Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Solomon Kane: A Film Review


  1. ROFL

    I suspected as much; too bad though ... what could have been ...

  2. Somebody needs more roughage in their diet. :p

  3. The fact that this didn't escape into the US makes me believe that there is hope for the movie industry.

    And, I know someone is wondering, it's not because it's not a "faithful" Solomon Kane, it's because it's a grand PIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEECCCCCCCEEEE OOOOOOOOOOFFFFFFFFF SSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTT by any way you'd care to measure a movie.

    Unrelated: How big of a stink do you think would be made if someone made Moon of Skulls into a movie? That's the only big "movie" in the Kane stories, I think (not that I think anyone else will try again for some time, if ever...).

  4. Wings in the Night--much epic-ness.

    On another note, James, if you would like me to stop reading your blog and stop purchasing your materials, please say so. Posting pics like this one will surely keep me away. There is nothing humorous about such a pic. It's disgusting. It's sick. People who enjoy such a pic must be sick.
    People who post such a pic must be sick. Something tells me you would relish that comment.

    When said pic is lost into the oblivion of other posts here, I may check back. May...

  5. I disagree 150% with everything you've said. It's a brilliant film that is entirely faithful to the spirit of Kane.

    Just my $.02.

  6. It has many weaknesses from a purely screenwriting/plotting perspective , but it wasn't *that* bad.

  7. Um, did you really change the photo because some dude on the internets thinks that an image of the result of normal bodily processes is "sick"?

    Way to go Raggi!

    Can't wait for your next bit of expurgated artwork.


  8. Yeah, pretty much how I felt about the film. The only thing it had from the original Kane was the hat, and beyond that it was just a spectacularly inept piece of moviemaking.

    Mind you, if someone were to make a movie about Solomon Kane, James Purefoy would not be a bad choice to lead.

  9. Think of the new pic as more of a homage to Type O Negative's "Slow, Deep, and Hard" album cover.

  10. It wasn't "some dude," it was a few people that mentioned that maybe it was a bit much. A few hours' removed from watching the movie, I thought that maybe they had a point.

    And yeah, the alteration was a Type O thing... glad somebody caught that!

    >>Mind you, if someone were to make a movie about Solomon Kane, James Purefoy would not be a bad choice to lead.

    OK, OK, this is true. The casting was not awful. Which makes the movie more infuriating. It had the talent, it apparently had some resources (although that's from later reading - during the movie I was cringing at some of the low-budgetness that I thought I was seeing... like how the rain looked), and delivered Kane fighting the balrog amidst a family drama. eerrghhhh

  11. It wasn't even a Solomon Kane movie. Why do artsy fartsy asshole writers, directors and producers continue to try to dazzle us with their "vision" and not just do their fucking job? Five of us could have sat around and scripted "Wings in the Night" and had something 1000 times better. Ditto with Conan; whoever is making the next movie needs to just have some slob put "Beyond the Black River" to screenplay and stand back....