Since last post: 3793 days Last activity: 2891 days
#1 Posted on 9.2.05 2301.27 Reposted on: 9.2.12 2304.17
There was a free advanced screening on campus tonight, so I decided to check it out to see if it was worth much... needless to say, even my low expectations for this movie weren't matches. A bland, cliche movie with some godawful dialogue and acting from Keanu Reeves... the only bright spot was the performance of Rachel Weisz, who provided a pretty good performance as a police detective who aligns with Constantine in order to find out what the cause of her sister's death was. Some nice visual effects too, I guess... but still, it just didn't captivate me at all.
Since last post: 2342 days Last activity: 2276 days
#3 Posted on 12.2.05 1142.22 Reposted on: 12.2.12 1143.15
I dunno. Not to discount your opinion, but I've heard a ton of good stuff from others who've seen the film. Not at the level of "this film is AWESOME OMG" but certainly enough to warrent a watch. From the sounds of it it's certainly not the total bungle that everyone had labelled it in pre-prod.
#4 Posted on 12.2.05 1323.00 Reposted on: 12.2.12 1324.38
Thing with Keanu is, for the most part he's either really good in a film (The Gift, Rivers Edge, first Matrix) or really bad (Point Break, Chain Reaction, Matrix 2 and 3). Seems to be no in between. I know a few people in my Humanities class a few years ago that were into the Constantine stories (we also had to read one for an assignment) and I can just picture their reactions when they first heard Reeves was playing Constantine.
Since last post: 2368 days Last activity: 2100 days
#5 Posted on 12.2.05 1429.14 Reposted on: 12.2.12 1429.14
Keanu Reeves as John Constantine is one of the most uninspired casting decisions in the history of cinema. Even if they just HAD to make an American Constantine, Nicholas Cage who was originally attached to the role would've been a better choice since he could better capture Constantine's personality.
I've seen clips for the movie and Reeves is totally not convincing in the role at all. He's just NOT Constantine.
#7 Posted on 12.2.05 2217.45 Reposted on: 12.2.12 2218.17
Originally posted by MoeGatesI also don't understand why they didn't just call the movie "Hellblazer," which is a much cooler name and does a lot better job of converying the type of movie it is (I think). Royaly issues?
Execs thought that the title would confuse folks into thinking it's another installment of the Hellraiser horror series.
Since last post: 3311 days Last activity: 2682 days
#8 Posted on 12.2.05 2218.31 Reposted on: 12.2.12 2219.38
Perhaps it's because Hellboy came out last year, and it did well in theaters. Also, to the careless viewer, they might seem similar. "Supernatural thriller/adventure that features Hell in some way?" I don't know: that seems about the quickest explanation.
Another might be that by calling it "Constantine," they brand the movie as being about Keanu's character almost exclusively. So if it did really well in theaters, they could bring him back and almost nothing/nobody else. Other actors can be kicked to the door and themes reworked because it's about "Constantine" alone.
#9 Posted on 13.2.05 1539.18 Reposted on: 13.2.12 1558.58
Going back to a topic in my last post in this thread, the book I read in that class was "The Books of Magic, Vol I-IV" by Neil Gaiman. The main character is Timothy Hunter (12 yr. old boy who looks like Harry Potter on a skateboard, although I believe these books came out before the Harry Potter series). John Constantine was in this story as was "The Stranger", "Dr. Occult", and "Mister E". The 4 of them introduced Timothy to magic, as he was supposed to become a powerful force in the world of magic as an adult. I thought it was a pretty good read.
#10 Posted on 13.2.05 2317.19 Reposted on: 13.2.12 2318.21
Originally posted by Internet Movie DatabaseAlthough the movie Constantine is based on the comic book Hellblazer, the movie title was changed because it was too similar to Hellraiser. The comic book itself was actually meant to be called Hellraiser, but Clive Barker came up with the title first.
#12 Posted on 16.2.05 0732.44 Reposted on: 16.2.12 0737.46
My question is, because it's obvious that the film has between little and nothing to do with the book, might someone like Constantine if they weren't real attached to Hellblazer? I've read a couple of the comics and never really got into them.
Since last post: 2368 days Last activity: 2100 days
#13 Posted on 16.2.05 1029.15 Reposted on: 16.2.12 1030.45
Its possible, the movie has a really cool, visceral atmosphere and setting, very film noir. There are some interesting characters.
However, the plot is really lame, convoluted, contrived, and confusing. There are dumb action scenes that really serve no purpose other than that they needed dumb action scenes, and the antagonists are pretty boring. The plot revolves around using the Spear of Destiny to birth the son of Satan on the earth? Huh? How is that supposed to work?
Most of all Keanu is not convincing in the role at all, and he has to spout a lot of expository crap that really just sounded ridiculous.