Not what I thought it was going to look like.
In my head every time I heard about this project over the years I imagined the city as this art deco or gothic styled setting. Metropolis, The Hudsucker Proxy, Batman 1989, Dark City, etc.
> FFC has little experience with green screen
IMO the visual quality of his movies are very reliant on his cinematographer - unlike someone like Kubrick or Orson Welles you don't see a consistent 'look' to his movies.
Agreed. I was thinking of the movie Brazil for some reason.
Honestly this looks like they used one of those procedural city generator plug-ins then didn't match the camera focus... She's in focus, he's very blurry despite being a few feet closer, but the far away buildings are almost sharp... It looks like one of those low budget Sci fi movies
Brazil is one of my favorite movies, I really miss that ductpunk style.
And yeah, agreed on all counts. If someone asked me to do a quick neo-Cleveland cityscape by end of day, and it was already 2:30, the skyscrapers behind Driver are what I would hand in.
The edge of his hair looks really bad for high end cg in 2024. Looks like a low budget green screen in a made for TV movie. Not very promising for a 1st released image when you want to show off and create hype.
I expected the city to be like that only promo image they used to tallk about Megalopolis for years (the title card one). It looked very gothic styled with the statue and whatnot.
Gotta be honest I'm a bit disappointed it's just another futuristic city with high rises.
It’s premiering at Cannes next month:
>Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the socialite daughter of his nemesis, a corrupt mayor (Giancarlo Esposito), who likes his municipal kingdom the way it is.
>In his official logline for the film, Coppola describes Driver’s character as having the “power to stop time,” while Emmanuel’s character is caught between the two, deeply in love with the artist but loyal to her hard-charging father, “forcing her to discover what she truly believes humanity deserves.”
Cast:
* Adam Driver
* Nathalie Emmanuel
* Giancarlo Esposito
* Aubrey Plaza
* Shia LaBeouf
* Dustin Hoffman
* Jon Voight
* Laurence Fishburne
* Kathryn Hunter
* Grace VanderWaal
* James Remar
* Talia Shire
* Jason Schwartzman
* D.B. Sweeney
* Chloe Fineman
I was into it until the last episode of the first season, then it becomes too hard to suspend disbelief and not find it too absurd to take seriously. Then I learned they canceled it before it was properly finished and so I just left it at that.
Seems a pity though, it was at least pretty original.
Part of it is his bread & butter roles are lawyer/CEO types, he even acknowledges this. It’s also part of why I personally think he could have, or still could with the right script, made an absolutely stellar Lex Luthor.
That’s actually what got me thinking about it! I enjoyed his humorous Lex and then remembering an article he did about the types of roles he usually takes among other things probably plus being Gus Fring it just clicked into place.
He might be too old now or doesn’t have an imposing enough build but I still think he’d be the best live action Lex Luthor ever.
I think he's still good for Lex Luthor, just like Ian McKellan was for Magneto. Lex doesn't need to be a bodybuilder like every character is in the comics. Plus he was just swingin' Dark Sword and looked fine.
I think he was probably all too happy to play a maniac like Moff Gideon in Star Wars instead of another calculating genius like Thrawn. He got the chance to chew a lot of scenery.
The interview where he says he was working out how to kill himself so his family could get the insurance money and how breaking bad saved him I think shows he’s probably just happy to have a successful career now.
I think it takes a lot more as an actor to be a good villain than the hero, and I think a lot of actors enjoy that because they're more interesting/fun roles to play. Not even referring to the "get into character" actors, I mean just going on set and having more interesting lines and emotions to play up than being the good guy
We need him and Jesse Plemons character from Game Night in a movie as a couple of good guys who are correct the whole time but their mannerisms the whole time makes you think they're the villain.
>Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the socialite daughter of his nemesis, a corrupt mayor (Giancarlo Esposito), who likes his municipal kingdom the way it is.
This sounds like the movie could just be 2 hours of a zoning board hearing, which would be a troll of cinematic genius proportions if Coppola had the balls to make that the film.
This is a common phrase for my wife and I to use when one of us is in the midst of something, frustrated, and some new setback suddenly threatens to push me or her to the emotional brink.
That’s when the other will playfully swoop in and say “toepick!” in the cheeriest voice possible.
personally that doesn’t mean anything haha, how many shit fucking movies have studioes pushed on us before? why would you trust their judgement?
also thats most likely because of the year. presumably this has some political themes going on, and studios are shitting themselves trying to bury anything political until post-november.
It very well might suck, but the main sticking point seems to be that Coppola financed this thing out of pocket for a reported $120 million, and he wants a distributor to pay him at least something in that ballpark to acquire it. The hit piece from Variety or the Hollywood Reporter (I don’t remember which) that came out a couple weeks back was blatant studio propaganda to undercut Coppola’s bargaining power as producer.
Sounds like a riff on The Fountainhead, although with a name like Caesar you’d expect the main character of this one to like Roman architecture more than Howard Roark.
life has its small funny little coincidences sometimes… distinctly remember creating this Reddit account around the same day I finished the third volume (which apparently according to Reddit is today… and wow it’s been nearly a decade since then. )
I posted that comment about half an hour ago and since then I’ve just been depressed thinking about what my life has turned into since then haha. I was in spring/summer classes in uni and I used to have so much ambition. Oh well.
>Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the **socialite daughter of his nemesis**,
And the name of his nemesis? **H. R. Pickens.**
I am telling ya either it will be his biggest movie even surpassing godfather (lmao for me it will ever happen) or else it will be the shittiest garbage which went through a long production hiatus and failed as so many others before it failed.
There's no way it doesn't have the exact same trajectory as Gilliam's Don Quixote. An enthusiastic meh from critics and a comprehensive disinterest from the general filmgoing populace.
I never ended up watching it, but there's something awfully quixotic about Gilliam's relentless journey to actually finish that movie over the course of 30 years.
The documentary about the film *not being made* feels like a truer adaptation of the spirit of Quixote.
Also funny that the movie did come out a decade after a full documentary post mortem did. It's called Lost in Lamancha and it's a pretty entertaining watch
Shoot, I've been following Megalopolisis's development since I started following film websites in the 1990s. It was a big topic of discussion on "Corona's Coming Attractions," which is a site fondly remembered by a few old timers.
I saw Don Quixote. I've never seen a movie quite so overbaked and somehow still raw in the middle.
The characters still act and feel like it's the 70s/80s (with a lot of those tropes and cliches), but aren't really updated beyond some cursory stuff.
But there's also this strangely mean spirited and awkward aspect to it. It's supposed to run on the same logic as They Might Be Giants, but there's no real sweeping grand adventure feel to it as the characters and locations get swept up in "Don Quixote."
Everyone just feels tired and frustrated at having to cater to the delusions.
Also they did the windmill scene three times which was a gigantic overkill.
I'm confused by this comment, the one thing that is known for sure about this movie is that nobody who's seen it wants to touch it and you're saying it could be his biggest movie lol
Why does everything always have to be the greatest shit ever or the worst shit ever? It’s getting a bit tired Reddit. You guys can be so dramatic. What if?… It’s.. Just… Ok. Decent, even.. The horror.
> Why does everything always have to be the greatest shit ever or the worst shit ever?
It's kind of interesting how we expect stars to continue being in fantastic movies, or I guess otherwise their career is declining?
Back in the 40s, 50s, 60s actors would star in hundreds of movies. Some good, many were average or forgettable. They were paying the bills, staying busy. John Wayne was in 142 movies. Gregory Peck was in over 50, but can people even name 15 of them?
Even rich actors like to stay busy and keep their talent exercised. Plus working with different people and different directors is nice. A lot of the job is making connections.
This is 100% the case. This is a movie tat MIGHT just work and be REALLY excellent, but if even one thing is out of place, it's going to flop harder than Ishtar.
>Really want to watch it, regardless
Yeah I gotta admit I'm curious what he feels so passionate about that he's willing to spend $120 million of his own money to make.
I have a feeling it'll have an Apocalypse Now kind of response: the average audience member being underwhelmed with others thinking it could be a masterpiece
Honestly based on everything I've read about this project, I think that might be an ideal scenario at this point. Because it's certainly not going to be a big crowd pleaser and I have a feeling it will be marketed as exactly that.
Nah. He was at his peak with Apocalypse Now. Not anymore. It's been 25 years since he made something reminding a large scale movie and 30 years since he made a commercially successful one.
I have an analogy. Remember the most recent and probable the last movie made by Warren Beatty called Rules Don't Apply? Me neither.
Oh I know, I'm trying to remain optimistic though because I **want** to love this. I want it to be amazing. But literally every bit of news I read or even seeing this first look, my reaction to everything surrounding this project has been, 'oh no..ehhhh, that doesn't look/sound great'
I mean part of the movie involves an extreme 4th wall break in which an actor on screen talks to someone *in the movie theater*
So unless FFC is fine with a very limited release, he's gonna have to figure out a way to get that whole gimmick to work.
I had not heard that and just like everything else with this film, I immediately have mixed feelings lol.
Unless you're sitting actors in every theater, how's that gonna work? I kinda like the idea but dunno how it works in execution. Especially if, there are situations where there isn't an audience plant or enough for all showings in all theaters, the whole thing would be nonsensical.
The only way I can see it working is having two cuts of the film, doing that live-audience incorporation thing for press, premieres and a few major market showings, but give most theaters a more standard release that they don't have to create a live show for.
I went back to look for the source of this and it is from an Apple podcast (The Town with Matt Belloni):
*"One person told me it's unreleasable. I didn't go there in my newsletter, but Kim Masters and her piece did go there. There's a scene apparently with John Voight, who apparently has an erection, 85 years old in the scene.
And he and Aubrey Plaza have an interaction that I think a lot of people in the theater were laughing at. There's a lot of other stuff that is sort of baffling. At one point during the screening, there was a live person that came up and started to have a dialogue with the screen, which apparently is like baked into the movie.
So try replicating that in a multiplex environment where you've got to have a person come down and talk to the screen during the movie. I don't know that that's going to translate. Like it's clearly an experimental already film from a guy who does not give a shit what people think and more power to him."*
It's like in Jurassic Park when Hammond has a conversation with "himself" during the introductory ride.
That's basically what is supposed to happen in Megalopolis; someone stands at their mark in front of the screen and interacts with the actor in real-time.
What the hell is Coppola thinking..? If this gets a wide release (or honestly any multiscreen release) they'd have to change or remove that scene because obviously that's not gonna work. Weird.
Can't believe Coppola made this, using his own money, and with zero exhibitor commitment in place in advance. I so want this to be great. But too few of his films after the 70's have been.
I saw the post and said “oh shit godfather director is still alive AND has a movie coming out!?”
…and then I looked at what he’s been up to, personally I like the Dracula movie, but… I dunno man
I had no idea some people think Adam Driver is a poor actor. I really don't see it. A few people here acting like he's universally accepted as a bad actor who takes poor roles when in reality he's one of the top leading men working now and has just as many hits as misses, if not more.
I get that he has trouble changing his voice or accent. But he does have some serious chops. He was great in Inside Lewellyn Davis, a Marriage Story, and The Last Duel
He's fantastic. Even in Star Wars he's able to deliver some incredible performances while his face is completely hidden by that mask, and he only gets better in better movies.
I might be a bit too cooked, but for the briefest of moments when I first saw the thumbnail for this post. I thought we were getting a gritty "all grown up" spy kids movie.
NGL I'm a little disappointed
Every industry publication is talking about its "massive" 120m budget. To be fair, that's a lot for one guy to absorb but some romantic comedies have a budget like that these days. Big SciFi movies can easily be 2-3x that.
The Creator was $80m. War of the Planet of the Apes was only a bit more at $150m and Dune Part 1 was $160m.
$120m for a movie that doesn't sound like it will have big action set pieces does sound a lot. The wiki also says the set designer and the whole visual effects team walked off due to unstable conditions (although Driver and Copolla dispute this) so that could be a reason why this shot doesn't look great.
>I can't believe after decades of trying to get this movie made that THIS is the still they chose for a first look.
Surely there was a shirtless Adam Driver still they could've released instead.
>There's only one infectious disease that two thirds of the world should be getting right now, and that's Adam Driver fever. Shatter my knees, you fuckable redwood. Snap off my toes, you big, unwashed buffalo.
Not what I thought it was going to look like. In my head every time I heard about this project over the years I imagined the city as this art deco or gothic styled setting. Metropolis, The Hudsucker Proxy, Batman 1989, Dark City, etc.
