Fast and Furious spinoff film (Hobbs & Shaw)

JP Liz V1

EoinMcLovin wrote: »

Universal Considering ‘Fast and Furious’ Spin-off With Johnson, Statham and Theron

http://variety.com/2017/film/news/universal-fast-and-furious-dwayne-johnson-jason-statham-and-charlize-theron-1202392305/

Idris Elba to play the villain?

http://ew.com/movies/2018/07/05/idris-elba-fast-and-furious-hobbs-and-shaw/

Vanessa Kirby also in

Agent Coulson

First look.

We either gonna get along or we gonna get it on.

mikhail

...or we gonna get it on.

Are we still doing "phrasing"?

brianregan09

Why though

brevity

brianregan09 wrote: »

Why though

Vin Diesel is a diva apparently

Captain Red Beard

brevity wrote: »

Vin Diesel is a diva apparently

The Rock too apparently. Two big bald muscly queens.

JP Liz V1

The official title is Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw

https://movieweb.com/hobbs-shaw-title-fast-furious-spinoff-photos/

EoinMcLovin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J2iFn6admE

Slydice

Very .. neon?

pixelburp

So from what little I've seen of the F&F series, it was never one to take a particularly realistic approach, but by that trailer it feels like they've just dived straight into Sci-Fi / superhero territory with Elba's bad guy?

Sabre0001

Looks utterly ridiculous...but also like it'll be quite a lot of fun Looking forward to it. Charismatic folk all round!

Dades

pixelburp wrote: »

So from what little I've seen of the F&F series, it was never one to take a particularly realistic approach, but by that trailer it feels like they've just dived straight into Sci-Fi / superhero territory with Elba's bad guy?

Seems that way alright. All aboard the enhanced human bandwagon. :pac:

A bit of a lazy departure tbh.

Mr E

Looks like fun!

Agent Coulson

Pure popcorn and I can't wait.

Pelvis

Looks AWESOME!

Mitch Connor

Looks utterly stupid in the best way possible.

Can't wait.

expectationlost

looks bonkers but with that trailer have we seen the highlights? they showed so much!

ziedth

Certainly not pointing out anyone here but it's more so on social media whenever Dyawne Johnson posts something it's met with a chorus of "FF is about Cars/Family" and I find it really bewildering.

A spin off is just that, FF films are my somewhat guilty pleasure and even I had all but checked out until Johnson came into it. He has great chemistry with Statham so it makes every sense to move in this direction.

I think making it absolutely nuts was actually a better move as it really separates it as a film.

I'm looking forward to it....

kerplun k

Big grin watching that. Absolutely ridiculous but looks like it’s gonna be a blast. and looks like we might finally reach peak Rock in this.

Venom

Looks awesome

Slydice

Superbowl spot:

EoinMcLovin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeau7UWjEms

pixelburp

Well, that's a perfect example of the "all the main plot beats" approach of the trailer, right down to what appears to be the final act confrontation & stunt :rolleyes:

Dades

I think if the Furious franchise hadn't jumped the shark already, it just did.

(I foresee a Friday night home viewing when the brain says "I'm full... let me be.")

ScrubsfanChris

We've come along way from nicking DVD players............

dreamers75

I dont understand the point of showing the entire movie in trailer, its going to do well? Why do that ?

Bacchus

I don't think it matters that they pretty much showed every plot beat and major action sequence. It looks incredibly stupid and incredibly fun. Job done trailer. Job done.

ronano

As said above it appears to sadly show every plot beat in the trailer, still thought i am ridiculously excited for it. I think the Rock and statham chemistry will make up for knowing the plot basically. I kinda hope against hope that the success of this film will lead to a crank 3

EoinMcLovin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c50jOvZbu04

Slydice

I think... **THINK** Universal brought a bunch of youtube trailer reactioner to a race track circuit to React to that trailer.

Graces has the race track reaction video online..

I went looking but can't find others. These say Universal brought them out to the race track and they'll have that reaction video on the way soon:

Zardoz

EoinMcLovin wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c50jOvZbu04

It looks like the laws of physics and reality dont apply to this film.

