criterionforum.org

Good Lord, 47 Ronin was bad enough that I'm angry at Ignatiy Vishnevetsky's review for talking me into seeing it. It's a movie full of strange choices- an almost all Japanese cast in a Japanese-set movie speaking English (poorly), running through a plot that's been Hollywood-ized all to hell in every way except the single largest sticking point, the ending. It's an Orientalist fantasy based on an actual Japanese cultural artifact, it's a movie where Keanu Reeves is desperately shoehorned in and then basically remains irrelevant, and in which he's called upon to be character of greatest depth, and it's a movie that despite being full of ideas that don't work and conflicts that don't get resolved in the fabric of the thing remains perversely and consistently dull. It's not even remarkably bad, it just feels like generic product in a very strange package.

Could be worse, you could be the studio that spent $175 million on production alone for it

I can only imagine that they must have reshot practically every special effects shot at the last minute, because the CGI looks midrange TV show quality- it's unbelievably bad for a $175 million movie.

I have a coworker who saw a sneak preview of it in November of 2012. So, yeah, they tried (and failed) to fix it. Should have cut their losses earlier.

This Variety piece gives a decent overview of Universal's "disaster."

Yup, this one sucks. The CGI is indeed breathtakingly atrocious on the level of, oh say Dragonball Evolution. But to top that off, every other aspect of the film is even worse. Acting, script, directing, editing are all terrible. Reminded me of that Daniel Craig calamity Dream House.

Curious if the title may have been an issue, too. Personally speaking, every time I see this title I think of Frankenheimer's Ronin, which I haven't even seen. I'm guessing, too, that most people wouldn't know what "ronin" means unless they look it up. Somebody I talked to at work said they thought 47 Ronin was a heist film. This is all starting to remind me of Gentleman Broncos (which I also haven't seen - and in fact, I don't know anybody who has) - at the time that came out I heard a number of people refer to it as Gentlemen Prefer Broncos and - again - a few people I knew thought it was a heist movie.

The only person I know who has seen (and liked!) Gentleman Broncos is friend and filmmaker Calvin Reeder, but then if you've seen Calvin's films he's a fan of curiosities.

captveg wrote:The only person I know who has seen (and liked!) Gentleman Broncos is friend and filmmaker Calvin Reeder, but then if you've seen Calvin's films he's a fan of curiosities.

I think a lot of us here like curiosities. But for a film about a teenager who wants to write science fiction it's an absolutely awful title that confuses its potential audience (including myself, as somebody who has taken a stab at writing science fiction). But to go back to the topic of the thread, if a teenager (which seems to be the core audience for this sort of film) didn't know what "ronin" meant I wouldn't be the least surprised if he/she would think 47 Ronin was about something other than samurais.

As far as teenagers go, they'll watch the trailer and say "Holy shit, Neo's fighting dragons!", and then sneak into it about fifty times in a row.

I imagine another casualty is going to be Frank Miller's Ronin, whichever ring of development hell its currently stuck in.

I won't see this, I just feel it's so disrespectful to the actual incident, legend, not to mention the films Kenji Mizoguchi, Kon Ichikawa and other Japanese directors made. It's as if they decided to make a period movie called Battle of Agincourt with English soldiers winning against all odds battling dragons and goblins.

You said that knowing perfectly well everyone would want to see that

lacritfan wrote:I won't see this, I just feel it's so disrespectful to the actual incident, legend, not to mention the films Kenji Mizoguchi, Kon Ichikawa and other Japanese directors made. It's as if they decided to make a period movie called Battle of Agincourt with English soldiers winning against all odds battling dragons and goblins.

It's actually really weirdly faithful to the legend, despite the fantasy elements.

domino harvey wrote:You said that knowing perfectly well everyone would want to see that

Kenneth Branagh's directing has devolved to the point he could remake it now.

lacritfan wrote:

domino harvey wrote:You said that knowing perfectly well everyone would want to see that

Kenneth Branagh's directing has devolved to the point he could remake it now.

He was credited as "The director of Thor" in the trailer for whatever action movie he's in this month, what happened there?

Although it is not as if Branagh's films were not full of bombast, explosions and shouting before Thor!

Sad news about this version of 47 Ronin. Does that mean I should temper my hopes for a live action Hakkenden adaptation?

domino harvey wrote:He was credited as "The director of Thor" in the trailer for whatever action movie he's in this month, what happened there?

"From the Director of Thor" is catchier than "From the star of How to Kill Your Neighbor's Dog".

CSM126 wrote:

domino harvey wrote:He was credited as "The director of Thor" in the trailer for whatever action movie he's in this month, what happened there?

"From the Director of Thor" is catchier than "From the star of How to Kill Your Neighbor's Dog".

He also happened to direct Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, hence the comparison.

i liked this more than the hobbit sequel (other than the barrel sequence), they have very similar beats too

also Gentlemen Broncos was pretty good

in the age of search engines are people still confused by titles? to the point they will or won't go see a movie based on them? i find that odd...

Sorry, matrixschmatrix.

captveg wrote:The only person I know who has seen (and liked!) Gentleman Broncos is friend and filmmaker Calvin Reeder, but then if you've seen Calvin's films he's a fan of curiosities.

New Yorker's Richard Brody is a fan of it.

I.V. wrote:Sorry, matrixschmatrix.

Haha, it wouldn't have been an issue if I didn't agree with your reviews like 95% of the time.

I'd take the word of Forum Member of the Year Nominee I.V. over Richard Cranium nominee matrixschmatrix any day.

swo17 wrote:I'd take the word of Forum Member of the Year Nominee I.V. over Richard Cranium nominee matrixschmatrix any day.

But the word of Commie Award finalist The Narrator Returns reigns above all.