?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

No, but, seriously...

I am so all over this thing, six ways from Sunday:

Tags:

Comments

( 19 comments — Leave a comment )
discodiva76
Nov. 19th, 2010 08:52 pm (UTC)
Awesome!!!

eregyrn
Nov. 20th, 2010 02:05 am (UTC)
AWESOME!!!!!
xandra_lj
Nov. 19th, 2010 10:47 pm (UTC)
DUDE. That? Is fabulous all over the damn place.
eregyrn
Nov. 20th, 2010 02:05 am (UTC)
I know, right?!?
telepresence
Nov. 19th, 2010 11:22 pm (UTC)
Hrm. Yeah, I was looking at this the other day, and something about it isn't quite working for me. I'm not sure what it is. I'm hoping they release another trailer that works for me. In theory this should be pushing my buttons and yet I feel unpressed.
eregyrn
Nov. 20th, 2010 02:08 am (UTC)
See, they had me at Daniel Craig Cowboy, and then Harrison Ford as what looks like a bad-guy? I don't even CARE about any of the rest. Give me a Daniel Craig & Harrison Ford Western, man. But the alien stuff looks kinda cool.

(I mean, I think it's an interesting concept to do an alien invasion story that is set before the 20th century. Although I think it may wind up making the notion that the people fight back against it successfully that much more unbelievable. Yet it's not usually that believable in films set in modern times, either. And at least we know they won't be taking down the aliens by plugging a Mac laptop into the mothership. *still bitter*)
veejane
Nov. 20th, 2010 04:21 pm (UTC)
I must admit, I'm a little disappointed that it's not Cowboy and Octopus, which is a book by Jon Scieszka of The Stinky Cheese Man fame. Although the book would make a boring movie, as it's mostly about the cowboy and the octopus hanging out.

I don't think it's set in the 19th C., though. Did you see the collar on Ford's shirt? That's not even trying for period. I think it may be much more of a fantasyland western than set in history. (Notably, they seem to be in dry country, where there isn't enough grass to feed cows!)
eregyrn
Nov. 21st, 2010 04:44 am (UTC)
Oh, honey. *pat, pat* There, there. Yes, I think we're going to have to treat it as set in Fantasyland Western, for all intents and purposes. I mean, I like the dusty, gritty look of it, but hoo boy would I not be expecting any sort of "accuracy" at all from this movie of ALL movies.

(According to the "story" page of the film's website, it's supposed to be set in 1873. What an interesting choice. You may commence hearty laughter now.)
veejane
Nov. 21st, 2010 02:49 pm (UTC)
I think actually that it would be way cooler if it were just some kind of AU where nobody ever stopped riding horses, or similar. Then it wouldn't matter that Olivia Wilde has her hair down and isn't wearing a corset! (Not to mention that she's half a person too skinny for the period; if you looked like that in those days people probably would think you were dying of pernicious anemia.)

I don't suppose they were able to pick a real location along with their "real" year? A lot of the driest areas were not really safe for settlement in 1873, several of the Indian Wars being still active and nasty. And that's the problem with historical adventures, you know? Call it Cowboys and Aliens, and I want to know which side the Indians allied with. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking aliens, and I'm pretty sure that's not what the movie wants me to be thinking!

Also, if they chose 1873, then some of the coolest guns are not available to them (the centennial Winchester rifle).
eregyrn
Nov. 21st, 2010 05:03 pm (UTC)
Dude, you KNOW that they will have the centenniel Winchester in the story, regardless, if they're cool. This film has "Rule of Cool" written all over it.

And I was already thinking that the whole general look of Olivia Wilde was gonna bug me, and I just had to get over it. She looks like a modern woman, not a woman of the period, whereas I think the men look a lot more periodesque. Grr.