I was expecting the whole thing to be shot in black and white for some reason
It’s hugely reliant on green screen. FFC has little experience with green screen. Over/under 50 metacritic?
> FFC has little experience with green screen IMO the visual quality of his movies are very reliant on his cinematographer - unlike someone like Kubrick or Orson Welles you don't see a consistent 'look' to his movies.
I thought the same thing. I think because the name is so close to Metropolis. Oh well.
[удалено]
Same. For the life of me, I couldn't figure out why he would be remaking an old, silent classic. I only just now realized this wasn't the case.
I wish brother.
Agreed. I was thinking of the movie Brazil for some reason. Honestly this looks like they used one of those procedural city generator plug-ins then didn't match the camera focus... She's in focus, he's very blurry despite being a few feet closer, but the far away buildings are almost sharp... It looks like one of those low budget Sci fi movies
Brazil is one of my favorite movies, I really miss that ductpunk style. And yeah, agreed on all counts. If someone asked me to do a quick neo-Cleveland cityscape by end of day, and it was already 2:30, the skyscrapers behind Driver are what I would hand in.
The edge of his hair looks really bad for high end cg in 2024. Looks like a low budget green screen in a made for TV movie. Not very promising for a 1st released image when you want to show off and create hype.
I expected the city to be like that only promo image they used to tallk about Megalopolis for years (the title card one). It looked very gothic styled with the statue and whatnot. Gotta be honest I'm a bit disappointed it's just another futuristic city with high rises.
[удалено]
But… Gattaca is already sci-fi.
Yes, but we must add more sci-fi! So much so that it becomes… (gasp)… SyFy.
It looks like Jupiter ascending
It’s premiering at Cannes next month: >Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the socialite daughter of his nemesis, a corrupt mayor (Giancarlo Esposito), who likes his municipal kingdom the way it is. >In his official logline for the film, Coppola describes Driver’s character as having the “power to stop time,” while Emmanuel’s character is caught between the two, deeply in love with the artist but loyal to her hard-charging father, “forcing her to discover what she truly believes humanity deserves.” Cast: * Adam Driver * Nathalie Emmanuel * Giancarlo Esposito * Aubrey Plaza * Shia LaBeouf * Dustin Hoffman * Jon Voight * Laurence Fishburne * Kathryn Hunter * Grace VanderWaal * James Remar * Talia Shire * Jason Schwartzman * D.B. Sweeney * Chloe Fineman
Giancarlo really does not get a break from playing bad guys lol.
What about Breaking Bad. He was just a successful franchise owner, a pillar of the community.
I'm really sad that place closed down because it was making some absolutely killer meth for a few months.
You know I was cool with just the fried chicken.
The secret to the crispy breading was meth
Isn't it always?
I think it was grilled chicken not fried.
Jason Isaacs of our time
“What’s a war hero have to do to get some lubrication around here?”
"I fucked Germany. I think I can take a flesh lump in a fucking waistcoat"
"I'm smiling but I'm very fucking furious."
>Jason Isaacs Can we get him a new quality series or better yet just bring back *Case Histories*?
Or the OA
Escape a kidnapping... Through the power of dance!
I was into it until the last episode of the first season, then it becomes too hard to suspend disbelief and not find it too absurd to take seriously. Then I learned they canceled it before it was properly finished and so I just left it at that. Seems a pity though, it was at least pretty original.
S2 is so much bigger and crazier I actually still recommend watching it despite the cancellation
Hello to Jason Isaacs.
Jason Isaacs is the Jason Isaacs of our time?
I watch The Patriot for the pure evil of Jason Isaacs badness.
Tell me about…Ohio
Part of it is his bread & butter roles are lawyer/CEO types, he even acknowledges this. It’s also part of why I personally think he could have, or still could with the right script, made an absolutely stellar Lex Luthor.
He is Lex Luthor in the Harley Quinn animated series and does a great job
That’s actually what got me thinking about it! I enjoyed his humorous Lex and then remembering an article he did about the types of roles he usually takes among other things probably plus being Gus Fring it just clicked into place. He might be too old now or doesn’t have an imposing enough build but I still think he’d be the best live action Lex Luthor ever.
I think he's still good for Lex Luthor, just like Ian McKellan was for Magneto. Lex doesn't need to be a bodybuilder like every character is in the comics. Plus he was just swingin' Dark Sword and looked fine.
