 |
|
| |
| |
| Home |
|
| |
| Discussions |
| |
| |
| News |
| |
| |
| Files & Links |
| |
| |
| Audio/Video |
| |
| |
| Info |
| |
| |
| Content |
|
| |
| Admin |
| |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Karate Kid 2010
 Reads: 75 |
Posted by samsation on Friday, May 28 @ 19:40:58 CDT
Samsation writes "I like Jackie Chan’s movies, with an apparently unusual appreciation for his less comedic, more dramatic films like Heart of Dragon (1985), or New Police Story (2004). I grew up watching the original Karate Kid movies as they came out, and I related to the character a lot. It should be obvious then that I will really enjoy this remake then, right? Well, not so readily, as I have some reservations as the release date nears.
Is the distinct nature of the "karate" fighting style being shoe-horned for the sake of marketing ease, or even just… Laziness? Hollywood wouldn’t do that would they? Didn’t this remake of "The Karate Kid" actually start shooting as "The Kung Fu Kid"? There seems to be more questions raised about this new version of "The Karate Kid" than are being addressed by any PR, and certainly the trailers don’t alleviate much.
According to the official Sony Pictures site for the 2010 film, The Karate Kid, Jackie Chan’s character is "secretly a master of kung fu" and he "teaches Dre that kung fu is not about punches and parries" which is all well and good, but how many times is "kung fu" mentioned on the official website promoting a film called "The Karate Kid"? Certainly, karate is not a Japanese-only form of martial art, and historically it actually developed in Chinese territory that was later `annexed’ by the Japanese. Also, as with most martial arts today that may have originated in one specific region there is now no limit to where the art may be taken up, and who may do so. But, there are cultural implications to having a movie called The Karate Kid and setting it in China. The trailers don’t indicate that any exploration of that will be in the movie.
Of course, with Will Smith AND Jada Pinkett Smith being listed as producers (with Jerry Weintraub, James Lassiter and Ken Stovitz) it certainly has the appearance of re-working an old franchise as a vanity project, for their son, Jaden. But having said that, I must grant that some of his legwork has shown a style that reminds me of the Korean martial artist, Hwang Jang Lee. This makes me think that the kid could have an honest talent for this kind of film role.
Jerry Weintraub is associated with franchise building. He was a producer for the original Karate Kid trilogy with Ralph Macchio and Pat Morita, as well as the attempted rework, The Next Karate Kid with Hilary Swank. He was also a producer on the Ocean’s Eleven, Twelve, and Thirteen films. Supposedly the recent reworking of Nancy Drew he was producer on a few years ago, is likely to lead to another film, and another franchise. Obviously, yet another franchise is likely to be built then, beginning with the remake of The Karate Kid.
I am not saying that a Karate Kid remake should be set in Okinawa, Japan, and that Sonny Chiba should be in the mentor role. While I wouldn’t mind that, and I would be less critical going in, there are always other things of concern for the film team involved. Even if, from a purist standpoint, Sonny Chiba would have been a better pick, what pull does Chiba have with the broader family market? None, to be honest. Now, as for Jackie Chan, he has done plenty. Chan is the most logical pick, for bankability, and broader demographic. Over the years Jackie Chan has broadened his acting modes considerably. Chiba has as well, but where Chan has gone for more light hearted and family friendly roles, Chiba has gone for more dramatic. Certainly, this role will give Chan a more dramatic and less comedic role but still keep him within what is, for the most part, his present family friendly career arc.
The trailers I have seen up to this point make me feel that the working title of "The Kung Fu Kid" may have been the most accurate (and besides, the original working title would mean they wouldn’t owe DC Comics for the use of the name "Karate Kid" after the publisher’s thirty-first century martial artist character that was part of The Legion of Super-Heroes).
In the end, concerns could simply be alleviated by part of the promotion also being educational, and discussing the historical and social implications of karate’s origin as a fighting form. It could very well be that after seeing the film all will be revealed and work out to everybody’s satisfactions. I will have to see. Won’t we all?
At this time, The Karate Kid is set for a June 11 theatrical release.
"
(comments? News | Score: 0) |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
 Reads: 42 |
Posted by Samsation on Friday, April 30 @ 18:30:17 CDT
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
Latest 'Nightmare' fails to deliver the chills -- and fun -- of the original
By Jen Chaney
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Freddy Krueger used to be such a fun guy.
Sure, he wore a ratty sweater, had a complexion like a blister-covered relief map, repeatedly invaded people's dreams, then shoved his deadly finger knives into their torsos. But he had such a sense of humor about the whole thing.
Unfortunately, in the remake of 1984's "Nightmare on Elm Street" -- don't call this a reimagining, people, because imagination is the last thing at work here -- good ol' Fred loses any sense of playful shock he once possessed and turns into a generic figure meticulously manufactured to simultaneously gross and freak us out. It doesn't work.