According to the Wikipedia pages for both the comic and the movie: it's set in "Absolution", Arizona. (It was apparently shot in New Mexico.) I have no idea why the choice of that specific year -- maybe that's the year the comic had, and it had a reason for that. The extremely brief premise/synopsis of the comic implies that in fact the "cowboys" (I know) will be teaming up with the Apache against the aliens. I guess we'll see what made it into the film, but it would be nice if that did. (My cynicism means I'm not holding my breath.) I'm guessing that the aliens are of the "we are going to squash/enslave you all" type, which would be the only reason for the Apache to team up with the whites, really. (I should probably put "Apache" in quotes, as I remain skeptical about the historical accuracy of either comic or film.)
eregyrn
Nov. 21st, 2010 05:08 pm (UTC)
Reading a little further -- it SOUNDS like it was FIRST conceived of as a film... then it languished in development hell for a long while, and the guy who had originally spearheaded it got it made into graphic novel format. That sort of suggests a strong possibility that the comic expresses accurately what will be in the film.

And there is at least one known Native American star listed -- our old friend Adam Beach! Who is so extremely not Apache for real... but that's common in Hollywood.
veejane
Nov. 21st, 2010 05:23 pm (UTC)
Poor Adam. I mean, it's a living, but. Also, Hollywood seems totally unable to conceive of Apaches as anything other than a hairpocalypse. Bad wigs all over the place!

(I recently watched Hombre (1967), which had PAUL NEWMAN play an Apache -- okay, a white-captive child who still identifies as same -- and the wig he is wearing in the opening sequence is hilarious.)
cofax7
Nov. 20th, 2010 06:58 am (UTC)
Oh, man, I just saw the trailer for this tonight at HP, and the whole theater busted out laughing when the title came up. I must admit it looks like HUGE FUN.
eregyrn
Nov. 20th, 2010 12:55 pm (UTC)
I think that's appropriate. I mean, busting out laughing at the title. I actually have vast respect for the title, even though it does seem kind of incongruous with the more serious tone of the story. But the title is really kind of reminiscent of "Snakes on a Plane" -- a working title that they "forgot" to replace.

(I gather that the movie is actually based on a graphic novel / series? of the same name. So the title is deliberate, in that sense.)
raven_lore
Nov. 20th, 2010 06:11 pm (UTC)
I had no idea this existed, but now I'm really curious about it. Thanks for the heads up.
eregyrn
Nov. 21st, 2010 04:38 am (UTC)
The funny thing is, I'd seen a production still of Daniel Craig from this a long time back, and at the time I thought, "Oooo!" but then I promptly forgot about it until a friend linked to the trailer the other day. So yay!
raqs
Nov. 20th, 2010 11:41 pm (UTC)
HIGH CONCEPT MUCH???

I mean, JESUS, and also JJEEEEEZZZUS!

I am so there. I AM THERE ALREADY!
eregyrn
Nov. 21st, 2010 04:42 am (UTC)
Well, in terms of High Concept, I gather that it was a graphic novel or something first, so the makers of that are the ones to be congratulated on it.

There also seems to have been a rumor online somewhere that RDJ was originally to star in it. There's a concept for you. I think if that had been the case, it would have tipped a lot more towards the comedic. This really looks more like a straight-up taking-itself-seriously western, rather than "Men in Black: Cowboy Edition". But frankly, I think I like the idea of it being done with a straight face *more*.

(Which isn't to say that RDJ is necessarily clownish. Just that both Iron Man, and Sherlock Holmes, have a twinkle to them both that is very postmodern. I felt it worked just fine for Holmes. But I think it's more interesting for this Cowboys/Aliens concept if it's not nodding and winking all the time.)
katie_m
Nov. 27th, 2010 01:39 pm (UTC)
So my phone is out of juice and thus I don't have your number, and I now know for sure I won't be back tomorrow because a friend from college died yesterday and the service is Monday. So. Save The Wire for me! And feel free to join in a hearty Fuck Cancer.
( 19 comments — Leave a comment )