Amazon Prime Road House (2024) (2 Viewers)

[Carl David]

Jake Gyllenhaal says they were fully aware they were making this film for streaming only. Apparently Amazon offered them a $60 million budget that included a theatrical release, or $85 million for streaming release only, and they elected to take the higher budget with no theatrical release.

Apparently Liman and Silver thought if they made a good film, they could change Amazon's mind. But when they didn't budge, Liman went on a tirade.

Jake Gyllenhaal Says ‘Amazon Was Always Clear’ That ‘Road House’ Was for Streaming After Director Slammed Studio for Skipping Theatrical Release

Jake Gyllenhaal says Amazon was clear that Road House was for streaming after director Doug Liman slammed the studio.

variety.com

This does not reflect well on Mr. Liman does it?

He had the option to to get it released in theaters yet took the money and ran and then decided to moan about it after.

I must say I am surprised he was offered more to make it streaming only.

Is Hollywood losing that much money via initial theater releases now?

Surely, they can make more via theatrical run and then streaming even if theater runs are for 2 weeks and then straight to streaming?

Definitely going to watch the movie though.

Think this is going to surprise a few on how good it is.

 

[Malcolm R]

I'm guessing the difference in budgets offered was part of what they would have had to spend on marketing and promotion for a successful theatrical release. Sounds like they let the team decide if they wanted a more streamlined budget which would allow money to be spent on theatrical promotion, or taking some of that marketing money and adding it to the film's budget to make a "better" film.

Per Gyllenhaal, they took the bigger film budget with the understanding the film would be exclusive to Prime. I don't know what Liman's problem is if that was the understanding, which seemed pretty clearly stipulated per Gyllenhaal.

 

[sleroi]

I thought there was some anticipation for the his but no one has written about it yet. I guess most people found it, like me, just kind of meh.

The first act/setup is so boring I almost turned it off. And there was something odd/artificial about the fighting. Almost looked CGI. I googled it and apparently they had actors punching and being punched by pillows and the two shots then composited together with a background plate.

Also, Conor McGregor is horrible. He has one facial expression, a giddy, dumb smile. But instead of coming off as the psycho hea supposed to be it reads more as "look at me, I'm in a movie."

And the main villain is nowhere near as eccentric as Ben Gazzarra was. He's really just kind of boring.

The love story isn't very engaging, and most of the attempts at humor fall flat. And there's a severe lack of throat-ripping and quotable lines.

Despite this, Gyllenhall was kind of charming, I was afraid he was going to try and imitate Swayze's zenike approach, but he made the character his own.

Once the first act was over the rest of the movie flew by. A bit predictable at times, but still a little fun. And I also really liked the music in this version as well.

Ive already watched my 4k copy of the original 3 times. I don't think I'll need to revisit this remake.

 

[Jeff Flugel]

Like you, Gavin, I was a little surprised that no one had reacted to the premiere of this movie yet, so thanks for getting the ball rolling.

I enjoyed this for what it was, a piece of disposable action fare given a quality boost from smooth direction by Doug Liman. I liked the sun-kissed Key West vibe (actually filmed in Puerto Rico, I believe) and thought Jake Gyllenhal was pretty good as the smiling, polite and, when necessary, badass ex-fighter turned bouncer-for-hire...and man, he sure got jacked for the role. Conor McGregor's getting trashed on the web for his performance, but I found him entertaining, in a cocky bantam rooster sort of way, and of course he is quite convincing in the fight scenes. The romance angle was just OK, as you say, but boy, is Daniela Melchior a good-looking woman (those eyes - wow!)

While I remember enjoying the original Swayze version back when it first came out, I don't hold it as some sort of action masterpiece or anything, so found this one an agreeable take on the premise, and a fun Saturday night romp. It is disconcerting, though, to read about the overtly CGI-manipulated fight scenes...guess the producers were worried about MacGregor roughing up Gyllenhal a little too much.

 

[Carl David]

I thought there was some anticipation for the his but no one has written about it yet. I guess most people found it, like me, just kind of meh.

