to look like Mr. Tumnus though.

I will always give the Wachowski siblings the time of day after The Matrix, which I still consider one of my favourite films.

Outkast_IRE

I like sci-fi and this looks interesting to me, will keep an eye on how this one goes.

pixelburp

Yeah, title should probably be changed as they're not brothers anymore; I'll give credit to the two siblings, their CV since the Matrix has been interesting to say the least and they appear broadly unafraid to take a creative leap into the unknown - step forward Speed Racer on that score. I quite liked their V for Vendetta adaptation even if many didn't (including Alan Moore but that's taken for granted really) and while I didn't get around to seeing Cloud Atlas, it seemed to cause enough of a reaction from audiences that it couldn't be accused of simply passing people by. I guess since the Matrix they've acquired enough clout, financial or otherwise, to basically do their own thing. Although that also involved making the Matrix sequels, which is a helluva black mark.

I'll be honest though; if someone puts together a trailer that presents a splashy, over the top Space Opera with big, creative visuals and imagination, I'm going to be all over that in a second. It has been a barren year for big budget Sci-Fi, and if a studio's taking a punt on something with a little flourish and visual flair, they have my support. I'm sure it'll be total bobbins, but who knows it could be enjoyable for what it is; pulp Sci Fi doesn't get enough love...

Mickeroo

^^ they only produced V for Vendetta I think, but I thought it was good adaptation too and their stamp was all over it.

I think this looks promising, I quite liked Cloud Atlas and the Wachowskis aren't afraid to take risks with big budget projects. Even the matrix sequels, which I'm not really a fan of, at least cant be faulted for their ambition.

pixelburp

Mickeroo wrote: »

^^ they only produced V for Vendetta I think, but I thought it was good adaptation too and their stamp was all over it.

Naw they wrote the script, and did second-unit work too. Seemed like a production they pretty much owned apart from sitting in the big chair.

I think I'm the only one that thoroughly enjoyed Speed Racer. Sure, there was a tonne wrong with it, but it was absolutely stunning to look at, with the racing scenes being a visual pleasure to see.

Links234

pixelburp wrote: »

I quite liked their V for Vendetta adaptation even if many didn't (including Alan Moore but that's taken for granted really)

yeah but to be fair to Moore, the V movie was very different and took an awful lot of liberties, it was a great movie in it's own right and by far the best the best adaptation of his work, but it's not really the story he wanted to tell and Moore's had a pretty bad run with the movie industry. From Hell had only the title and jack the ripper in common with his book, and the less said about the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen the better.

/comicbook nerd.

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think this looks promising, I quite liked Cloud Atlas and the Wachowskis aren't afraid to take risks with big budget projects. Even the matrix sequels, which I'm not really a fan of, at least cant be faulted for their ambition.

I'd love to see them work with a smaller budget again, because without all the budget and special effects, behind it all they're still incredible storytellers and to me one of the most criminally underrated movies ever is Bound:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzAtuprN3tg

grames_bond

Wonder at what point will Sean Bean die!?

Bullseye1

pixelburp wrote: »

Yeah, title should probably be changed as they're not brothers anymore; I'll give credit to the two siblings,

Oops changed.

Bullseye1

Otacon wrote: »

I actually really like Tatum - though mostly for his comedic roles. No idea why he seems to look like Mr. Tumnus though.

I will always give the Wachowski siblings the time of day after The Matrix, which I still consider one of my favourite films.

I've no doubt it will look visually stunning but having more than one wooden actor in a movie is a mistake. Kunis is the female version of Tatum. I know they have their fans but I wouldn't be among them. Strange casting considering the excellent casting in Cloud Atlas.

Mickeroo

Tatum and Kunis are both very good actors from what I've seen of their work.

Bullseye1

Mickeroo wrote: »

Tatum and Kunis are both very good actors from what I've seen of their work.

Glad you have enjoyed their performances.

TheIrishGrover

It looked well done. Stylistically looks great. While the Wachowskis gave us the great "Bound" and, of course, the iconic "The Matrix" when given free reign they tend loose all restraint. Never forget The Matrix sequels or Speed Racer.

As someone said above, the look reminds of the future in cloud Atlas.

I'm not going to write it off. But I am cautious.

JP Liz V1

Nice to see Terry Gilliam is in this too

norrie rugger

Wachowski Siblings: Nice way around the potential PC pitfall!

eyeball kid

It looks ok from the trailer anyway. Seems like the kind of sci fi, i'd like.
I'll have to keep an eye out for it during the summer

john the one

Links234 wrote: »

yeah but to be fair to Moore, the V movie was very different and took an awful lot of liberties, it was a great movie in it's own right and by far the best the best adaptation of his work, but it's not really the story he wanted to tell and Moore's had a pretty bad run with the movie industry. From Hell had only the title and jack the ripper in common with his book, and the less said about the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen the better.