Jackie Earle Haley -- who earned a well-deserved Oscar nomination for his role as a sex offender in 2006's "Little Children" -- assumes the Freddy persona made iconic in eight previous "Nightmare" movies by, as this movie makes abundantly clear, the irreplaceable Robert Englund. The basic storyline remains the same: A bunch of teens in a cozy suburb called Springwood start having simultaneous bad dreams about the same homicidal dude, dreams in which some of them are viciously murdered and wind up dead in real life.
Screenwriters Wesley Strick and Eric Heisserer take a couple of liberties with the original backstory. In the '84 version, Krueger was a child murderer burned by a mob of angry Springwood parents after being freed from prison; this time, he's a suspected pedophile set ablaze by a mob of angry Springwood parents after taking innocent children to his dank basement home underneath their preschool. Because, you know, most accredited preschools are totally cool about letting weird guys reside in their basements.
The flick spends most of its time re-slashing its way through scenes already familiar to anyone who saw Wes Craven's original, while adding enough "modern" tweaks to make this "Nightmare" relevant to younger audiences. Remember that scene from the first "Elm Street" when a terrifying silhouette of Freddy nearly bursts through the wall above our heroine Nancy's bed? Well, in the 2010 version, we see that same scene -- only this time, Nancy is listening to her iPod.
As for Haley, he pours every bit of menace he can muster into Krueger, but can't overcome the listless direction by Samuel Bayer, or the completely unterrifying, updated Krueger makeup job foisted onto his face. When Englund wore the pock-marked, ghoulish guise, he seemed genuinely creepy, even while he was cracking absurd jokes. But the "new" Krueger looks like some melted-candle hybrid of the Pale Man from "Pan's Labyrinth" and Hans Moleman from "The Simpsons."
Even when he rips off a halfway-decent one-liner -- "How's this for a wet dream?" he barks at Nancy (played with zero intensity by Rooney Mara) as she slogs down a liquefied hallway, in yet another scene ripped straight from the first "Street" -- all we can think of is how much we miss the Robert Englund Freddy. Man, that guy knew how to have a killer good time.
Contains strong and bloody horror, violence, disturbing images, terror and language.
(comments? News | Score: 0) |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Plane crash in Austin points to vulnerabilities from small planes
 Reads: 37 |
Posted by samsation on Thursday, February 18 @ 17:29:38 CST
Samsation writes "Washington
The crash of a small civilian plane into a building in Austin, Tex., points up national vulnerabilities as US officials begin to investigate the incident.
The crash was an obvious reminder of what a pilot with ill intentions can do with an aircraft, and it undoubtedly raises questions about the ability of the US military and Department of Homeland Security to respond quickly and effectively.
Thousands of civilian planes fly within the general aviation system every day. But there are few regulations, laws, or security procedures that would prevent a pilot with ill intentions from using the plane for evil purposes. The pilot, named by officials as Joseph Andrew Stack, was apparently disturbed and had ranted about various concerns before posting a suicide note online and flying his plane into an office building in Austin.
Few ways to prevent a suicidal attack
“There are no security measures for this,” says Fred Burton, a counter-terrorism expert and vice president for intelligence at STRATFOR, a terrorist tracking firm based in Austin. “There are no counter measures to put into place that can stop this from occurring.”
The response of the US government after 9/11 focused primarily on commercial aviation, not general aviation, he says. “We need to rethink how we’re looking at this threat.”
Although it is virtually impossible to protect American infrastructure from such attacks, a higher level of security around even small airfields and a different mind-set about general aviation could diminish the risk, says Burton.
He notes the extent of the damage the plane had on the building, blowing out windows and setting it afire even though it hit the concrete slabs between floors. The crash reveals the vulnerabilities across the country, he said.
For example, Texas alone has hundreds of airports, including small airfields and airstrips on ranches that can be used as a launching pad for any terrorist threat against “softer” targets such as state capitol buildings or other office buildings that typically aren’t protected to the extent that many federal buildings are.
NORAD launched two F-16 fighters
North American Aerospace Defense Command launched two F-16 fighters to patrol the skies over Austin, Texas for a few hours after the plane crashed – a routine measure in the wake of 9/11. A spokesman for NORAD said the command responds to about 200 incidents per year, including a variety of violations and air incidents.
The military jets were sent from an airfield near Houston to conduct a patrol within minutes of the crash at a federal government building that houses Internal Revenue Service offices. The planes have since returned and landed, officials at NORAD said.
“This response from NORAD is a prudent precaution and consistent with our response to recent, similar air incidents,” said Jamie Graybeal, a spokesman for NORAD "
(comments? News | Score: 0) |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |