Olympus Has Fallen trailer (Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart, Ashley Judd)

[marillion]

ryan123450 wrote:

---

It's interesting how movies always come out in twos.

I'm thinking "threes"... Gotta bet that Asylum Pictures will be putting out a knockoff picture starying C. Thomas Howell as the President and Ernie Hudson in the Speaker's role.

Coming Soon - "The White House has Fallen Down"....

[Garak]

I thought it would be total shit but that trailer actually surprised me. Not saying I'd pay to go see it, but it might be worth a watch somewhere down the road.

[Aragorn]

marillion wrote:

---

I'm thinking "threes"... Gotta bet that Asylum Pictures will be putting out a knockoff picture starying C. Thomas Howell as the President and Ernie Hudson in the Speaker's role.

Coming Soon - "The White House has Fallen Down"....

I'm surprised they didn't get C. Thomas Howell to be in their Hitcher knockoff. That would've taken it to a whole new level.

There's actually nothing listed on their website to ride the coattails of White House Down and Olympus Has Fallen. Their next ripoff is of Jack the Giant Slayer.

[Data Holmes]

Aragorn wrote:

---

I'm surprised they didn't get C. Thomas Howell to be in their Hitcher knockoff. That would've taken it to a whole new level.

There's actually nothing listed on their website to ride the coattails of White House Down and Olympus Has Fallen. Their next ripoff is of Jack the Giant Slayer.

Give them two weeks. And, I'm not kidding. I read once that they only need four to six weeks to go from "concept" to finished product pressed and shipped.

[JRS]

Could be fun action film
I have to say that I have thing for movies about the President of US and Secret Service, so this will be something I want to see.
Plus it has Freeman, Mitchell and Judd also
I do not mind Butler myself and the cast in this seems somewhat more interesting than in the other one mentioned.

[Captaindemotion]

^Just about, though. Tatum Channing and Gerard Butler are equally bland leads. WHD has got Jamie Foxx as the POTUS, James Woods, Maggie Gyllenhall, Richard Jenkins, Lance Reddick, Garcelle Beauvais and Jason Clarke (Zero Dark Thirty).

Mind you, I still think that that silly-but-fun White House storyline in S7 of 24 is likely to have been mnore entertaining than both these movies put together.

[CorporalClegg]

Forbin wrote:

---

There's gotta be some corporate espionage or something going on when that happens.

Ghost/Always
Deep Impact/Armageddon
Friends with Benefits/No strings Attached
Etc/etc...

It happens all the time, and studios don't even try to be surreptitious about it.

Essentially what happens is: writer has is script and makes his pitch to the studios. They all take notes during the pitch. If more than one studio likes it, then, instead of getting into a bidding war, one will just pass the notes off to a staff writer.

Oh. And film looks terrible.

[Professor Zoom]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

^But wasn't Air Force One Die Hard on, er, Air Force One?!

Yeah. Sure. But at least Air Force One felt like an interesting take on the Die Hard On A... This is taking one that's already been done.

[Captaindemotion]

^True, making the POTUS himself the action hero was a novel twist. And Harrison Ford on his worst, even in the likes of Firewall, is still 100 times better than Gerard Butler.

[Gaith]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

^Just about, though. Tatum Channing and Gerard Butler are equally bland leads.

I'm a straight dude and all, but Channing is so damn handsome even his alleged blankness can't help but be compelling to me. Like Keanu, except believable in his non-superpowered physical badassery.

Butler, OTOH, is like a poor man's Russel Crowe. He was good in Mrs. Brown, alongside Judi Dench, and he and his beard fit the hyper-reality of 300, but remove the beard and stick him in an actioner, all you've got is a cologne model.

And gah, don't remind me of Firewall! That brief shot of Indiana Jones tackling the T-1000 was in no way worth the agony, and I saw it for free with a live Ford Q&A afterwards!

[Professor Zoom]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

^True, making the POTUS himself the action hero was a novel twist. And Harrison Ford on his worst, even in the likes of Firewall, is still 100 times better than Gerard Butler.

Yep. This movie will do about as well as Butler's soccer movie.

[throwback]

When I saw that slow moving Hercules, as compared to a fighter plane, approach DC, I thought, where are the fighters?

I get the feeling that people who did this movie and the second Die Hard are completely ignorant about DC and the surrounding vicinity. There are two major airbases in that vicinity - Andrews and Langley. This limits the possibility of an attacking plane to hitting the WH to nil in this post-911 world.

I am curious, why didn't the film makers go for a different time setting and base on a potential scenario that happened in the past. For example, the US is involved in a second Civil War - a scenario explored in science fiction - and the WH is threatened by an advancing military force hell bent on capturing the president. Then, show the good guys getting the president out of the WH to safety, or defending the WH successfully defending the WH against attack. (The possibility of the WH and the president being attacked were real concerns in the first Civil War. However, the South blundered, lost two battles, and had to retreat quickly back to Virginia.)

I am not buying the concept behind either film. DC has been turned into a quasi-fortress after 9-11; there is no way that a North Korean military force or a paramilitary unit would be able to breach this fortress.

[Gaith]

throwback wrote:

---

I get the feeling that people who did this movie and the second Die Hard are completely ignorant about DC and the surrounding vicinity. There are two major airbases in that vicinity - Andrews and Langley. This limits the possibility of an attacking plane to hitting the WH to nil in this post-911 world.

Passenger planes fly right close to downtown DC all the time; I'm sure they'll have some handwave line about how they fooled/hacked National Airport into thinking they were legit. Either that, or they remotely disabled all military aircraft... with hacking. It really wouldn't be more egregious than some of the stuff Skyfall threw at us, and that movie's been fairly well received.

[Star Wolf]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

^Just about, though. Tatum Channing and Gerard Butler are equally bland leads. WHD has got Jamie Foxx as the POTUS, James Woods, Maggie Gyllenhall, Richard Jenkins, Lance Reddick, Garcelle Beauvais and Jason Clarke (Zero Dark Thirty).

Mind you, I still think that that silly-but-fun White House storyline in S7 of 24 is likely to have been mnore entertaining than both these movies put together.

If I was Channing Tatum I would worry about having a second movie delayed to make it 3D

Gaith wrote:

---

Passenger planes fly right close to downtown DC all the time; I'm sure they'll have some handwave line about how they fooled/hacked National Airport into thinking they were legit. Either that, or they remotely disabled all military aircraft... with hacking. It really wouldn't be more egregious than some of the stuff Skyfall threw at us, and that movie's been fairly well received.

The deception plan is a lot simpler then that and there is no Red Dawn remake god device to explain how it was possible either.

[Data Holmes]

I saw this one. I actually enjoyed it. There were one or two minor plot holes which felt like they were created by cutting a scene or two in the editing bay or script rewrite, but other than that it was worth seeing. I actually think they handled the concept of the attack very well.