/comicbook nerd.



I'd love to see them work with a smaller budget again, because without all the budget and special effects, behind it all they're still incredible storytellers and to me one of the most criminally underrated movies ever is Bound:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzAtuprN3tg

Need to check this out, hopefully tonight!

pixelburp

Another trailer's out, showing more spacey shenanigans and FX money-shots: I'm keen to see how this works out because there are few enough original IPs in genre cinema as it is, so fingers crossed - even if it looks a bit bananas. You wait ages for some new Space Opera, then two come along at once (this, Guardians of the Galaxy and the slim hopes EpisodeVII might be good...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1hW3bWIuDA

Links234

That does look better than the previous trailer though?

Mickeroo

It looks daft, I can't wait. Also excited to see how Sean Bean will die in this.

Adamantium

Mickeroo wrote: »

It looks daft, I can't wait. Also excited to see how Sean Bean will die in this.

Sean Bean Ascending?

Skerries

put back to February 2015 due to needing more "CGI work" :rolleyes:;)
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/jupiter-ascending-delayed-until-february-2015-1201211461/

krudler

The dreaded February graveyard slot, doesn't bode well

Mickeroo

krudler wrote: »

The dreaded February graveyard slot, doesn't bode well

No no this is good, it could mean the studio have no idea how to sell it, much like Cloud Atlas. :pac:

Yeti Beast

Makes sense to capitalise on the pancake Tuesday holiday season, a period oft neglected by the big studios.

Arkaron

So, anyone still looking forward to Jupiter Ascending here? Is it just me, or is the marketing campaign really lacklustre? I don’t get Warner’s strategy with this… they went to the siblings asking for a big scifi blockbuster, and now they’re almost flushing it down the toilets before it even comes out… how hard could it be to advertise the new space opera film from the Matrix creators, seriously?

I personally can’t wait, being a big fan of the Wachowski's work as a whole. I basically like all the films they directed, including the Matrix sequels (even though I think all three films should always be considered one entity) and Speed Racer.

I’ll probably try to see this one in IMAX, on opening weekend.

TheDoc

Pretty meh on this one if I'm honest. Had seen a trailer a while back and failed to catch me. Saw the latest trailer before the Hobbit recently, and again failed to really grasp me.

Girlfriend enjoyed Divergent so might be something she will take me too

maximoose

Have caught the second trailer a lot in the cinema recently, it looks absolutely nuts and I can't wait

cloud493

The first reviews are coming in, mostly positive.

tunguska

Saw the trailer and said, that looks fookin' terrible, not a chance am I going to see it. But I had no idea the wachowski's were involved, gonna have to give it a go at the very least now

pixelburp

Its a film many would have fairly low to zero expectations, the pedigree of the Wachowskis notwithstanding, so it could yet be a pleasant surprise. I'm a sucker for some splashy space opera, so I'd be a happy bunny if it turned out entertaining

cloud493

http://www.thewrap.com/jupiter-ascending-review-wachowskis-mila-kunis-channing-tatum/

There is no “up” in space, and there is no “the top” over which The Wachowskis will not go in “Jupiter Ascending,” a sci-fi saga that’s convoluted and silly, yes, but also exciting and enthralling over the course of its two-hours-and-change running time. Inducing gasps and giggles in equal quantities, it’s a film better enjoyed not as “from the makers of ‘The Matrix’ and ‘Cloud Atlas’” but rather as “the most expensive movie Roger Corman never made.”

http://baretnewswire.org/humble-housekeeper-turns-earth-heir-apparent-futuristic-sci-fi/

An over-stimulating, intergalactic odyssey evocative of The Wizard of Oz.

Arkaron

Very, very, very excited for this! I'll be watching it in IMAX tomorrow night. Just re-watched The Matrix last night to remind myself at how freaking good the Wachowskis are at writing a script. Everything is so much denser than the other scripts in the industry...

constitutionus

god awfull.

spent the whole film trying to figure out if it was a bad action flim or a bad romance film. eitherway was left completely non plussed about the whole affair (and i like skyline FFS !)

