The new _Solaris_ (trailers included). (2 Viewers)

[Jordan_E]

Simply showing Mr. Daniel Ocean rolling around with his dead wife
and not much else. Sure, the original trailer for Kubrick's THE SHINING was as simple, but was effective. The others saying it looked like GHOST 2: Ghost Harder seemed more appropriate than SOLARIS. I have seen the original quite a few times and this version just seems like a big WHY? to me, like remaking PSYCHO and the upcoming THE WARRIORS.

 

[ThomasC]

I saw the trailer on TV as well and the wife immediately asked "what the hell was that?" but I kept my mouth shut. The trailer did not convince me to see it at all.

i saw it on entertainment tonight, was that where you saw it too? that definitely wasn't the entire trailer, if that's the one you saw...

 

[Rich Malloy]

I tried to watch the trailer on the Solaris website, but it's not yet available. Hope to see it soon. Sounds a bit more like a teaser, and if all it consists of is Kelvin embracing the Rheya/Hari "visitor",
...then I think that's perhaps not a bad way to market it. After all, this is not the usual sci-fi movie stuff, and pitching it as such would not be appropriate IMO (it would be dishonest, in fact). Rather, focusing on what would appear to be a love story would seem to be very much in order. It gets to the essence of this story much better than, for instance, showing scenes that would appear action-oriented, or, worse, editing a sequence of scenes to make them appear as such (perhaps with a heavy techno soundtrack backing them up), or even just showing a few gee-whiz shots of the orbiting Prometheseus.
And if it helps to keep the teenagers and sub-literates out of theater, I'm all for it!

 

[Mattias Stridsman]

Sorry Rich, I wrote that the trailer was available on the site, but the truth is I never clicked on the button because I assumed it would be the trailer that was posted a couple of months ago. Don't you just hate it when they put a "trailer"-button on the site only to get a "coming soon"-message when you click on it?
Glad to hear it's not marketed as something it's not.

 

[Jordan_E]

I caught the trailer/teaser on network TV; don't ask me what show because the trailer/teaser was so underwhelming that it didn't leave a lasting impression. I agree that showing whiz bang FX would give the wrong impression, but knowing the Hollywood Marketing Machine, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't see such a trailer before the release. As Roger Waters sang: "who cares what it's about as long as the kids go..."

 

[chung_sotheby]

I am sorry, but in what way does Soderbergh qualify as a "genius" director. The guy has made two very good movies (Out of Sight and The Limey) two good movies (Sex, Lies, and Videotape and Traffic) two barely watchable movies (Erin Brockovich and Ocean's Eleven) and the rest a slate full of steaming, hot guano (Hello, Full Frontal, Schizopolis?). I personally think that Solaris will be as, if not more, boring and completely cluttered as A.I., as the original material is just a little too complicated for someone like Soderbergh to transcribe to film. The guy is almost near hack status, a supposed auteur who simply rips things off of other established directors like Altman, Mann, Scorcese and Demme. Besides, remakes of incredible European films usually dont do too well (ie, The Vanishing, La Femme Nikita, Insomnia, Vanilla Sky, Swept Away, Get Carter, etc. etc.)

 

[Rich Malloy]

I am sorry, but in what way does Soderbergh qualify as a "genius" director

???

While I think you've succeeded in establishing that Soderbergh is no "genius" director, why did you bother? No one here has claimed that status for him, and the curious and befuddled looks your post is surely receiving are due to the fact that we're wondering exactly who you purport to be quoting and responding to.

And do you really consider the original "Swept Away" to be an "incredible European film"? Or, for that matter, "Nikita" and "Abres los ojos"? I'd think given your stern appraisal of Soderbergh's ouvre, that these lightweight to downright awful movies would more likely have been the focus of your ire.

???

 

[Rich Malloy]

(I'm not really trying to put you on the spot, Chung - I just think you're being overly harsh regarding Soderbergh, generally, and surprisingly lenient regarding the quality of the films you offer as examples of prime European cinema ruined by hack American remakes.)

 

[chung_sotheby]

For their respective genres, the movies that I listed were prime examples of film done well. Swept Away was a great escapism film that also dealt with sexual politics, while Abre los ojos was a great Spanish mind-f*(k movie of the highest pedigree, and Nikita a helluva good straight action movie. Are these movies all time classics in the veign of Delicatessen or M; no. But they are examples of how good/great genre films can be made from a european hand.
As for the comments regarding soderbergh, I get a little antsy when people start proclaiming that he is a better, more established talent than James Cameron, and I just wanted to push him off the pedestal that he has unjustly been put on by the hollywood press (even though with Full Frontal and Ocean's Eleven, maybe he didnt need any more pushing)

 

[Vickie_M]

The guy has made two very good movies (Out of Sight and The Limey) two good movies (Sex, Lies, and Videotape and Traffic) two barely watchable movies (Erin Brockovich and Ocean's Eleven) and the rest a slate full of steaming, hot guano (Hello, Full Frontal, Schizopolis?).

While I agree with you about Out of Sight and The Limey, I don't think Gray's Anatomy, The Underneath, King of the Hill, and Kafka belong in the "bat guano" category. They're decent to good. I think Full Frontal and Schizopolis were experiments. I haven't seen either, so I can't say if they're stinkers or not (since I completely disagree with your opinion of A.I. I don't think I'll take your word on how bad they are). I appreciate the fact that he's willing to experiment and take risks in this day and age, failures or not.
I'm looking forward to Solaris.

 

[Paul_D]

Schizopolis is really funny. About as experimental as you can get, and as such, doesn't fir the standard definition of a narrative-driven film, but its excellent in its own way. Check it out Vickie if you get the chance.

 

[Vickie_M]

Check it out Vickie if you get the chance.

I've been meaning to, and I will, thanks for the recommendation.

 

[AndrewD]

Turner Classic Movies will be airing the '72 Tarkovsky version in letterbox on Friday, November 29 at 930p.

 

[ThomasC]

the internet exclusive trailer is online:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/solaris/

 

[teapot2001]

MPAA has assigned the movie an R rating based on Clooney's behind that appears twice.

~T

 

[David Ely]

Oh my ... is it just me or does the trailer makes this look REALLY awful?

Oh well ... At least we have the original film coming out on DVD in a few weeks.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

MPAA has assigned the movie an R rating based on Clooney's behind that appears twice.

That's bullshit. They showed that guy's ass in Mr. Deeds in lingering detail, and that only got a PG-13.

 

[Kristian]

They showed that guy's ass in Mr. Deeds in lingering detail, and that only got a PG-13.

Another example is the "mooning" scene in K-19: The Widowmaker, which was also issued a PG-13 (the rating reasons do not mention the rear nudity). I'm sure there are many other examples of PG-13 and even PG films with rear nudity. The MPAA really needs to be more consistent.

 

[Guy_K]

I am very impressed with the Solaris trailer.. I'm really looking forward to it. Anyone else agree?

 

[teapot2001]

George Clooney must have an unattractive butt then.
The Internet trailer looks good, better than the TV spot that's been airing.
~T