REAL STEEL Clip-Show Knockout!

jackie-chan
Contributor; Toronto
Sign-In to Vote
REAL STEEL Clip-Show Knockout!
The second I saw Hugh Jackman shadow-boxing on a lawn in sublime synchronicity with a giant robot in the Real Steel trailer I knew that this would be something special. And when I saw Jackman leap into a ring-side sucker-punch at the end of that trailer, his underdog robot gracefully imitating him like a ballerina out of a Michael Bay film, I trembled at the cinematic purity of the image - harmony between a digital and physical subject. In those two shots, Shawn "Night at the Museum" Levy has made motion-capture more fascinating and quietly beautiful than anything Robert Zemeckis has ever breathed on. If the rest of the film were terrible (and it isn't according to early reviews, its apparently great!), I would still stand by that statement.

Maybe its just the Robot Jox fanboy in me...

Oh yeah! Dreamworks has released some clips of Real Steel on Youtube. Get excited along with me.
Sign-In to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.
godsaremonstersSeptember 30, 2011 8:24 AM

I have to say I'm genuinely surprised. I haven't read anybody's opinion that this movie in any way looked good to them. I'm not trying to poop on your excitement. Like I said, this is honestly the first positive posting I've seen for what looks like to me and many of the sites I keep up with, a completely silly mess.

joefoolioSeptember 30, 2011 11:42 AM

I would be inclined to agree with "godsaremonsters" this movie looks like a hot mess. Seriously, there is a young child that gets the help of a washed up fighter, it doesn't get anymore cliched than that.

I could care less what early reviews say, the movie has already failed (imo) based on the trailers but that is irrelevant since obviously it will rake it in at the box office cause people like crap.

godsaremonstersSeptember 30, 2011 12:13 PM

I didn't say nobody would or should like this. Just that a lot of what I'd been hearing was negative. I also didn't say that you shouldn't be excited for the film. For me it looks like a silly melodramatic manga come to life. If the trailer and press materials spoke to you, great. Mozel tov. I hope its everything you want it to be. For me It falls in the category of "Gamer". I don't care if got a couple good reviews. Life is to short to watch something that looks as monumentally lame that.

godsaremonstersSeptember 30, 2011 12:20 PM

I should mention one of the big problems I have with the premise of this movie is that I find it hard to believe that all but the most invested viewers are going to be able to muster any emotional involvement with people fighting through clunky robotic avatars. It wouldn't appear that the robot is in anyway autonomous. Lacking any personality of its own it would seem like it would be hard for the audience to view it as any sort of character. So it becomes kind of a strange abstraction when "rooting" for it/Hugh Jackman to win. At least in my mind anyways.

Peter K.September 30, 2011 12:24 PM

Life's probably too short to watch movies period.

BTW, Gamer is brilliant.

https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawmesjr2OApP8DevO2X1NrPaUFNwYKKMQFgSeptember 30, 2011 2:15 PM

Well, the premise is from a short story by Richard Matheson called "Steel" which was also made into a Twilight Zone episode. Since I enjoyed that I am excited to see this update.

godsaremonstersOctober 3, 2011 7:55 AM

I would have preferred something closer to a real discussion, but your glibness works too.

godsaremonstersOctober 3, 2011 8:04 AM

I not concerned where the premise came from. Or how this premise has previously been used. I think its great your excited for this "update". My concern to paraphrase what I've previously stated is: It seems hard to get invested in a film about 2 palookas play fighting on either side of fighting ring while lifeless, personalty-less constructs act our their pantomimes.

https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawmesjr2OApP8DevO2X1NrPaUFNwYKKMQFgOctober 4, 2011 9:46 AM

It's quite obvious from the trailers that there's more to this story than your miopic view there. But hey, ignorance is bliss!

Peter K.October 4, 2011 1:21 PM

Well, seeing as I haven't seen the film yet, there's not much more to add. I'm up for a convo once I've seen it, of course then you will have not seen it... Hmm...

Hey what do you know, another rave!? http://www.aintitcool.com/node/51468

(I'm honestly surprised that the press has been this positive. I was expecting something a lot shallower with mere moments of fun.)

godsaremonstersOctober 6, 2011 8:05 AM

You seem defensive. I would hope the fact that I have been attacking the premise of this movie hasn't been taken as attack on you bacause your excieted for it. That being said here is a good review:

http://twitchfilm.com/reviews/2011/10/real-steel-review.php

This author seems able to look at the film with adult eyes, and not let himself be blinded by childish contrived nostalgia for a movie that seems like something they may have liked as a child.(see, that time I was attacking you. see the difference?)

Peter K.October 6, 2011 1:46 PM

I wouldn't chalk up bowing out of discussing a film neither of us have seen as defensive.

That was a pretty good review though, definitely more in line with my initial expectations of a shallowish story complimented with some stellar effects work (which was the initial draw to this film for me).

I don't quite understand what your "attack" is implying. That its childish to respond to this film's trailer by observing the unique use of motion-capture as both a diegetic and non-diegetic tool and appreciating its simple kinetic beauty? I'm fully prepared to engage with the film as an "adult" (whatever that means), but am definitely not prepared to avoid appreciating the film on a more juvenile level and have no idea why think they should be mutually exclusive.

You're one of those folks that hate Speed Racer, aren't you...

godsaremonstersOctober 6, 2011 6:07 PM

As I said, that was "one" of my problems with the premise. Hardly "myopic".

godsaremonstersOctober 6, 2011 6:08 PM

One of the many yes.

Peter K.October 6, 2011 6:35 PM

:) I like that you threw in "many" as if that means something. The same "many" that dismissed Blade Runner?

Well, now knowing that you don't like Speed Racer, I can completely understand where you are coming from now and why you are correct in your decision to stay far away from films like this.

In fact, I am now puzzled why you have been entertaining this conversation for so long.

Peter K.January 11, 2012 5:18 PM