It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Agreed…somewhat.
A lot of people (you included DP) started to become interested in “Cop Out” due to the red-band trailer. And here come the reviews…and they’re down in the crapper. I can’t remember the last time Emanuel Levy gave a movie below a C-.
But “Cop Out” is tracking in the high teens/low twenties…pretty much DOUBLE KEVIN SMITH’s previous high opening, and a better opening for Willis than the very expensive “Surrogates” (overall his best non-Die Hard since Sin City).
Very much due to that red-band trailer I suspect…
Was there any outrage over the kid swearing in the Role Models red-band trailer?
SIDE TOPIC:
But AMERICANS are way too big of pussies about kids.
I realize from recent threads this is the OCTOMOM FORUM with a bunch of dudes who HAD KIDS BEFORE THEY NEEDED TO (ie, BEFORE 37) but whatever….
Americans are GIANT VAGINAS about children. KIDS ARE STUPID. They’re usually hateful, violent, psychotic. This is a country where 11 YEAR OLD KIDS are out KILLING PEOPLE WITH GATS AND SHIT, where teenage girls are pulling tricks at the mall.
FACE IT, most KIDS are HUMAN GARBAGE and MORAL FREE and PIECES OF GARBAGE that YOU shouldn’t have had. LITERALLY kids go around SHOOTING OTHER KIDS and RAPING THEM and are SOCIOPATHIC because most of you who have them DON’T RAISE THEM and DON’T SPEND TIME WITH THEM.
But when some MOVIE comes along where kids are talking shit or shooting each other, ADULTS have to act all agasp, like, OH NO, my little WESTSIDE PSYCHO couldn’t POSSIBLY BE LIKE THAT.
And thus they get all SQUEAMISH if there’s a movie where kids get killed or pull or a gun or talk about sex… MEANWHILE, seriously, take a trip to a MALL in any L.A. neighborhood. You’ll hear a plentitude of junior kids PLOTTING MURDERS and calling females “bitch” with their little gel-head, future gun-packing sociopathic selves.
REALLY, what’s the difference in a movie between Jason Statham shooting off guns and killing people, or two 12-year-olds KILLING EACH OTHER? Actually, the latter is MORE REALISTIC.
And as a basic RULE OF THUMB, any movie where a kid GETS WASTED is usually fucking AWESOME. See, ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13.
You simnply can’t regulate this. For instance, European movie trailers often have a lot more sex in them, and are not usually age-restricted because sex is not a big deal. On a world-wide forum, should restrictions be put in place to placate the tastes of other nations? And how far should we take it? What about the middle-East? The debate could be worth having, but when it comes to cursing, genitals, recreations of violence etc, the internet is not only a free-for-all, it reduces the point of sensuring other media as well. Here in Norway, hardcore pornography became legal a couple of years ago simply because the politicians saw no reason to ban from some mediums what is easily accessible to anyone with a computer. I’m guessing mainstream entertainment will be a lot less clinical in the years to come, and for our grand-children curse-words will just be words.
Hey Lex, maybe if the parents of those kids you are talking about had been more like “Giant Vaginas”, those kids wouldn’t be so fucked up.
You sound like a grumpy old man on the bus frightened of all the darker tinted teenagers around you and what they might be doing.
Lex waxing poetic on parenting is like me philosophizing about being a woman: I’m not one and really have no idea what it’s like to be one. I have plenty of opinions about it but ultimately don’t know what I’m talking about.
LexG, hard to take that rant truly seriously enough to be really offended – kids are really fun and really exhausting, that’s all I’ll say.
And as Chris Rock would say, it looks like you’re planning on being the “old guy in the club….”
You’re so right Lex, it’s better to spend your 30’s cuddling your Kristen Stewart pillow (now with extra cretinous face!) than raising a child. And your views on teen violence are rational and well informed.
The NYTimes is written and printed for the ruling class. That piece was written to stir up the fundies and the fascists. After all the liberal media have a soft spot for the hard right.
