-Not Logged In-

Jump to content

Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

- - - - -

Three Kings: Sequel??

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#21 of 33 OFFLINE   Chris Lockwood

Chris Lockwood


  • 3,215 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 21 1999

Posted April 07 2003 - 03:10 PM

Yeah, bring on Three Kings and a Baby. I think Steve Guttenberg is available. Posted Image

#22 of 33 OFFLINE   Aaron Reynolds

Aaron Reynolds


  • 1,714 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2001
  • Real Name:Aaron Reynolds
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted April 08 2003 - 02:45 AM

If they call the sequel Four Kings they need to add Joe Pesci as Leo Getz, always in the back seat of the Jeep. I loved Three Kings so much when I saw it. Heck, I loved the trailer. Wasn't that one of the best trailers of the last decade?
My Twitter account: @aaronreynolds

My dumb Star Trek Emoticons Twitter account: @TrekMoticons

More pictures of Theatre Reynolds, children and nonsense: http://instagram.com/aaronreynolds

#23 of 33 OFFLINE   chung_sotheby


    Supporting Actor

  • 858 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 08 2002

Posted April 08 2003 - 03:36 AM

Three Kings, Blow, Fight Club, Salton Sea, American Beauty, all had great trailers, but I felt that Three Kings was the only one that really captured the feeling of the film in just a three-minute sampling. Others were intentionally ambigious(Salton, Fight Club), while others seemed to create a feeling for the trailer that was different than the movie (like Blow, whose trailer was 3x better than the movie).

#24 of 33 OFFLINE   Jeff Kohn

Jeff Kohn

    Supporting Actor

  • 680 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 29 2001

Posted April 08 2003 - 06:13 AM

Well, I didn't like it. I went in expecteing an action/war movie, not a preachy anti-US political statement. [Political commentary deleted. See the HTF Rules and Ron Epstein's 3/19/03 announcement at the top of this forum.]
Jeff Kohn
My DVD Profiler Collection

#25 of 33 OFFLINE   Phil Florian

Phil Florian


  • 1,190 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted April 08 2003 - 09:09 AM

It was an action war movie. Just one that discussed some issues. I thought it was a funny commentary on the mixed up nature of that war. Like the current war, we had about a dozen reasons why we went in. Free Kuwait. Save the people. Free the oil. Stop a menace. Etc. They kind of make fun of it and get to the core of what was really at stake. I found it very PRO- something. Pro- soldier. Pro- citizen. In the end, everyone wins because they all work together and are willing to sacfice their lives and for the first time (now that the war was over) they realized why they were really there. It is like that recent news story where the American soldier saw first hand the Iraqi people and their situation and said "this is why we are here." That may be true or not (it wasn't in the original docket) but it is the reason THAT soldier is able to get up and go every day. Three Kings also deals with the imbedding of the media (or, in Clooney's case, just bedding) with troops and how that affects the war. It was the first real media spun war and the film deals with that as well. Cool stuff. Phil

#26 of 33 OFFLINE   Lee-M


    Stunt Coordinator

  • 162 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2003

Posted April 08 2003 - 09:38 AM

I have a friend who saw it and did not like it (most of my friends who have started making over $50K annual have become conservative old farts)...

I thought it was brilliant, but it took me about three years to getting around to renting it; I intend to purchase it tomorrow.

I do not think a sequel is necessary, and [Political commentary deleted. See the HTF Rules and Ron Epstein's 3/19/03 announcement at the top of this forum.]

...sorry about that. Lee-M

#27 of 33 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted April 08 2003 - 09:48 AM

Please discuss the film, not current events. I'd really like to be able to leave this thread open.


COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#28 of 33 OFFLINE   Rob P S

Rob P S


  • 1,997 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 22 2002
  • Real Name:rob

Posted April 08 2003 - 10:28 AM

A great film. Mark Wahlberg steals the film, especially in the torture scene.

#29 of 33 OFFLINE   Nathan V

Nathan V

    Supporting Actor

  • 960 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 16 2002

Posted April 08 2003 - 12:18 PM

I think the film's pro-individualist, among other things (which I won't go into here). The film has definitely taken on a new meaning, in light of recent events. As for the film itself, it strongly reminds me of Fight Club. It has that same ballsy nerve to "discuss" "current" events- although 3K was made after Desert shield/storm, while FC was made in the thick of the consumerist age. High marks for scriptwriting (Russell spent 18 months on rewrites), truly amazing cinematography, acting (Cube? Wahlberg? Who would've thought?), music, and great action sequences to boot. Whatever happened to David O'Russell, anyway?
The Tree of Life / Brad Pitt / Sean Penn / Directed by Terrence Malick / 2010

#30 of 33 OFFLINE   Phil Florian

Phil Florian


  • 1,190 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2001

Posted April 08 2003 - 02:07 PM

I like O'Russell's interview on the DVD. He said after the fuss and stuff of such a large-scale production, he wanted to make a movie about two people in a room. Here is a blurb I found on the internet about his newest offering.
Looks like we are a way off for this one (looks like 2004, according to one site) Phil ]

#31 of 33 OFFLINE   Matt Stone

Matt Stone

    Lead Actor

  • 9,070 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 21 2000

Posted April 08 2003 - 03:55 PM

Regardless of what he makes next, I'll be lined up. I've been very impressed with all of his films thusfar.
In Heaven, everything is fine.
[ 2006 Films | 2005 Films | 2004 Films | 2003 Films | YMDB Top 20 ]
[ Star Wars | Sideshow | HT | DVDs | LDs | AIM: Maulrat87 ]

#32 of 33 OFFLINE   todd stone

todd stone


  • 1,768 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 2000

Posted April 08 2003 - 04:26 PM

I watched it myself, but no need for a sequel for one simple reason: there was little to no news coverage of the first war, where this war we are watching it as it unfolds.. no need for a movie to tell us how things are going along.
Lo, there do I see my mother, and my sisters, and my brothers, Lo, there do I see the line of my people, back to the beginning, Lo, they do call to me, they bid me take my place among them, In the halls of Valhalla,where the brave may live...

#33 of 33 OFFLINE   Andy Olivera

Andy Olivera


  • 1,302 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000

Posted April 08 2003 - 09:26 PM

Being avidly pro-US I just have to ask: what about it did you find to be anti-US? The film simply pointed out that encouraging an uprising and then leaving the Iraqis on their own was a mistake, proceeded to show the result of that mistake, and made a very good case of the good we could've done had we not made that mistake. What's anti-US about that?
"It is not, and never should be, the policy of the law to require the protection of the foolhardy or reckless few and therefore to deprive, or interfere with, the enjoyment by the remainder of society of the liberties and amenities to which they are rightly entitled." -unknown

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users