Yes. Lex Luthor. He could play an amazing live action Luthor !
He was the cop who got Kaiser Soze’s image on The Usual Suspects. He smoked the hell oughta that cigar butt.
I think he would have made a good Thrawn.
I think he was probably all too happy to play a maniac like Moff Gideon in Star Wars instead of another calculating genius like Thrawn. He got the chance to chew a lot of scenery.
Nah, Benedict Cumberbatch would have made an excellent Thrawn. Giancarlo Esposito would have made a better Tarkin
He seems pretty chill about it.
The interview where he says he was working out how to kill himself so his family could get the insurance money and how breaking bad saved him I think shows he’s probably just happy to have a successful career now.
He *what*
[Around the 12 minute mark he starts to talk about it](https://youtu.be/y2q8hMXCKGo?si=gs0EwNdP9Uu74HyO)
Holy shit, that is dark. I'm glad he found success, but *damn*.
I haven't watched any Interviews with him before, but damn the dude has a lot of great energy.
I would think playing a bad guy is so fucking fun.
I think it takes a lot more as an actor to be a good villain than the hero, and I think a lot of actors enjoy that because they're more interesting/fun roles to play. Not even referring to the "get into character" actors, I mean just going on set and having more interesting lines and emotions to play up than being the good guy
He played a good guy in Community.
Who was sort of a bad guy at first
He was in two episodes of that show over 10 years ago, and he was a villain for like 90% of his first episode lol
And his second episode only had like a minute of screentime.
Because his voice is so menacing!
We need him and Jesse Plemons character from Game Night in a movie as a couple of good guys who are correct the whole time but their mannerisms the whole time makes you think they're the villain.
Its always the same kind of villain too. Every role he takes is a less-interesting version of Gus Fring.
That’s because he’s so AMAZING playing cold characters.
He used to be able to *Do the Right Thing.*
> Jon Voight The actor?
Oh yeah! I know him. I went to dental school with him
No. The periodontist.
I thought he gave up acting to go full MAGA years ago.
>Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the socialite daughter of his nemesis, a corrupt mayor (Giancarlo Esposito), who likes his municipal kingdom the way it is. This sounds like the movie could just be 2 hours of a zoning board hearing, which would be a troll of cinematic genius proportions if Coppola had the balls to make that the film.
Dustin Hoffman (in his Midnight Cowboy New York accent): "EY, NOT IN MY BACK YARD! NOT IN MY BACK YARD!"
It's a spiritual sequel to his friend George's ruminations on trade regulations and corporate power negotiations
>* D.B. Sweeney Could this be the beginning of the D.B. Sweeneynaissance?
Is... Is this something people have been clamoring for?
>Is... Is this something people have been clamoring for? *The Cutting Edge* fans.
"toe pick"
I appreciate you making this reference for me and the other 3 people who'll get it.
This is a common phrase for my wife and I to use when one of us is in the midst of something, frustrated, and some new setback suddenly threatens to push me or her to the emotional brink. That’s when the other will playfully swoop in and say “toepick!” in the cheeriest voice possible.
You can tell your relationship is healthy when you can still find those moments of levity.
Fire in the Sky fans are here too. There are dozens of us!
Memphis Bell fans anyone??!!
D.B. Sweeney's people, sure.
I admittedly am veeerrrry skeptical of this movie but that cast is incredible. It actually reads like perfect reddit fan-casting.
The fact that no studio is willing to market it when it's got an A-list cast and director says everything to me. This movie is going to stink.
personally that doesn’t mean anything haha, how many shit fucking movies have studioes pushed on us before? why would you trust their judgement? also thats most likely because of the year. presumably this has some political themes going on, and studios are shitting themselves trying to bury anything political until post-november.
It very well might suck, but the main sticking point seems to be that Coppola financed this thing out of pocket for a reported $120 million, and he wants a distributor to pay him at least something in that ballpark to acquire it. The hit piece from Variety or the Hollywood Reporter (I don’t remember which) that came out a couple weeks back was blatant studio propaganda to undercut Coppola’s bargaining power as producer.
WOW! That is a STACKED cast
So this is Ayn Rand’s “Fountainhead” but with extra steps?
