 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We can only hope they can patch things up again for Mars Attacks! 2!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While there may have been a conflict, when the score was recorded doesn't indicate that. The film doesn't open until September -- that's plenty of time to write and record if Elfman wasnted to. I only see three films on his IMDb page for 2016 and all are recorded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed by the composers Oct 11 on our website
MV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Oct 4, 2016 - 5:21 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
Just came back from the press screening here in Norway (has it premiered worldwide yet?).
A sweet film filled with many highlights, but also some 5-6 warts which has been the standard for Burton ever since after the marvelous BIG FISH. The warts include wooden acting (or possibly stale direction from Burton), a lack of energy in the first 2/3rds, a bit whimsical plot, some radical tone shifts (including an over-the-top finale) and -- yes -- the music. I'm a big fan of Margeson, especially after his stunning EDDIE THE EAGLE earlier this year, but except for a few Elfman-ian elements (celeste, female voices, organ), it's far more conventional, relying on the ubiquitous ostinati and typical contemporary Hollywood action/suspense tropes. But loved the electronic celeste for the 'loop' areas. Maybe it works better on album, we'll see.
On the plus side is a reliance on character interaction and less on CGI spectacle, a more subtle incorporation of Burton elements (like twisted figures, burlesque situations, play with dark and shadow, contrast between monochrome and stale everyday images etc.). Also some stunning static shots that I've never seen in Burton films before.
So variable in quality, but overall I would place it in the upper echelon of Burton film post-BIG FISH.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It opened in cinemas across the UK last week.
Not seen it yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