The audience that’s gonna see “Kick-Ass” ain’t the type that read the NYTimes.
I have to agree with the non-crazy that Chucky wrote above. I think this was written so people can cluck their tongues in dignified disgust. And I have to say the article worked. I am already predisposed to turn my nose up at Lionsgate’s constant parade of ugly (even their classier projects play like a hard kick to the groin), but the marketing practice of Red Band trailers is something to be looked at.
I know its a little stupid to complain that there is violent content on the web, but this is a major company that is putting it out there, not some skeezy girls gone wild jackass.
There are porn companies that take in almost as much revenue as Lionsgate. Are they not major?
This KICK-ASS red-band is laughable in just HOW HARD it tries, throwing in totally incidental profanity from the first shot. It couldn’t possibly look more poseurish… It’s not even good lines or choice “stinger” uses of “fuck,” but rather incidental exchanges and random sound bites that just happen to have the word.
Also, what happened to Matthew Vaughn’s STYLE? “Layer Cake” had a handsome crime-movie sheen… I didn’t see “Stardust,” but it certainly looked extravagant if not garish from the trailers.
This really DOES look like “Superhero Movie,” all flatly shot in generic alleys with no filters and production design that looks like those Showtime softcores that always star Evan Stone and Christine Nguyen (GOOD REFERENCE.)
Torpid bunny: I love my Kristen Stewart pillow AND T-shirt. She keeps me safe and cozy at night.
“The audience that’s gonna see ‘Kick-Ass’ ain’t the type that read the NYTimes.”
The audience that’s gonna see “Kick-Ass” ain’t the type that reads, period.
I’m a parent and I completely agree with Lex. All kids are psychotic and satanic. All except mine.
This tut-tutting by the NYT is hilarious when you realise that the first tuts were actually issued by the geek brigade themselves upon seeing the “controversial” advance clips.
“Oh dude you cannot believe the fucking shit this 11yr old does in the film, its so anarchic and subversive” one well known web critic breathlessly (actually I wish it breathless as his haliotosis overrided the whispered intent) told me.
KICK ASS looks as subversive as GI JOE.
PS – Anyone else enjoying the irony of the COP OUT title?
Cadavra, considering the movie sold for $50 million based on the buzz it got from all the geek websites, I’m gonna go ahead and say you’re wrong on that one.
“There are porn companies that take in almost as much revenue as Lionsgate. Are they not major?”
No, Lionsgate is a publicly traded company that has won a best picture oscar and is up for another. While they have some of the same software, porn and movies are two different mediums.
What, exactly, is the danger here, hcat? That kids can see red band trailers? Who cares?
Kids have access to the finished, R-rated product. Isn’t that more concerning than them having access to a slightly raunchy commercial?
I mean, concerning to other people who get concerned about what kids watch. I personally don’t care if teenagers watch R-rated movies. Are we worried that 8-year-olds want to see the Cop Out trailer?
@hcat I really hate to pop your virginal bubble but companies such as Digital Playground take in as much if not more money than Lionsgate, are publicly traded, and win awards in their respective industry.
I don’t see any difference between the two posting profane trailers. Sorry.
Also hcat… you think that alcohol and tobacco companies advertising on television is better than online red-band age restricted trailers? Really?
Under-age kids likely can find hard-core porn videos on the web if they look carefully enough. Hell, I’ve found a few by accident — including, once, I swear, by inadvertently typing the wrong letters in a url — so I can only imagine what a determined, hormonally-inflamed 16-year-old could accomplish.
Ethan- First, who the fuck mentioned alcohol advertising on television? As for Tobacco thats been out of the television racket for what a quater century, but how did this enter into the conversation.
As far as my living in a virginal bubble for not being up on the porn industry, yes I have to admit ignorance on how well these individual companies do, seeing that I actually get laid as opposed to whacking off in front of my computer.