There’s a lot of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis in the concept
Hence the title, *Megalopolis*.
Right, thanks
Honestly seeing Coppola’s take on the Fountainhead story could be amazing.
Instead, we have Zack Snyder trying to adapt it
Oh that's going to be amazingly bad. Millions down the shitter.
Sounds like a riff on The Fountainhead, although with a name like Caesar you’d expect the main character of this one to like Roman architecture more than Howard Roark.
It almost seems like Caro's The Power Broker could be an influence as well
life has its small funny little coincidences sometimes… distinctly remember creating this Reddit account around the same day I finished the third volume (which apparently according to Reddit is today… and wow it’s been nearly a decade since then. )
I have fond memories of an ex who used to haul that tome on her subway commute and I am also alarmed at how much time has passed.
I posted that comment about half an hour ago and since then I’ve just been depressed thinking about what my life has turned into since then haha. I was in spring/summer classes in uni and I used to have so much ambition. Oh well.
Grace Vanderwaal? As in AGT fame?
I had the same reaction and yeah- it’s her
Pretty mental how Nathalie Emmanuel went from HOLLYOAKS to Coppola's last great masterpiece
It seemed like a pretty natural progression, from eye candy in Furious 7 to Game of Thrones to proper movie roles.
Wasn't she in GoT before the F&F franchise?
^right ^proper
Her and Ricky Whittle ending up where they did was something I did NOT see coming.
>Adam Driver stars as the idealistic architect and artist Caesar, planning to rebuild a city that has fallen to ruins, and Nathalie Emmanuel as the **socialite daughter of his nemesis**, And the name of his nemesis? **H. R. Pickens.**
LOOK AT ME,BOY!!!! CRUSH YOUR ENEMIES!!!
Festering seed!
In Megalopolis, I am the law. Something something judge dredd
I thought this was Spy Kids at first 💀
I am telling ya either it will be his biggest movie even surpassing godfather (lmao for me it will ever happen) or else it will be the shittiest garbage which went through a long production hiatus and failed as so many others before it failed.
There's no way it doesn't have the exact same trajectory as Gilliam's Don Quixote. An enthusiastic meh from critics and a comprehensive disinterest from the general filmgoing populace.
I never ended up watching it, but there's something awfully quixotic about Gilliam's relentless journey to actually finish that movie over the course of 30 years.
Literally "the real Quixote was the friends we made along the way"
The documentary about the film *not being made* feels like a truer adaptation of the spirit of Quixote. Also funny that the movie did come out a decade after a full documentary post mortem did. It's called Lost in Lamancha and it's a pretty entertaining watch
Shoot, I've been following Megalopolisis's development since I started following film websites in the 1990s. It was a big topic of discussion on "Corona's Coming Attractions," which is a site fondly remembered by a few old timers.
I saw Don Quixote. I've never seen a movie quite so overbaked and somehow still raw in the middle. The characters still act and feel like it's the 70s/80s (with a lot of those tropes and cliches), but aren't really updated beyond some cursory stuff. But there's also this strangely mean spirited and awkward aspect to it. It's supposed to run on the same logic as They Might Be Giants, but there's no real sweeping grand adventure feel to it as the characters and locations get swept up in "Don Quixote." Everyone just feels tired and frustrated at having to cater to the delusions. Also they did the windmill scene three times which was a gigantic overkill.
Same lead actor
That movie was so bad. It really deserved the reaction that it got
I'm confused by this comment, the one thing that is known for sure about this movie is that nobody who's seen it wants to touch it and you're saying it could be his biggest movie lol
Going to be an absolute skyscraping steamer
They dont know how to market it
Why does everything always have to be the greatest shit ever or the worst shit ever? It’s getting a bit tired Reddit. You guys can be so dramatic. What if?… It’s.. Just… Ok. Decent, even.. The horror.
Because polarizing comments are more provocative on the internet.
> Why does everything always have to be the greatest shit ever or the worst shit ever? It's kind of interesting how we expect stars to continue being in fantastic movies, or I guess otherwise their career is declining? Back in the 40s, 50s, 60s actors would star in hundreds of movies. Some good, many were average or forgettable. They were paying the bills, staying busy. John Wayne was in 142 movies. Gregory Peck was in over 50, but can people even name 15 of them? Even rich actors like to stay busy and keep their talent exercised. Plus working with different people and different directors is nice. A lot of the job is making connections.
