THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => ENJOY => Topic started by: Bearer on 30 Sep 2008, 15:11
-
from: http://geeksofdoom.com/2008/03/18/saints-rise-again/
Troy Duffy's production blogs: http://www.youtube.com/user/realboondocksaints
Production starts October 20th in Toronto.
Well ladies and gentlemen, here it is. The long awaited (albiet Roco and Smecker less) sequel to the cult classic, "The Boondock Saints" Be it the second coming or terribly bad idea, the plot is as follows:
The boys (Norman Reedus, Sean Patrick Flanery) and their father Il Duce (Billy Connolly) have been living in seclusion, deep in Ireland on a sheep farm, away from everything, when Il Duce’s brother comes to tell them that a priest was murdered in Boston and it was set up to look like it was done by the Saints.
The boys rush back to deal with it, while they’re supposedly ailing father stays on the farm. There’s a new character who’s kind of the Rocco character named Romeo; funny, but much more bad ass. As soon as the brothers land, they start picking off anyone who may be tied to this framing. Willem Dafoe is not in the sequel, a new FBI detective comes into play — a female with a strong southern accent. She wants to catch the Saints and is working with some of the detectives in the first movie (like Bob Marley) who, as we know, decided the Saints were good and began helping them, but they don’t think she knows this, so they need to go with that. Eventually their father comes back into play and tells them what’s going on, which sets in motion a full-on flashback of the story of Il Duce from day one.
I'm at a loss for words, the excitement to just too much to form into a viable sentence. I think a road trip to Toronto is in order, nuff said.
-
I'll believe it when I see it. I knew a guy who was "working" on Boondock Saints 2 back in '05.
-
I hope that Duffy has gotten a bit better with the cinematography aspect. I liked the plot, and appreciated that they were self-aware about the constant swearing, but the slo-mo was overused just a little bit.
-
Wow this sounds like it will be shit.
-
Yes it surely does. Are people seriously this incapable of leaving well enough alone?
-
...
"Two Irish American brothers, with guns and the help an Italian American friend take on the mafia with tv shows and their family prayer."
How does Boondock Saints sound like a good movie? Nevertheless, it's awesome. Seriously, give movie a chance, guys.
-
OK, good point.
-
Boondock Saints is probably the most divisive movie I've ever seen. There are literally three sorts of people I know - those who think it's brilliant, those who haven't seen it, and those who think it's a cheap, shitty sub-Tarantino (shit, sub-Guy-Richie!) style movie that should have hit the D2V market with the rest of its ilk. I'm obviously in the latter category.
Though you really can't argue with a little slice of ham from Willem Dafoe, the scariest-looking man alive.
-
What was probably his most interesting character quirk was lifted from The Professional, so I don't even think about Dafoe when that movie comes up in a discussion.
-
I guess Im with most of you on this one, this seems 100% unnecessary. The original while a beloved cult classic to many, is in actuality a pretty mediocre if fun to watch movie. I have a strong feeling this sequel will do alot of pandering and get alot of extra press that it doesnt really deserve.
-
should have hit the D2V market with the rest of its ilk.
Ummm...it essentially was D2V. It played in five theaters for only one week. That limited of a release is essentially synonymous with direct to video.
The original while a beloved cult classic to many, is in actuality a pretty mediocre if fun to watch movie.
That effectively describes the vast majority of "cult classic" movies. Shit, you could describe the original Star Wars trilogy that way.
-
Any film buff will tell you that cult movies are okay but not the greatest thing ever. Boondock Saints, Fight Club, American History X, Pulp Fiction, Donnie Darko...etc. They're pretty average movies that just do something different.
-
What was probably his most interesting character quirk was lifted from The Professional, so I don't even think about Dafoe when that movie comes up in a discussion.
How does he resemble Stanfield? No drugs, no sociopathy, no sadism? I could see that being said of Il Duce, with the "No women, no kids" thing, but that never really comes up.
Oh, beethoven?
-
Yup.
-
I don't know why people get so upset over sequels, really. The truth is, the sequel doesn't really do any harm. It's just a device used to bank off of people who enjoyed the original. And if it's not made solely for money-making purposes, you end up with a decent film sometimes.
Boondock Saints 2 has a lot of potential to be good, and I look forward to it.
UNFORTUNATELY, there has been talk about the production of this movie since basically forever, and I doubt it's really going to happen any time soon. Though, hooray if it does!
-
I'm excited about this. I can appreciate any movie that takes on the good vs. evil fight without the use of super heroes with ridiculous superpowers.
-
I'm more interested in some kind of sequal to Overnight (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041118/REVIEWS/41116007/1023), but then, as I said in the Terrible Movies Thread, I thought Boondock Saints was pretty bad.
-
I just can't get over the subtitle to this movie, it's so horribly cheesy.
Boondocks Saints: Saint Paddy's Day features the main characters (I don't remember their names...Fergus?) doing something stereotypical. The End.