So Digital Playground has won awards in its respective industry? Yippee, that the exact equivelent to an Oscar. Sure Lionsgate’s Oscar was for Crash but I’m sure its a couple steps up from Nympho Bar Sluts 11.
Sorry if I hit a nerve by critizing your flogging material as being subpar to an actual movie. Just wanted movie companies to act like movie companies and market their stuff accordingly.
I would rather watch Nympho Bar Sluts 11 repeatedly over Crash— one is literal-minded exploitative trash for mouthbreathers, the other is pornography– and would probably be less ashamed to display the porn on my shelf as well.
Haha hcat you didnt hit a nerve..I still frequently see tobacco ads on premium channels like HBO, Showtime etc. They are allowed to advertise on cable after 10pm unlike redband trailers.
As for the porn comment…I don’t watch porn (really) but Im aware of the entertainment market since I play it. If you had to compare porn companies to most studios…they’re bigger than the mid-majors easily…at this point the largest might be on par with floundering Universal for all I know.
Anyhow I swear on whatever holy I’ve never watched a porn video. Just like I’ve never watched a Lionsgate horror/Tyler Perry movie. Sorry to disappoint.
love the trailer. love the comic series. can’t wait for the film. if half of the material makes it to the final cut, it’s going to piss off a lot of people.
bring it on.
Since when have Showtime and HBO started running ads?
And apology accepted, I am truly disappointed, even devastated, that you have never watched porn. You know you can simply type that you are an annoying fuckwit instead of hinting at it with snotty little endings to your posts like Really?!?! and sorry to disappoint.
The point I was trying to make is that no matter what the revenue, these are two different industries. And just because someone elses shit is available to kids that they have agreed to as an industry not to market for, it doesnt mean its fine for them to. This isn’t about getting weirded out by a kid swearing in Cop Out or Role Models or somehow being shocked that kids watch R-Rated movies, its simply about the marketing.
Haha you’re a trip. Free speech is restricted to what industry you’re in. It doesn’t matter WHAT you say. It matters for whom you’re saying it.
I guess to be even more clear…Im amused that your cheeks blush crimson at red-band Lionsgate trailers with children cussing, when Lionsgate, the studio in question, releases films like “American Psycho Unrated,” “Dogma Unrated,” “Shattered Image,” “Buffalo 66,” “But I’m a Cheerleader,” “Amores Perros,” “O,” etc.
Lionsgate released “Irreversible” domestically and advertised for it. Did your dick re-enter your body in horror when those ads came out?
I have no idea what you two are even bickering about.
I just can’t believe there are men who don’t watch porn. Even when I was younger, skinnier, happier and dating, I’d still shoo chicks out the door just to watch more porn. But even if you don’t watch it, how can a GUY be anti-porn?
Also, Lionsgate rules. I actively go to see movies just because they ARE from Lionsgate. And as Ethan says, they have a pretty diverse fucking slate… and I wouldn’t trust any guy who doesn’t like “Saw.”
Lionsgate is an entirely different company from when they were releasing arthouse fare like Irreversible and Buffalo 66. Every thing you listed was when they were still working the festival circuits. Then they opened Cabin Fever and Shattered Glass within months of each other, looked at the grosses and decided to stop trying to be the new Miramax to become the new Cannon. Since then each year has a groan-inducing number of crappy looking movies like Gamer and The Condemned. Six Saws for every Away from Her.
And you nailed it right on the head about Irreversible. An NC-17 French movie would have the same appeal to an eleven year old as a movie based on a comic book about a trash talking eleven year old.
And again, no matter how many times you want to paint as one, I’m not some grey-haired prude who gets the knickers tangled about a kid swearing in a movie trailer. Not trying to limit anyone’s free speech, not saying the movie shouldn’t have been made, just saying that if you make a movie about a killer eleven year old you should try to make sure you are not marketing it to the same. I would have been a little off-put if Warners had advertised Orphan on the back of Froot Loop boxes.
