trailer break: ‘Knowing’Take a break from work: watch a trailer... I get it! Nicolas Cage finds a piece of paper that, 50 years prior, unerringly predicted each and every future large-scale disaster to come... and there’s a few more yet to unfold. And Nicolas Cage will stop those disasters from unfolding. Because these predictions are absolutely accurate and comprehensive, and therefore the future disasters they insist are coming -- and will certainly come because all the other predictions have been correct -- must be prevented. And they will be prevented because Nicolas Cage is our hero. I don’t get it. Oh, I get that it’s like the bogus “Bible code” meets Next, the bogus “Nic Cage can see into the future” movie from a few years ago. I just don’t get how this is going to work. Unless I’m completely wrong about how this movie must inevitably turn out. Maybe Nicolas Cage will not save the world and his adorable towheaded little son at the same time. But I’m guessing if I’m wrong about anything, it’s about that. Knowing opens in the U.S. on March 20 and in the U.K. on March 27. support
Disqus commentsblog comments powered by Disqus |
posted:
Tue Mar 03 09, 10:58AM categories: movie buzz permalink 7 pre-Disqus comments Disqus comments tip jarshare
read morerelated· The Devil’s Double (review) · question of the day: What disaster -- natural or manmade, or a combination of the two -- would you like to see depicted on film? · new DVD releases in Region 1, July 7 · question of the day: How important is it for a film to be shot where it’s supposed to be set? · North American box office: ‘Knowing’ has the numbers · Knowing (review) · my week at the movies: ‘Monsters vs. Aliens,’ ‘Super Capers,’ ‘Knowing,’ ‘Duplicity,’ ‘I Love You, Man,’ ‘Goodbye Solo,’ ‘Shall We Kiss?,’ ‘Earth’ · question of the day: Where are all the benign alien first-contact stories? · question of the day: What’s the most egregious fake movie or TV location you’ve seen recently? · question of the day: What non-hit of the 00s will be an acclaimed favorite by 2020? bloggyprevious post: question of the day: Will women see ‘Watchmen’? next post: my week at the movies: ‘Watchmen,’ ‘Sunshine Cleaning,’ ‘The Great Buck Howard’ |
|
|
search
follow
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in case of site outages or other emergencies, I'll update my status on Twitter and Facebook)
|
||
follow FlickFilosopher.com no matter where you are online
|
||
share and enjoy
shop to support
support FlickFilosopher.com when you click through here and buy almost anything at:
• Amazon U.S.
• Amazon Canada
• Amazon U.K.
• Amazon Germany
• Amazon France
• Amazon Spain
• Amazon Italy
• Chapters/Indigo (Canada)
• Amazon U.S.
• Amazon Canada
• Amazon U.K.
• Amazon Germany
• Amazon France
• Amazon Spain
• Amazon Italy
• Chapters/Indigo (Canada)
pre-Disqus comments
posted by marshall (Tue Mar 03 09, 5:09PM)
Ok, so it's got Nicolas Cage who hasn't made the best choices in recent times... but dang it, I'm a sucker for Apocolyptic Disaster flicks...
posted by Katie Dvorak (Tue Mar 03 09, 5:27PM)
Didn't we just see something like this with Jim Carrey and the number 15 or something?
posted by the rook (Tue Mar 03 09, 5:35PM)
is it all right to complain that the train at 1:10 doesn't look like anything in the new york city subway?
posted by JoshFL (Tue Mar 03 09, 11:39PM)
My first reaction when I saw the trailer for this film, including about 300 different questions:
"Aren't the body counts for major disasters often estimates? And who the hell gets to decide what is the official body count? Couldn't this paper be used to determine the exact number of people dead in certain events, such as the tsunami? What is a 'major global disaster,' as defined by this movie -- is it always natural? Does it have to have a certain minimum body count to be classified as a 'major global disaster,' or would a fire in Namibia that kills a few villagers be considered? If so, should there not be something like pages and pages of numbers, rather than just one?"
I know that I definitely have been overthinking this way too much [especially considering how stupid but fun they probably intend it to be, like National Treasure (though I just thought it was stupid)], but am I really the only one?
posted by Josh (Tue Mar 03 09, 11:40PM)
Basically, my point is that there are way too many plot holes.
posted by Grondzilla (Thu Mar 05 09, 11:23PM)
Wouldn't actually watching the movie first be appropriate before this level of petty bitching?
Cage picks are unpredictable...For every Ghost Rider there is a Lord of War. Director of 'Dark City' to boot? I'd say the outcome is entirely uncertain at this point.
posted by Josh (Fri Mar 06 09, 4:18AM)
The fact is that a movie has to create its own reality that is believable and makes sense, at least in some twisted way. Could there really be a robot capable of achieving (rather than being programmed as such by its creators, which is a distinct possibility some time in the next century, if not less) the ability to feel every possible human emotion, especially love and longing, like in Wall-e? Probably not, but we accept it for the sake of the story. However, a movie cannot work if there are so many unanswered questions and nonsensical plot points that it just disrespects the audience's intelligence.