World of KJ
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

Is Be Cool going to be victor in everyway possible?
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4824		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  dolcevita [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Is Be Cool going to be victor in everyway possible?
Ok, so I've seen the trailer and it looks even better than the first one. The episodic feel of it seems well handled, and its going to have tight humor. Anything with a cast that includes this many goodies, especially De Vito (this came up yesterday) is going to be hilarious. Cedric the Entertainer is funny too if they give him some space and let him improvise. Vince Vaughn? 'Nuff said. I've considered him one of the funniest new guys in Hollywood and I hope he gets alot of screne time. It just feels more glossy and expensive than its predesseor, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. There a scene with Travolta and Thurman dancing that is so a reference to Pulp Fiction. I think the two of them work quite well opposite eachother. Its a shame though that Russo doesn't have a cameo or small role. Anyhow this is looking fabulous, and around this time last year Starsky and Hutch came out against not much competition (50 First dates had already been around three weeks) and did remarkably well considering it was only so-so. I think that makes Be Cool the potential double victor. If its any good, it'll get great word of mouth, and it does look to be good, plus the lack of competition for the genre is going to make it gross very high. I think this is going to get more buzz than anything this early on in last year did. I want to see it opening weekend. This one might warrant a repeat viewing. \:D/
Author:  El Maskado [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
Travolta is BO poison and while the trailer looks interesting, it lacks any real funny moments. It seems to have some Big Bounce feel to it. And yes I do miss seeing Russo. She still looks great at 55
Author:  dolcevita [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't think Travolta is poison. This is a reprieve of a role that people loved him in, and people considered the first one a success, so it doesn't have the same considerations as a fresh "random" Travolta pic. That and its comedy and ensemble, both which help. The films Travolta tends to do that bomb are dramas like Civil Action and Michael, not his action and comedies. Swordfish did surprisingly good considering it sucked! :lol:

Yeah, Russo never had as big a film career as she should have. I think I remember people saying she had serious spine problems as a kid which made her very introverted, which is why she always avoided the lime-light and stayed away from intense celebrity.
Author:  matatonio [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
im seeing a big disappointment with this movie, i just dont see making more than $40M :???:
Author:  Plot [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 2:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
This won't bomb outright, but it won't be the big hit that MGM is probably expecting. If I rememebr correctly, Get Shorty wasn't a huge hit either, so this shouldn't do too much better. At the most, it'll get $75 million.
Author:  Bodrul [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
this aint no 'whole ten yards' or 'analyse that' This movie should be able to get a decent total just from its star power.
Author:  dolcevita [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
Plot wrote:
This won't bomb outright, but it won't be the big hit that MGM is probably expecting. If I rememebr correctly, Get Shorty wasn't a huge hit either, so this shouldn't do too much better. At the most, it'll get $75 million.


Yeah, but no one knew Get Shorty when it came out. Its actually gained in popularity after it went to video (which is when I saw it). The promotion for this is much heavier, the cast bigger, and there isn't any competition. It just has to get mediocre fresh reviews (60 to 70% at RT) and it'll be golden. I thought it looked good, I'm betting it gets around 75% fresh or maybe higher from reviewers *but with about a 6.5-6.8/10 enthusiasm only). I agree with Plot that its going to be a sequel tht outdoes its predecessor (probably in the first three weeks) and not some horrible rehash like Analyze That apparently was. It seems like they put a bit of time into the production and script,so here's hoping it fun? [-o<
Author:  bABA [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
I'll be there to watch it. Looks promising.
Author:  jenniferofthejungle [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
I can't believe I still haven't seen this even though I've had it for a long time. Guess I should get cracking on that one.
Author:  makeshift [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
Although the whole white guy acting black thing is incredibly played out (Gary Oldman did it the best in True Romance, and that was 12 years ago), Vince Vaughn is tear-inducingly hilarious in this trailer. He was the only funny thing about it, though, and that Uma/Travolta dance bit is so obvious and obnoxious. I'll probably see a matinee just for Vince, but I don't think it looks that good.
Author:  Maximus [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
Vince Vaughn rocks the trailer. I can't wait to see it! Unfortunately, I haven't seen Get Shorty. It's first on my list of rentals.
Author:  Plot [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Supposedly, The Rock as a gay bodyguard is supposed to be one of the funnier parts of the movie. It's odd that he's barely featured in the trailer. Maybe, for once, a studio decided to release a trailer that didn't show all the parts that made the movie worth seeing.
Author:  Maverikk [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 8:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Get Shorty is one of my favorite comedies, but this just looks like a typical thrown together sequel that's trying to cash in on the success of the original.

First of all, Chili Palmer was a movie nut. He lived and breathed movies. His dream was to get involved with them. It seems like a disservice to his character that he would quit the movie business, and get involved in the music business. Movies were his passion, not music. Now, you take out a legend like Gene Hackman and replace him with...Vince Vaughn, and we can see the quality difference. This looks to be a pale immitation of the great original. :???:
Author:  Bell [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 10:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
i think Be Cool will do good. i like Get Shorty. besides, my friends are looking forward for this one too. :)
Author:  MovieDude [ Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:
Get Shorty is one of my favorite comedies, but this just looks like a typical thrown together sequel that's trying to cash in on the success of the original.