How does Lionsgate go out of its way to make sure 11 year-olds don’t want to see Kick Ass? No red-band trailer? No Internet advertising? When does marketing their movie to an age-appropriate audience cross over into marketing it to 11 year-olds?
“This KICK-ASS red-band is laughable in just HOW HARD it tries, throwing in totally incidental profanity from the first shot. It couldn’t possibly look more poseurish… It’s not even good lines or choice “stinger” uses of “fuck,” but rather incidental exchanges and random sound bites that just happen to have the word.”
This is exactly what the Adventureland trailer did, only worse, imo.
I’m just offended that the 11-year-old-or-whatever-she-is actress appears to SUCK AT ACTING. In the cussing little kid genre, that one in the last couple of seasons of “The Wire” knows how to do it.
Stella – I don’t have an answer on how to reach the age appropriate demo without making teens and kids want to see it. I just think that putting out a red band trailer for it will stoke their fires more. What would you estimate, 95% of R rated films are able to scrape together a general audience trailer? And that almost all other Red Bands contain maybe a flash of ass or someone saying Fuck. And most of the other Red Bands are for movies that would be generally ignored by younger audiences (am I underestimating Bruce Willis’s appeal to the 15 and under set)? But somehow it is not possible for Lionsgate to cut a movie staring kids, that will massivly appeal to a large number of kids, without keeping the decapitations?
I am not saying that there should not be red band trailers, R rated movies, alchoholic drinks, or skirts above the knee. I am just saying that being a part of the MPAA means following their rules about marketing films to minors, and Lionsgate can’t just shrug their shoulders and say “What can you do?” when they cut a red band trailer for a comic book movie with killer kids and put it in the one place where everyone has access to everything.
Again, as I stated in the first post, I am fully aware that there are much worse things on the web. And that’s a fair arguement for you to make. But not a fair arguement for Lionsgate to make.
“Six Saws for every Away From Her” – sounds like a fair deal to me.
Thank you Lex, for pointing out the similarities to Superhero Movie. I just couldn’t put my finger on what the materials reminded me of. As far as post Naked Gun 33 1/3 ZAZ-type spoofs go (David Zucker was a producer), Superhero Movie is actually a pretty good one. It has a real plot, actual jokes that require set-ups and pay-offs (the Stephen Hawkings bits amused me), and a genuinely winning comic performance by Christopher McDonald (plus fun supporting turns by Brent Spiner, Leslie Nielsen, and Jeffrey Tambor).
The geeks have been going bonkers for Kick Ass for a while now, and I imagine the red-band trailer was an attempt to keep the buzz going strong. Commerce trumps all. It seems to have worked too. The requisite sites are frothing at the mouth with anticipation.
I guess the point Im trying to make is whether Lionsgate was more like Screen Media is now back then or whatever…size of the company shouldn’t matter. Greenband trailers for a lot of movies (whether theyre NC17 and have to be shown after midnight or whatever) are worse than a lot of the redband ones out there.
Maybe the studios need better age verification or parents need better filters on their computers or kids’ smart phones or whatever…but after seeing “This Film is Not Yet Rated” I think the MPAA can already be considered an out of control organization against free speech..no need to make it worse.
@LexG I guess what I meant was Im not some weirdo who sits around streaming porn all the time.
More recent green-band trailers that are just as bad as red-band would be “The Poughkeepsie Tapes,” “Shortbus,” and “Captivity.”
Dave, I think you have the answer to the question in the title of your post. The trailer nor the movie would have grabbed my attention had it not been for the link to the article. I can’t believe I have spent this many posts discussing Kick-Ass.
Ethan- after rereading some of the posts from last night, I realized I got a tad snippy (the Scorseby tends to anger up the blood) and the virginal bubble thing was like a neighbors kid’s soccer ball hitting an angry napping mans window. Sober and composed now, sorry if I dropped the level of discourse.