Mr E

... and?

Heckler

Zardoz wrote: »

It looks like the laws of physics and reality dont apply to this film.

It also looks like a hell of a lot of fun. I want physics and reality i'll watch a documentary.

Zardoz

Heckler wrote: »

It also looks like a hell of a lot of fun. I want physics and reality i'll watch a documentary.

Its not really fun though when its so ludicrously over the top .
The best action films need to have some bit of suspense ,this looks like a cartoon ,Hobbs is pulling off manoeuvres Superman would be proud of.

Heckler

Zardoz wrote: »

Its not really fun though when its so ludicrously over the top .
The best action films need to have some bit of suspense ,this looks like a cartoon ,Hobbs is pulling off manoeuvres Superman would be proud of.

Ah stop. Even the best action films usually have a high degree of OTT ludicrous stuff going on. Maybe not to the same degree as this trailer but its there. John McClane and the firehose anyone ? Pretty much all of Speed ? Fantastic action movies but hardly grounded in reality.

pixelburp

Speed isn't grounded in reality, but most of its action still consisted of stuntmen throwing themselves between moving vehicles, or prop cars crashing into each other along the road. There were miniature, model buses, invisible wires, empty highways and so on, but ultimately all the action had to obey the basic laws of physics, gravity and all the rest. Pneumatic launchers might make those jumps look more epic but it was still 'real' insofar as it happened and requires precision coordination. People could get hurt (not that that should be required mind you), there was an element of real danger.

As a random example, I remember watching The Mummy 3 (yeah, I know), and a stunt involved a woman jumping out of a crashing car. It was all "real", but the stunt went wrong and you could see the woman had landed on her knees as she leapt. OUCH. They kept it in the final draft but the scene was lifted by reaction to something real happening, albeit as an artifice. George Miller bought old jalopies and crashed them into each other for the original Mad Max (I think he sacrificed a caravan he owned and let a car plough through it). Same happened with Mission Impossible: Fallout, where they kept a scene in which Tom Cruise broke his ankle jumping a gap.

CGI has none of those crunchy elements; no heft, no danger or gravivty to give these scenes any immediacy or sense of visceral threat. It's the same with the MCU and other Hollywood films and why I've become so desensitised to the action. It's all fake, in the laziest sense. The Raid, Fury Road, Mission Impossible films are celebrated because they are "real", those stunts in the above trailer look "fake". It's all fiction, but how they make the action happen counts imo.

Heckler

pixelburp wrote: »

Speed isn't grounded in reality, but most of its action still consisted of stuntmen throwing themselves between moving vehicles, or prop cars crashing into each other along the road. There were miniature, model buses, invisible wires, empty highways and so on, but ultimately all the action had to obey the basic laws of physics, gravity and all the rest. Pneumatic launchers might make those jumps look more epic but it was still 'real' insofar as it happened and requires precision coordination. People could get hurt (not that that should be required mind you), there was an element of real danger.

As a random example, I remember watching The Mummy 3 (yeah, I know), and a stunt involved a woman jumping out of a crashing car. It was all "real", but the stunt went wrong and you could see the woman had landed on her knees as she leapt. They kept it in the final draft but the scene was lifted by reaction to something real happening, albeit as an artifice. George Miller bought old jalopies and crashed them into each other for the original Mad Max (I think he sacrificed a caravan he owned and let a car plough through it).

CGI has none of those crunchy elements; no heft, no danger or gravivty to give these scenes any immediacy or sense of visceral threat. It's the same with the MCU and other Hollywood films and why I've become so desensitised to the action. It's all fake, in the laziest sense. The Raid, Fury Road, Mission Impossible films are celebrated because they are "real", those stunts in the above trailer look "fake". It's all fiction, but how they make the action happen counts imo.

Agree 100%. practical stunts can't be outdone. But well done CGI can be fine too. The Matrix for example. I know there was a lot of practical stunts and effects but there was also a lot of CGI.

pixelburp

Heckler wrote: »

Agree 100%. practical stunts can't be outdone. But well done CGI can be fine too. The Matrix for example. I know there was a lot of practical stunts and effects but there was also a lot of CGI.