-
Angus McFinnegan
or was it Mickey O'Sullivan
-
Personally I am kind of excited for this; it all depends how much free license Duffy is given over the movie. We've all seen how Hollywood can shit up a franchise/series/whatever by throwing in a bunch of bullshit that isn't good in any respect, but I really liked the work Duffy did on the first movie. It seemed pretty stereotypical, but the dynamic between the brothers was probably my favorite aspect. Especially the fight they get into in the air duct of the hotel. That just caught the essence of being a brother to a T.
On a semi-related note, anybody have any clue what's happening with The Good King, the other screenplay Duffy wrote while the rights to All Saints Day were still locked up in the courts? I've searched and nothing's come up. No IMDb page, so it's not even pre-production at this point.
(shit, sub-Guy-Richie!)
hey man, snatch was a pretty awesome movie.
-
Snatch probably had my all-time favorite one liner, too.
"In the quiet words of the Virgin Mary...come again?"
-
J, I think that The Good King is being made after All Saints Day.
-
Any film buff will tell you that cult movies are okay but not the greatest thing ever. Boondock Saints, Fight Club, American History X, Pulp Fiction, Donnie Darko...etc. They're pretty average movies that just do something different.
So film buffs are people who don't like things that are totally great?
-
I'm torn. On the one hand, I do dislike the implication that ambivalence towards various genres is the mark of a film buff (partly because this would imply I'm a film buff, which is definitely not true). On the other hand, I think Boondock Saints is generally poor. I swear it seems to be in some kind of race with Fight Club to figure out which movie can turn into a self-indulgent circlejerk faster. Maybe it's a violence fetishist thing, but I guess I simply don't get it.
-
Film buffs LOVE things that are totally great. A lot of cult movies are not totally great. It's not an outright panning of cult movies, it's acknowledging that there are better movies which really are totally great. To me, at least, cult movies like Boondock Saints only leave their effect on the first viewing, so it's not as good the next time you watch it. Good movies you want to watch again. It's entirely subjective, I know, but most of the people you can call film buffs recognize this.
It's kind of like Daft Punk. Daft Punk is alright the first few times, but starts to get boring after more than a few listens. Some people will go looking for better music, most will blast it at every party they host for the rest of their lives.
-
I'm torn. On the one hand, I do dislike the implication that ambivalence towards various genres is the mark of a film buff (partly because this would imply I'm a film buff, which is definitely not true). On the other hand, I think Boondock Saints is generally poor. I swear it seems to be in some kind of race with Fight Club to figure out which movie can turn into a self-indulgent circlejerk faster. Maybe it's a violence fetishist thing, but I guess I simply don't get it.
One major thing Fight Club has over Boondock Saints: A sense of irony. I'm surprised by how many people can't see the satire in the film (though really, the third act isn't nearly as fun as the first two)
To me, at least, cult movies like Boondock Saints only leave their effect on the first viewing, so it's not as good the next time you watch it.
Man, I don't know what cult movies you're watching. Boondocks Saints is an exception to the rule, being that it's all style and it's paper-thin. Better cult movies, like Lebowski, get better with repeated viewing.
But then, I'm not of the mind that Boondock Saints deserves a cult. I'm not of the mind that Boondock Saints should be seen by anyone, really.
-
I think a lot of cult movies shouldn't be cult movies. That's the thing. I don't know why they get such large followings (well, I have an idea), because most of them aren't all that they're cracked up to be and/or unique. There are always exceptions, Big Lebowski being one of them, but for the most part the 'first time is the best' rule is what I stick to.
-
One major thing Fight Club has over Boondock Saints: A sense of irony. I'm surprised by how many people can't see the satire in the film (though really, the third act isn't nearly as fun as the first two)
I like Fight Club's first act quite a bit; I'd go so far as to say it's wonderful. But the movie speeds downhill quite quickly from there. It makes its point early and then overstays its welcome. Boondock Saints starts out with little going for it and eventually wins the self-indulgence race by holding a steady pace but personally I felt like Fight Club was starting to gain ground quickly by the final act.
-
Any film buff will tell you that cult movies are okay but not the greatest thing ever. Boondock Saints, Fight Club, American History X, Pulp Fiction, Donnie Darko...etc. They're pretty average movies that just do something different.
I don't really think Pulp Fiction is a "cult" movie. It's got widespread acceptance among general mainstream critics as one of the best movies out there. (I'm not trying to promote it here, just pointing out reality.)
-
Of the QT movies, Reservoir Dogs is usually considered the cult standard, but if you go by the "not popular or critically acclaimed at time of release" criterion (which movies like Lebowski, Darko and Office Space would fall under, but not something like, oh, Armageddon) Jackie Brown is probably it.
-
write-in: Natural Born Killers
(I have not seen this film, but it's probably the most "cult" film Tarantino's been associated with)
-
It is a film Tarantino would rather not be associated with. At least, his screenplay was edited so much before they shot it, he doesn't really think of it as his work.
-
But it's got tits and murder.
-
I am just voicing the opinions of the man himself.
-
Tits. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119396/) Murder. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108399/)
Tits AND Murder. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462322/)
Either he has no leg to stand on or he has three.