I have no idea about poughkeepsie but Shortbus and Captivity are interesting contrasts. Shortbus’s restriction would have been based entirely on sexuality, and I can’t help but laugh at the idea of any kid sneaking a download of Shortbus hoping for a Porky’s and getting drag queens, masterbation, orgies, and the star spangled banner scene. Now I think Captivity would be of greater appeal to the younger crowd and I do remember not liking that ad campaign either. If that was the Cuthbert film I am thinking of, I remember full size one sheet ads at bus stops that depicted her buried alive. But instead creating a sense of terror, the photo so emphasized her breasts that it just felt creepy and expliotive. If I recall correctly that was the campaign that sort of sunk the whole ‘torture porn’ genre. I have to say if that between the two, I would prefer the kids saw the honest sexuality of Shortbus to the confused fetishization of Captivity.
I’d love to see an example of the tobacco ads that are still running on TV – especially the ones airing on non-ad supported stations like HBO and Showtime. Would LOVE to see that.
It would be quite interesting, since it’s been illegal to air one in the US since 1971, and even smokeless tobacco ads have been illegal since ’86.
I think the Superbowl is pornographic with its rampant misogyny and crass consumerism masked by macho violence, but that’s sensitive me. KICK-ASS might be good but the AICN over-hype has already killed my interest. Reminds me of MYSTERY MEN, the script of which was truly hilarious.
@storymark…should have clarified and said magazine ads for tobacco. Gossip rags like US Weekly, In Touch etc still have them.
hcat…sorry if I offended. “Poughkeepsie” is the worst of the bunch trailer wise because it’s presented as an actual snuff film. Not sure how it snuck past MPAA but may more disturbing to me than the “Cop Out” and “Kickass” red-bands.
Anyone who has read the source material knows that both kick ass and wanted were dark stories that made fun of the cimic book culture. Superhero comics that make fun of people who read superhero comics.
I wont go into spoiler territory with kick ass, but if they stuck to the comic then there are some real shots at the very audience they are marketing the film to.
‘Not sure how it snuck past MPAA but may more disturbing to me than the “Cop Out” and “Kickass” red-bands’
That goes back to the MPAA counting instances over themes. The Damned United is much tamer than say The Dark Knight but saying “I’m going to put this fucking pencil through your fucking eyesocket” will get you an R rating faster than actully having a character shove a pencil through someones eyesocket.
My favorite example is Billy Elliot and Coyote Ugly that came out around the same time. This great movie about a teen was off limits to kids because he talked exactly how a miner’s kid who grew up without a movie would talk. Meanwhile the movie about scantily clad women who danced on bars was fair game to kids because no one used language that is used in bars where women dance scantily clad.
That should be ‘miner’s kid who grew up without a mother.’
I could not believe Taken was given a PG-13. Granted no one says “fuck” and limbs aren’t severed, but it includes kidnapping, drug use, human trafficking, torture, beatings, shootings, stabbings, murder and ODs.
At the risk of sounding cold-bloodedly crass: Do you think yesterday’s tragedy in Orlando might force WB to push back — way back — the release of the DTV Free Willy movie? Or at least cut back on promoting it?
It could be a perfect opportunity to finally unleash that killer what horror movie you know they’ve wanted to make; Slave Willy.
I was not aware of a new Free Willy movie. Do DTV movies ever have their release pushed back over something like this?
“@storymark…should have clarified and said magazine ads for tobacco. Gossip rags like US Weekly, In Touch etc still have them.”
Oh-kay. So when you said you see ads on TV all the time, and named two specific channels…. what you really meant was magazines. Riiiight. Glad you cleared that up.
“They are allowed to advertise on cable after 10pm unlike redband trailers.” (No, they’re not)
Yeah, that version of the story totally tracks, and doesn’t look like you made up a BS claim and backtracked….at all.
Ouch…I was wrong because while I see ads for places that SERVE tobacco all the time in the local DC market at night (specifically sheesha parlors…which can advertise as long as they serve food). Assumed that it was the same restriction as the ads for hard liquor. Didn’t realize you can advertise for tobacco establishments but not actually tobacco. Apologies.