The Matrix started with practical, and used CGI to embellish (I'm ignoring the sequels which went CGI crazy but then that's kinda the point). Jurassic Park famously heralded CGI in blockbusters, yet it had only had a few minutes total, most of the dinosaurs done with puppets and real props.

At the end of the day it's just another tool in the box, but when an entire set piece becomes DRIVEN by CGI, the crunch is totally lost, physics becomes abandoned for something that superficially looks cool. The action in that Hobbes and Shaw trailer - and latter F&F films - is empty calories, so to speak. It doesn't hold a candle to the equivalent chase scenes of Fallout.

I suspect it's a cost thing, contractors in render farms are easier to hire & fire than a huge crew needed to film a car chase down a blocked off highway. Speed could never happen in 2019. It's a minor miracle Fury Road got made ( which itself used CGI,but only for stitching, not the meat of the action).

Heckler

Ah yeah I agree with you mostly but ya know sometimes I want to see a guy drop his motorcycle under an artic and skid with it and then right himself and the bike and carry on. Escapism and c'mon it looks ****ing badass.

pixelburp

It might be bada$$, if it was a real stuntman (but then who knows, maybe they over airbrushed the scene)

Anyway, any eejit can skid a motorbike under a truck. I present a more impressive stunt, done with real props too!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUi_gGZY2m0

Heckler

pixelburp wrote: »

It might be bada$$, if it was a real stuntman (but then who knows, maybe they over airbrushed the scene)

Anyway, any eejit can skid a motorbike under a truck. I present a more impressive stunt, done with real props too!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUi_gGZY2m0

Hahaha that was hilarious ! I hope no stuffed horses or bad actors were injured in this scene.

Dades

Zardoz wrote: »

It looks like the laws of physics and reality dont apply to this film.

Well if you've seen the other ones you kinda know what you're getting. They jumped the shark long ago on reality and the public keeping coming back.

Heckler wrote: »

Agree 100%. practical stunts can't be outdone. But well done CGI can be fine too. The Matrix for example. I know there was a lot of practical stunts and effects but there was also a lot of CGI.

The Matrix wasn't real and bound by physics so it could never have been fully made with practical effects!

Sabre0001

Saw this last night and usually I'm on board with the silliness of Fast & Furious, but I really didn't like it. Maybe I didn't turn the brain off in time.

Thought it was 2+ hours of ego massaging for The Rock and Statham (moreso than usual) and inane bro banter/one upmanship. Wasn't surprised to see them pop up in the credits as producers.

Mr E

It was an enjoyable enough turn-off-your-brain summer popcorn movie that will never win any awards. I think the funniest bits were in the trailers too (which is never a good thing).

The last half hour was a good payoff though. The helicopter fishing sequence was even more bonkers than it looked in the trailers. Laws of physics my arse.

Sabre0001

Mr E wrote: »

It was an enjoyable enough turn-off-your-brain summer popcorn movie that will never win any awards. I think the funniest bits were in the trailers too (which is never a good thing).

The last half hour was a good payoff though. The helicopter fishing sequence was even more bonkers than it looked in the trailers. Laws of physics my arse.

Yeah, that's where I went wrong despite knowing it needed to be done

brevity

Was the teaser trailer for Nolan’s new movies played before this?

Mr E

We arrived during the trailers so might have missed it.

branie2

I'm just back from it, and I thought it was very good.

fmpisces

Saw it last night with the two sprogs (13 & 20), we all enjoyed it.

silverharp

good laugh, liked the banter, the Hatty Shaw character was pretty cool, some good side characters, basically a comedy Mission Impossible. the only "fk physics" moment i didnt like was Hobbs sliding one handed down a cable on the side of a building no problem ...rope burn?

tunguska

Saw it last night. Great fun, enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would. I mean the plot is ridiculous, venessa kirby is a bit cringe in that you just cant take her seriously as an MI6 agent. And its about 20 minutes longer than it needed to be. But for some reason it all works. I like the rock but I think statham is a better actor than he's given credit for. Looking forward to the next one already.