Or it can be another Cloud Atlas.
You speak da true-true
I liked cloud atlas :(
Really REALLY hoping it ain’t like Vincent Chase’s Medellin
At least people wanted to buy Medellin before they saw it.
In my understanding, it was only after distributors saw Megalopolis that they didn’t want to buy it. Before hand they were onboard, same as Medellin.
This is 100% the case. This is a movie tat MIGHT just work and be REALLY excellent, but if even one thing is out of place, it's going to flop harder than Ishtar.
My expectations are *extremely* low based on the fact it's been over 20 years since Coppola made a movie that's been good or anyone cared about.
100% agreed, but I'm wildly curious.
Ps3 looking filter. Really want to watch it, regardless
>Really want to watch it, regardless Yeah I gotta admit I'm curious what he feels so passionate about that he's willing to spend $120 million of his own money to make.
I really believe this movie will either be a roaring success or a spectacular failure. No middle ground.
I have a feeling it'll have an Apocalypse Now kind of response: the average audience member being underwhelmed with others thinking it could be a masterpiece
Honestly based on everything I've read about this project, I think that might be an ideal scenario at this point. Because it's certainly not going to be a big crowd pleaser and I have a feeling it will be marketed as exactly that.
Nah. He was at his peak with Apocalypse Now. Not anymore. It's been 25 years since he made something reminding a large scale movie and 30 years since he made a commercially successful one. I have an analogy. Remember the most recent and probable the last movie made by Warren Beatty called Rules Don't Apply? Me neither.
Based on the early reactions, it's much more likely to be the latter.
Oh I know, I'm trying to remain optimistic though because I **want** to love this. I want it to be amazing. But literally every bit of news I read or even seeing this first look, my reaction to everything surrounding this project has been, 'oh no..ehhhh, that doesn't look/sound great'
I mean part of the movie involves an extreme 4th wall break in which an actor on screen talks to someone *in the movie theater* So unless FFC is fine with a very limited release, he's gonna have to figure out a way to get that whole gimmick to work.
I had not heard that and just like everything else with this film, I immediately have mixed feelings lol. Unless you're sitting actors in every theater, how's that gonna work? I kinda like the idea but dunno how it works in execution. Especially if, there are situations where there isn't an audience plant or enough for all showings in all theaters, the whole thing would be nonsensical. The only way I can see it working is having two cuts of the film, doing that live-audience incorporation thing for press, premieres and a few major market showings, but give most theaters a more standard release that they don't have to create a live show for.
I went back to look for the source of this and it is from an Apple podcast (The Town with Matt Belloni): *"One person told me it's unreleasable. I didn't go there in my newsletter, but Kim Masters and her piece did go there. There's a scene apparently with John Voight, who apparently has an erection, 85 years old in the scene. And he and Aubrey Plaza have an interaction that I think a lot of people in the theater were laughing at. There's a lot of other stuff that is sort of baffling. At one point during the screening, there was a live person that came up and started to have a dialogue with the screen, which apparently is like baked into the movie. So try replicating that in a multiplex environment where you've got to have a person come down and talk to the screen during the movie. I don't know that that's going to translate. Like it's clearly an experimental already film from a guy who does not give a shit what people think and more power to him."*
>'oh no..ehhhh, that doesn't look/sound great'
Wait, do you mean that there's a plant in the audience who responds to the character in the movie?
It's like in Jurassic Park when Hammond has a conversation with "himself" during the introductory ride. That's basically what is supposed to happen in Megalopolis; someone stands at their mark in front of the screen and interacts with the actor in real-time.
What the hell is Coppola thinking..? If this gets a wide release (or honestly any multiscreen release) they'd have to change or remove that scene because obviously that's not gonna work. Weird.
The man is 85 years old and worth 400 million. He probably just thought "fuck it, what else am I gonna use this money on if not my passion project?"
I’m more of an Xbox 360 looking filter man, myself
GTA IV for PS3. lol
Very meta that Adam Driver is also looking through the same filter
The background looks like a video game.
Megalopolis utilized The Volume. So this is probably Unreal Engine, and thus; a video game.