Since you’re so adamant, here is such an ad for your viewing pleasure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DYdsu0kHFc
The Hall Of Fame Blunder for the MPAA remains WOODSTOCK, where kids who actually went to the festival couldn’t go see the movie unless they dragged their parents.
A_Loco, I didn’t say KICK-ASS wouldn’t do business, just that it looks like a very stupid movie for very stupid people. Specifically, it looks EXACTLY like MYSTERY MEN remade by the SUPERBAD people.
Kick ass is nothing like mystery men. Its dark, brutal, and satirical. It aint slapstick, thats for sure.
The “satire” label always amuses me – there’s projects that deliberately try to send up a genre, and then there are those that are the result of the producers frantically realising they missed their original mark and need an excuse.
It will be interesting to see which of the two Kick Ass falls under.
Saw DEFENDOR this evening. Excellent little picture, and Harrelson again gives a balls-out performance. And it’s very dark at times. I’d say it’s KICK-ASS for smart people, but I don’t wanna start that crap up again. Oops, too late.
oh i totally want to see ‘defendor’, it looks like my cup of tea, hilarious. i hope it makes it down here in the cinema. woody is having a bit of a revival isn’t he, just finding his range and hitting his stride
Foamy, I’d have to think that any movie showing a ten year old girl dressed as a superhero killing ten bad guys and dismembering them is probably not taking itself entirely seriously.
It seems pretty obvious from the clips that the movie is comedic and satirical. Have you seen the one where Cage shoots the girl as training? Even if you HATE that clip and everything that stands for, I don’t see how you can think they’re not sending this stuff up.
The middle section of the red band trailer shows definite hints that they may be treading into “taking themselves seriously” territory. Yes, there’s lots of “Oh noes! I accidentally hurt myself trying to do something I saw in a movie! LOL!” schtick, but there’s a definite possibility that the tone veers all over the place and they’re using “Hey! It’s satire! Didn’t you see that other bit?” as an excuse.
For me, the jury’s still out on this one.
I hope the tone does veer all over the place…that’s how movies like that are interesting to me. I’m not really interested in the comedy version of this movie. I am interested in the comedic version that has serious bits and fucked up bits and exciting bits.
That’s why I think Shaun of the Dead is a great movie while something like Zombieland was amusing but that’s all for me. While I’d call Shaun a comedy overall, if you took out bits from the middle and end and showed it to people who didn’t know any better, they’d think it was a serious horror movie.
I use the term “veer” in a fairly specific sense – not that it has variation (which, as you point out, can be a good thing) but that it is wild, erratic, and uncontrolled (which, admittedly, is more of a trend in the word’s usage than its literal meaning).
An example of this that I have used before is Watchmen – the two lovers have an “adrenaline as viagra” sequence played almost dead-straight, which concludes with a ludicrous “flame jet symbolism for orgasm”… and is sandwiched between Rorschach mutilating criminals in a very graphic manner. For me it wasn’t artistic juxtaposition, it wasn’t satire, it was someone who didn’t know what the hell they were doing even if they believed they did.
Not to knock Shaun of the Dead, I have to (somewhat) disagree with you on Zombieland, Big Perm. For me, what made the movie work is that it did take its post-zombie world seriously. Yes, the characters did their best to be funny and some of the situations were comic, but the film fully acknowledged that this was a horrifying place to live and was a tragedy for all involved. Because it kept the focus on the characters’ upended lives and created a surprisingly plausible post-apocalyptic dead zone, I found Zombieland actually scarier and more moving than most conventional horror tales.
I think a guy like Miike does what you’re saying, but I don’t really mind that style. I didn’t have a problem with that stuff in Watchmen either. So I figure I’m probably okay with what they do as long as it doesn’t suck (and stuff like the little girl saying “it’s shaped like a giant cock” sort of does).
ZOMBIELAND was the TV commercial version of SHAUN OF THE DEAD. Tonally inept and culturally deaf. Though I liked Woody Harrelson natch.