There is some lovely ideas in it dont get me wrong. what the ruling families are up to is a perfectly logical thing and it has some gorgeous set designs in it, complete with some lovely visuals on what a type 2 civilisations homeworld would look like.

but by GOD it takes ages to get going, far FAR too much of mila kunis cleaning a jax.

and the actions sequences make michael bay look tame by comparison, i hadnt a clue what was going on half the time. seriously if transformers throws you on the CGI action front this will leave ya completely confused.

i guess worst of all i just didnt care about any of the characters. theyre not BAD characters, and its well acted (though the main bad guy seems to be channeling lord voldermort) .

its just DULL.

3/10

Wouldnt go again, wouldnt advise anyone i know to go, cant even say it s a good DVD with beers film. really disappointed. cant belive the lads behind the matrix were involved.

Arkaron

I'd say it's well worth watching at the cinema, since Jupiter Ascending contains some of the most beautifully crafted images Hollywood has ever produced. The production design is ripe with ideas that fill the screen so relentlessly you'll never catch everything in one viewing.

The action is insane (especially the Chicago chase), like nothing we've seen before, with a very clear sense of spatial orientation and clarity... really, I don't see the comparison with Micheal Bay, who tends to over-edit or shake his camera needlessly. Here, it's all about stable camera, logical cuts and kinetic energy. Sure, you need to follow carefully, but I found it masterfully executed.

And Giacchino's score is easily better than 95% of whatever film music came out last year.

The story seems pretty straightforward, so I really don't know where those "no idea what's happening" comments are coming from sometimes... anyway, I agree the romantic scenes/dialogues are pretty dull, but it's because the Wachowskis prefer writing the characters' sentimental interactions into action sequences (sunrise setting, cyclical rescues, and so on).

No, the main problem for me is Mila Kunis... she can't carry it all on her shoulders, and threatens to bring the film to the brink of collapse because she has no idea how to act her scenes... =/ It's a real shame, IMHO.

All in all, the on-screen universe asks the audience for a leap of faith into sci-fantasy world, but the sheer imagination of the world is impressive.

I would defo recommend it, if only for this chase scene that took 6 months to shoot and might just make your head explode with awesomeness!

IvaBigWun

Things I Never Thought Id See Online part 94: The Wachowskis compared to Michael Bay :cool:

20% or so on RT does not a good forcast for this film make. Sometimes RT gets it wrong, but usually it's on the money.

Can a director (or two) really be a one hit wonder (or in this case, a one trilogy wonder) as much as they have? Maybe they need a hard ass producer like Jerry Bruckheimer to reign in their madness.

Having Channing Tatum and Mila Kunis in a "Space Opera" sounds like something Gary Busey would pitch to a film studio whilst sniffing cocaine off a dog's arse.

Anyone I know who has seen the film has enjoyed it for what it is, a big, dumb, fun blockbuster that's all about the spectacle. It's the kind of film that many critics and film snobs will turn their nose up and as such I don't have much faith in many of the reviews I've seen thus far, one I saw seemed more concerned with how Tatum looked than anything else.

Mr E

I'm not a critic and not a film snob, and I didn't really like it.

I expect the Wachowskis pitched this to WB and the stars with "Star Wars" comparisons (action figures, merchandise etc.) but it hasn't a hope at that market.

Mr E

Mr E wrote: »

I'm not a critic and not a film snob, and I didn't really like it.

I expect the Wachowskis pitched this to WB and the stars with "Star Wars" comparisons (action figures, merchandise etc.) but it hasn't a hope at that market.

I wasn't implying that those who dislike the film are in fact those things but this is a film that many will have an opinion of before even seeing.

Arkaron

Second viewing tonight, actually even more exciting! The Wachowskis are taking apart the codes of fairy tale storytelling to propose a new dynamic within the genre. I guess not many people care, but I find it quite well written, with a progressive, intradiegetic evolution.

If this is to be the last big budget film of theirs financed by Hollywood, at least they went all the way, to the great pleasure of a few weirdos like me.

Memnoch

Deleted User wrote: »

I wasn't implying that those who dislike the film are in fact those things but this is a film that many will have an opinion of before even seeing.

What's a film snob?

Memnoch

Memnoch wrote: »

What's a film snob?

A film snob is someone who would go see a film like Jupiter Ascending and then complain that it isn't realistic. Generally they are people whom believe their cinematic tastes superior to all others. They are people who will watch a film, not enjoy it but rather simply so that they can talk down to others about it, they will over analyse a film and then talk mock anyone who enjoys something they don't. One of the worst examples of a film snob is when they hear you haven't seen such and such a film they do that mock pity thing. When I hear someone hasn't seen a film such as Seven Samurai I envy them as they get to experience it for the first time, a film snob on the other hand will belittle you and imply there is something wrong with you.

