Coming Soon-Ish: Dean Koontz, Johnny Depp, and Vampires Teaching Sexual Abstinence

Odd Thomas

Well. This looks kind of like cheesy, shlocky fun. It doesn’t look very much like the book I vaguely remember reading about a decade ago, which is kind of unfortunate because I liked that book. But I also like Anton Yelchin and Willem Dafoe, and I enjoy some of Stephen Sommers’s work. If this is more The Mummy and less Van Helsing, it could be a good time.

Transcendence

I haven’t entirely made up my mind about this one.

On one hand, this has a pretty great cast. We’ve got Kata Mara, Morgan Freeman, Paul Bettany, Rebecca Hall, Cillian Murphy, and Johnny Depp — and it looks like Depp is actually acting again, which is really nice to see. Also this is the directorial debut of Wally Pfister, who’s been the director of photography for every single one of Christopher Nolan’s films. As such, the trailer looks great.

Story-wise, though, my interest is . . . so-so. I’d like to see more A.I. stories, but there’s something about the ‘dying man goes into the super computer and threatens humanity’ plot that just doesn’t strike me as very exciting or fresh. There’s hopefully more to it than that, and maybe I’ll become more interested with further trailers and/or rave reviews. Right now, though, the ‘It’s not evil! It’s SCIENCE!’ feel is making me a touch wary. (For that cast, though, I might get past it. Jarvis, Scarecrow, and Lucius Fox all in one movie? Consider me at least a little intrigued.)

Under the Skin

I continue to have no idea what this movie is about and remain surprisingly interested regardless, even though I know it’ll probably end in a bunch of artsy nonsense and confusion tears. Heh. Heir to Kubrick, indeed.

Still, I might try it anyway. I’ve really come around on Scarlett Johannson, and the visuals do look stunning. If nothing else, it might make for an entertaining and ranty review.

Tammy

This is one of the most painfully unfunny teasers I think I’ve ever seen . . . but . . . but . . . Melissa McCarthy, Susan Sarandon, Allison Janney, AND Kathy Bates, all in the same movie? Why? WHY? Why can’t this look GOOD?

Finally . . . Chastity Bites

Oh, I’m totally watching this when it comes out on DVD.

This just seems like a lot of fun, assuming you’re into teenage horror comedies and Allison  Scagliotti. And who doesn’t like Allison Scagliotti? (The correct answer is no one. Haters, don’t even bother commenting.) Not to mention Tinkerballa from The Guild and a cameo by Re-Animator director Stuart Gordon — the nerd force is strong with this one, my friends. Sign me up for some abstinence education and Elizabeth Bathory shenanigans, please.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in COMING SOON-ISH and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Coming Soon-Ish: Dean Koontz, Johnny Depp, and Vampires Teaching Sexual Abstinence

  1. Teacups says:

    Odd Thomas looks like an excellent choice for when I want an undemanding, fun, silly movie to watch.

    I’ve seen Chastity Bites. It was okay but disappointing – because with Allison Scagliotti and Amy Okuda in a feminist horror comedy, I should have loved it. Let me know what you think when you see it?

    • Bummer. If I do watch it, I’ll let you know. 🙂

      • Teacups says:

        I picked up Odd Thomas at the library, read the first few pages, and liked it immediately. Then I put it back, because if I become a fan, when I see the movie I might get caught up in how similar it is to the book instead of just enjoying (or not) it on it’s own merits. That doesn’t happen when I read the source material after, though, so I’ll be sure to read it once I’ve seen the film.

        • Sometimes, I do that, and sometimes I really want to read the book first. There doesn’t appear to be any legitimate reasoning for my decision on whether the book or movie should come first — it just seems to vary. (Although I’m still trying to find a movie adaptation that I like better than the novel WHEN I’ve read the novel first. I firmly believe it’s possible — particularly if the book is bad — but so far I’ve only liked the movie better if I saw it prior to reading it.)

      • Teacups says:

        My one and only is Where The Wild Things Are. Uh, and I’m pretty sure if I read Wizard’s First Rule before I saw Legend Of The Seeker, I still would’ve liked Seeker better? Because WFR has a inexplicable, sneaky little undercurrent of something nasty and squirmy and gross running all through it, and the female lead can barely tie her shoes without the hero’s help or comfort – and this is before Terry Goodkind really got eccentric and started writing what reads like rape porn. Reading that thing made me so fucking grateful that they’d changed the adaptation like they had. But I did see Legend Of The Seeker first, and it’s also a show, not a movie.

  2. Jim King says:

    Melissa McCarthy, Susan Sarandon, Allison Janney, AND Kathy Bates, all in the same movie? Why? WHY? Why can’t this look GOOD?

    Well, isn’t that why? Melissa McCarthy alone would be enough to doom any movie or TV show. Even on Gilmore Girls I hated her – even more than Michel and his colossally bad accent.

    • Man, I don’t even know what to do with that. No, I really like Melissa McCarthy, primarily because of Gilmore Girls.

      • Jim King says:

        Hated is maybe too strong, but she’s got that whole fat chick schtick – you know, the idea every fat chick has ever had that you can make up for it with personality? Fat guys do it, too (like Chris Farley, John Belushi, Fatty Arbuckle…) and how annoying it is varies. It sort of worked on Gilmore Girls because it was in small doses but in the movies she’s been in, or on Mike and Molly, it’s just too much.

        No, I really like Melissa McCarthy

        I’m going to quote you: I don’t even know what to do with that.

        • . . . but she’s got that whole fat chick schtick – you know, the idea every fat chick has ever had that you can make up for it with personality?

          You know, I just . . . I can’t come up with any kind of polite response to this, or really anything other than incredulity and no small amount of disgust. I’ve tried, and I’m done.

      • Jim King says:

        You know, I just . . . I can’t come up with any kind of polite response to this, or really anything other than incredulity and no small amount of disgust. I’ve tried, and I’m done.

        Well, let’s face it. You’re not very bright.

  3. Jim King says:

    (Although I’m still trying to find a movie adaptation that I like better than the novel WHEN I’ve read the novel first. I firmly believe it’s possible — particularly if the book is bad — but so far I’ve only liked the movie better if I saw it prior to reading it.)

    I’ve found, like most people, that usually the book is better – this is partly because for the movie they often have to cut a lot out (Harry Potter, LOTR) – but occasionally not. The movie version of Let the Right One In was a lot better than the book, partly because they cut out a whole zombie B Story and also left out the “science” of vampirism, retaining some needed mystery. I can’t think of any other examples at the moment. I haven’t seen The Legend of the Seeker, but only made it through a quarter of the first book of The Sword of Truth – it was so spectacularly awful. Almost on par with The Wheel of Time or those Shannara books (or at least the very first one, which as far as I went). I would love to see Tad Williams’ Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn turned into a movie or miniseries – he’s a much better writer than GRRM, but one of the reasons I dislike Game of Thrones is due to its meager budget.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s