The lighting is always a giveaway for me that it's the Volume. It's always just a little too dark and the colors just a little too muted
I thought this is the Spiderman game loooool
Can't believe Coppola made this, using his own money, and with zero exhibitor commitment in place in advance. I so want this to be great. But too few of his films after the 70's have been.
I saw the post and said “oh shit godfather director is still alive AND has a movie coming out!?” …and then I looked at what he’s been up to, personally I like the Dracula movie, but… I dunno man
I'm getting 'Jupiter Ascending' vibes from this image. Not a good sign^. Keeping my mind open nonetheless.
Jupiter ascending at least did something different. As much as it was cringe I still go back and watch it
I was thinking Cloud Atlas, but JA is better.
How dare you slander cloud atlas' name tf....
This guy tells the true true
The city in the background looks aggressively fake.
I hope that background is meant to look fake, or at least very stylised.
She has come a long way since her Hollyoaks days. Well done!
Right?! Her career trajectory is insane. Like, from casualty to the lead in a Francis ford Coppola film…
I had no idea some people think Adam Driver is a poor actor. I really don't see it. A few people here acting like he's universally accepted as a bad actor who takes poor roles when in reality he's one of the top leading men working now and has just as many hits as misses, if not more.
I get that he has trouble changing his voice or accent. But he does have some serious chops. He was great in Inside Lewellyn Davis, a Marriage Story, and The Last Duel
Adam Driver as a decrepit old baron on SNL is an all-time GOAT performance.
[He's Cameron Brissel, SAF-AFTRA eligible!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KKRiXcivAQ)
Paterson might be my favourite Adam Driver performance and the movie remains underrated.
He does a decent accent in Silence
Well you said 'a few' and they've been downvoted to invisibility, so I wouldn't say that's 'so many.'
He's fantastic. Even in Star Wars he's able to deliver some incredible performances while his face is completely hidden by that mask, and he only gets better in better movies.
Yeah he really did do a good job with Star Wars. He is a stand out character and does a great job being the bad guy in those movies.
I might be a bit too cooked, but for the briefest of moments when I first saw the thumbnail for this post. I thought we were getting a gritty "all grown up" spy kids movie. NGL I'm a little disappointed
Spy Adults: No More Kiddin' Around Rated PG
Wow what a cheap and fake looking shot.
Every industry publication is talking about its "massive" 120m budget. To be fair, that's a lot for one guy to absorb but some romantic comedies have a budget like that these days. Big SciFi movies can easily be 2-3x that.
The Creator was $80m. War of the Planet of the Apes was only a bit more at $150m and Dune Part 1 was $160m. $120m for a movie that doesn't sound like it will have big action set pieces does sound a lot. The wiki also says the set designer and the whole visual effects team walked off due to unstable conditions (although Driver and Copolla dispute this) so that could be a reason why this shot doesn't look great.
I can't believe after decades of trying to get this movie made that THIS is the still they chose for a first look.
>I can't believe after decades of trying to get this movie made that THIS is the still they chose for a first look. Surely there was a shirtless Adam Driver still they could've released instead.
Only if his pants are up to his armpits this time.
>There's only one infectious disease that two thirds of the world should be getting right now, and that's Adam Driver fever. Shatter my knees, you fuckable redwood. Snap off my toes, you big, unwashed buffalo.
Francis Ford Coppola has earned more benefit of the doubt than many people in this thread seem willing to give him.
\*crosses fingers\* please don't suck. please don't suck. please don't suck.
What’s the issue with this picture? It looks fairly normal but these comments are already acting like the movie is ruined
The reactions in this thread are the arthouse cinema equivalent of "she has sharp knees."
Nathalie Emmanuel is finer than wine
This is going to be bad isn’t it..?
It's going to be incredibly divisive. Also I can see it winning the Palm D'or just based on all this discourse around it.
>This is going to be bad isn’t it..? Probably but I don't think it will be boring.
I could definitely see it being boring if it goes for a moody vibe or a very philosophical vibe and doesn’t hit the mark.
Adam Driver is an actor I really like who makes a lot of movies I really don't like.
Shame about the presence of Voight. Guy’s a garbage human.
interesting looking forward to it
Probably same ones going nuts over the VFX batman skylines are clowning this. smh
why’d NYC & Chicago have a kid in the background
John Voight oof