If you want to see an example of film snobbery, find any decent critic who may give 3 stars to some blockbuster and read the comments beneath. Guaranteed to find something along the lines of "if you believe that Fast & Furious deserves 3 or 4 stars then you are an idiot".

Tristram

Love most Wachowski movies so was pretty excited to go see this earlier. Left feeling a little underwhelmed. For me the characterisations failed to create the dramatic tension necessary to carry me through the rather long action sequences. It looks beautiful throughout and I loved the vibrant colours. Think there was a lot of potential to do something more serious with the concept but guess it was going more for the space-romp vibe.

cloud493

I very much enjoyed it. It is a bit dumb, for sure, but very enjoyable.

Looper007

cloud493 wrote: »

I very much enjoyed it. It is a bit dumb, for sure, but very enjoyable.

agreed its nowhere near the masterpiece that was the first Matrix film, but its an enjoyable 2 hours popcorn style film. The effects and fight scenes were amazing that you must see it in IMAX. It could have done with having just

Eddie Redmayne as the main villain, and got rid of Douglas Booth and Tuppence Middleton would have helped the running time and wouldn't have harmed the film at all

. Channing Tatum is a great action hero and he was the best thing in it. Mila Kunis was fine. And I was happy that

Sean Bean didn't die

. Not a great film but nowhere near as bad as the critics are making it out.

oxygen

Looper007 wrote: »

agreed its nowhere near the masterpiece that was the first Matrix film, but its an enjoyable 2 hours popcorn style film. The effects and fight scenes were amazing that you must see it in IMAX. It could have done with having just

Eddie Redmayne as the main villain, and got rid of Douglas Booth and Tuppence Middleton would have helped the running time and wouldn't have harmed the film at all

. Channing Tatum is a great action hero and he was the best thing in it. Mila Kunis was fine. And I was happy that

Sean Bean didn't die

. Not a great film but nowhere near as bad as the critics are making it out.

I'm honestly not trying to flame ye here, everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but I thought this was brutal, and as a massive sci-fi nerd missing the big space opera's that studios aren't interested in making these days I am a very forgiving critic. I couldn't find anything to like about this, IMO if it flops along with the bad reviews its set Space Opera movies back years.

I was hoping this would be successful and lead to a Mass Effect adaptation.

Looper007

oxygen_temp wrote: »

I'm honestly not trying to flame ye here, everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but I thought this was brutal, and as a massive sci-fi nerd missing the big space opera's that studios aren't interested in making these days I am a very forgiving critic. I couldn't find anything to like about this, IMO if it flops along with the bad reviews its set Space Opera movies back years.

I was hoping this would be successful and lead to a Mass Effect adaptation.

I respect you're opinion oxygen. Maybe some had higher hopes with this but I think The Wachowskis were always a two film wonder (Bound and The Matrix) and their films after those seriously needed reigning in. I admire Cloud Atlas though.

I can see why some would slaughter me for saying it was a enjoyable film, I just didn't think it was as bad as many as Reviewers were painting it as. I think coming from The Wachowskis many were expecting something a little smarter, an arty space movie with a little action thrown. But I got my moneys worth for a leave you're brain at the door blockbuster. It is a visual feast, the story is non existence and some of the acting (Eddie Redmayne hamming it up) is awful but the action scenes were great. It won't be breaking into my top 20 films at the end of the year or top 50 but it wasn't the train wreck I was expecting.

Dempsey

Visually stunning, well framed etc. The premise was interesting but it fell flat. Channing Tatum was a charisma vacuum. He was channeling his inner Keanu Reeves all the way through. The baddie was more peculiar and a caricature of an evil villain than menacing.

I wouldnt recommend it to anyone tbh

humbert

I'm really suspicious of the hammering this film is getting. It's as if it was marketed as some super serious revelation that would blow Serenity and Star Wars out from the pages of history. Maybe it was, but I didn't see that.

It's much better than your average Hollywood blockbuster. You're not fed back-story and so you meet each character with the same wonder and suspicion as Jupiter. The world they created is very rich, captivating and beautiful. The action is very very good but, in my opinion, stops short of distracting from the characters. Finally, I think Channing and Kunis were actually great together, funny, human and at times heroic.

There definitely isn't much character development but the only way there could have been would be to simplify the world and reduce the number of characters enormously or make the movie twice as long which people would also have whinged about.

I walked out of the cinema (BFI IMAX ) with a smile on my face and so did mostly everyone else, as far as I could tell.