The first act/setup is so boring I almost turned it off. And there was something odd/artificial about the fighting. Almost looked CGI. I googled it and apparently they had actors punching and being punched by pillows and the two shots then composited together with a background plate.

Also, Conor McGregor is horrible. He has one facial expression, a giddy, dumb smile. But instead of coming off as the psycho hea supposed to be it reads more as "look at me, I'm in a movie."

And the main villain is nowhere near as eccentric as Ben Gazzarra was. He's really just kind of boring.

The love story isn't very engaging, and most of the attempts at humor fall flat. And there's a severe lack of throat-ripping and quotable lines.

Despite this, Gyllenhall was kind of charming, I was afraid he was going to try and imitate Swayze's zenike approach, but he made the character his own.

Once the first act was over the rest of the movie flew by. A bit predictable at times, but still a little fun. And I also really liked the music in this version as well.

Ive already watched my 4k copy of the original 3 times. I don't think I'll need to revisit this remake.

That is the gist of what I have read by others who have seen it.

Seen many grumblings on Conor McGregor's ham acting which seems to have infuriated viewers.

Was highly anticipating this and have commented in this thread about the potential prospects but based on what I have read am not even going to invest my time on it so will not bother even giving it a try.

Have wasted too much time as it is on some movies released over the past 5 to 6 years and after a few years of intense movie watching trying to reduce my selections where bad experiences are kept to a minimum.

Will just watch Road House original instead or even a decent modern action movie like Nobody rather than potentially waste my limited time again on a poorly executed movie that lacks intelligent characters, original script writing and a story which knows how to engage its audience.

 

[Tino]

rather than potentially waste my limited time again on a poorly executed movie that lacks intelligent characters, original script writing and a story which knows how to engage its audience

To each his own if course but I personally wouldn’t let others influence my desire to see a film. All opinions are subjective and too many times have I enjoyed a film that many others didn’t. Making up my own mind is preferable.

I haven’t seen this yet but plan to soon.

And if you’re going by reviews, this remake is better reviewed 62% fresh vs 41% rotten for the original.

 

[DaveF]

It just came out. I won’t get around to watching it for months at least, best case. Given the poor reviews, will be even longer until I’m interested in risking precious movie time for a likely bad movie.

 

[Tino]

Given the poor reviews,

As noted above, the majority of the RT reviews are positive.

 

[TravisR]

I thought there was some anticipation for the his but no one has written about it yet.

It seems like it's very hard for most streaming movies to get anyone talking about them. If this wasn't a remake, it wouldn't even have a thread here. Right or wrong, most streaming movies are treated like background noise and don't get the recognition that a theatrical movie receives.

 

[AlexF]

Watched this tonight. It's not the original Roadhouse. But... it's not too bad overall.

McGregor is average, but fills the role well enough. Jake G is actually really good in his role. The fight scenes were interesting to watch. The plot was a bit predictable, but we're not here for the mystery.

 

[Malcolm R]

Was going to watch this last week, then remembered I'd be watching with ads, so decided to watch something else.

 

[AlexF]

Was going to watch this last week, then remembered I'd be watching with ads, so decided to watch something else.

Interestingly, I had no ads in my viewing. And I'm not paying for a no-ad level.

 

[Malcolm R]

Interestingly, I had no ads in my viewing. And I'm not paying for a no-ad level.

That is interesting. I'll have to give it a try sometime.

 

[Walter Kittel]

Viewed this earlier today. It was enjoyable enough on its terms. It never took itself too seriously for the most part, which made it easier to accept its more extreme elements. Just an okay way to spend a few hours. There are better action films and there are worse ones. I did like the super polite antagonist who really didn't have his heart in the whole bad guy thing. Also, the final scene felt appropriate for this feature and got a laugh from me.

I was mildly disappointed that...

Spoiler

Gyllenhal did not execute Swayze's signature move that Peter Griffin so slavishly repeated, the spinning back kick.

We did not see the elder Brandt. I was hoping for a nice celebrity cameo from the prison.

- Walter.