First of all, Chili Palmer was a movie nut. He lived and breathed movies. His dream was to get involved with them. It seems like a disservice to his character that he would quit the movie business, and get involved in the music business. Movies were his passion, not music. Now, you take out a legend like Gene Hackman and replace him with...Vince Vaughn, and we can see the quality difference. This looks to be a pale immitation of the great original. :???:


But c'mon, it DOES have Harvey Keitel in it, something I definitely don't mind.
Author:  dolcevita [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 9:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
D'oh #-o

Might take the boxoffice but its not golden of a movie. I'll tell you what Be Cool's problem was, it couldn't figure out its "bad" guys. It made them easily "bad" rather than smart businessmen, and their dialogue was by far the weakest. They make Keitel barely speak a word (completely underused) except for a bad faux-rap (sounds familiar :wink: ) sequence, and this is the first time Vince Vaugn was all wrong. They made him so over-the-top and not responsive to his surroundings. Vaugn is great because he can dead-pan, not because he can act like a random freak. It had it high moments too though. Pretty much every scene with Cedric the Entertainer and the Rock were hilarious. Christina Millian is ok, but over-used considering she's the most boring role in the film. She's not coniving or witty or anything, she's just a young girl with a good voice who all the others are fighting over (to have her contract). They should have given her less screentime considering the movie was about fighting over her, not her herself. Either that or they shouldn't have made her as pure. It was bland to focus on. Its interesting that the best characters Cedric's, Rock's, the Intern's) were the least thought out but ended up being the funniest because they weren't overscripted. Ok, but really too bad.

I tried to approach this as a fun ensemble cast piece about the music biz and not really associate it with its predecessor, but even strand-alone, it just wasn't all that great. Total mismanged the bad-guys and shot itself in the foot. Pleasant, but can wait until video, and even then some.
Author:  torrino [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 9:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hmmph. So, it's not that witty. The characters are bland. And the plot doesn't work...

Is Uma Thurman at least nice to look at? [-o<
Author:  Jeff [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 9:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
torrino wrote:
Hmmph. So, it's not that witty. The characters are bland. And the plot doesn't work...

Is Uma Thurman at least nice to look at? [-o<


Is she ever not nice to look at?
Author:  torrino [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
RogueCommander wrote:
torrino wrote:
Hmmph. So, it's not that witty. The characters are bland. And the plot doesn't work...

Is Uma Thurman at least nice to look at? [-o<


Is she ever not nice to look at?

She might've been considred so at the time, but I didn't find her "hot" (sexy - yes) in Pulp Fiction.

She's usually nice to look at, though. Like Witherspoon, Johansson, and Portman...
Author:  dolcevita [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
torrino wrote:
Hmmph. So, it's not that witty. The characters are bland. And the plot doesn't work...

Is Uma Thurman at least nice to look at? [-o<


Not her finest hour actually. But she's ok. I didn't say all the characters were boring, sadly, just the main ones. All the minor characters were freaking hilarious. The premesis of fighting over s inger's contract could have been great, it was just bothced by the inability to make the "bad-guys" businessmen rather than business "Badguys." Does that make sense?
Author:  STEVE ROGERS [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
dolcevita wrote:
I don't think Travolta is poison. This is a reprieve of a role that people loved him in, and people considered the first one a success, so it doesn't have the same considerations as a fresh "random" Travolta pic. That and its comedy and ensemble, both which help. The films Travolta tends to do that bomb are dramas like Civil Action and Michael, not his action and comedies. Swordfish did surprisingly good considering it sucked! :lol:

Yeah, Russo never had as big a film career as she should have. I think I remember people saying she had serious spine problems as a kid which made her very introverted, which is why she always avoided the lime-light and stayed away from intense celebrity.


Yeah but Honey, unfortunately the critics have not been too kind to this movie and how bad would it be if Vin Diesel beat out John Travolta for his silly movie The Pacifier which received * 1 Star in this mornings review?? :lol:
Author:  STEVE ROGERS [ Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
dolcevita wrote:
D'oh #-o

Might take the boxoffice but its not golden of a movie. I'll tell you what Be Cool's problem was, it couldn't figure out its "bad" guys. It made them easily "bad" rather than smart businessmen, and their dialogue was by far the weakest. They make Keitel barely speak a word (completely underused) except for a bad faux-rap (sounds familiar :wink: ) sequence, and this is the first time Vince Vaugn was all wrong. They made him so over-the-top and not responsive to his surroundings. Vaugn is great because he can dead-pan, not because he can act like a random freak. It had it high moments too though. Pretty much every scene with Cedric the Entertainer and the Rock were hilarious. Christina Millian is ok, but over-used considering she's the most boring role in the film. She's not coniving or witty or anything, she's just a young girl with a good voice who all the others are fighting over (to have her contract). They should have given her less screentime considering the movie was about fighting over her, not her herself. Either that or they shouldn't have made her as pure. It was bland to focus on. Its interesting that the best characters Cedric's, Rock's, the Intern's) were the least thought out but ended up being the funniest because they weren't overscripted. Ok, but really too bad.

I tried to approach this as a fun ensemble cast piece about the music biz and not really associate it with its predecessor, but even strand-alone, it just wasn't all that great. Total mismanged the bad-guys and shot itself in the foot. Pleasant, but can wait until video, and even then some.


So to sum it up, basically you won't be seeing this for a 2nd time and probably should've went straight to video, is that correct?? :-k
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/