Shooter
April 14th, 2007 by Frank
Everybody is talking about the CGI effects in ‘300‘, and meanwhile the incredible feat of producing ‘Shooter‘ is passing practically under the radar.
The producers of Shooter located a film originally shot in 1982, which had the misfortune to languish in post production for three years when ‘Rambo: First Blood Part II’ came out and made the 1982 film obsolete before it had ever been released.
Having sourced their base stock, the producers of Shooter then went about the extremely difficult task of using CGI to transpose Mark Wahlberg’s face over that of the original, unknown, eighties actor and electronically modifying the voice to sound like that of Wahlberg’s
Some extra footage was shot, mostly in the FBI offices to include current actors, and further CGI was used to age original actors in the eighties film, Danny Glover and Ned Beatty.
I mean, that’s the only possible explanation for this film.
Entries (RSS)
April 14th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
It’s an interesting comparison you make Frank. Considering the America of the Regan era that produced the action films of the 1980’s it is interesting to see a return to these types of films - however small it may be - in 2007. Shooter is out at the moment and both Die Hard 4 and Rambo 4 are due out later in the year.
April 14th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
You think it has to do with political climate?
Hmmm… well, to back up your claim, check out the 20 second mark in the trailer. Some eagle eyed YouTube user spotter that it was the 9/11 Commission report!
April 14th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Oh! That’s a good spot. I thought there was a lot of political undertones in Shooter. Especially in the scenes that Fuqua could be bothered to direct.
I do think that the current choices by the Hollywood studios are to do with political climate. Aren’t they always. Considering they’re in the build up to a Presidential Election now though there’s a combination between the actual political climate and trying to influence the political climate ahead of the election. It’ll be an interesting year in American film!
April 14th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
…hmm with eoin in the ‘political climate’ department. and let me just say, from that perspective, seeing rambo back is less than cool.
p.s. as for the ‘combination between the politicaly climate and trying to influence the political climate ahead of the election’, i might point out that in the US (and most democracies frankly!) the current political climate is alway very little more than an attempt to influence choices in the next election. that my dear friends is why nothing long-term and productive ever happens.
April 15th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Anyone see the latest Rocky-Rocky 6, I think? In keeping with eoins’s idea of Hollywood movies reflecting political realities, I considered it an attempt to recover the innocence of pre-Bush America when America was generally viewed as the good guy and Rocky was the personification of the American spirit. For example in the film the neighbourhood has become run down, the economy isn’t doing too well, racism is rife and love in the form of Rocky’s beloved Adrianne has died. Reluctantly, Rocky steps in and tries to turn back to clock to his and America’s glory days. Well, that’s the way I saw it anyway.
April 15th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Believe it or not, I have never seen an entire Rocky film.
With regard to Rambo, I had the misfortune to see Rambo 3 or something and as a result never went near any other Rambo film.
Eventually I gave in, only a couple of years back and watched the first Rambo. What a great film. Pádraigín, have you seen it? If not you might be surprised at the political message - I certainly was (or at least surprised at the message I took from it!)
April 15th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
see, this is what eoin was saying to me yesterday. i know i saw part of one once….there was a village, and trees, and houses in trees. there were lots of guns and helicopters and people dying. …and i was probably like…way to little to know what was going on :P. but ya, it’s starting to sound like i should go back and take a look!
April 15th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Sounds to me like you took the intended message from the first Rambo, Frank. And sounds like you might have seen some of Rambo 2 Pádraigín. Considering the message of the first movie it’s shocking the direction the two sequels took. It’ll be interesting to see what line they take with number 4.
Martin that sounds like a very interesting take on Rocky 6. I’d buy that theory. It’s almost enough to make me watch it.
I hear it’s not that bad?
April 15th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
It wasn’t great Eoin, lots of cliches about believing in yourself and never giving up etc. There’s the usual problematic father-son relationship there, Rocky kind of falls for a girl and proves himself an all-round good egg when he gives her semi-delinquent son a job in his restaurant. The fight was good though and you really did get emotionally involved with Rocky during the fight, wanting him to win. Mike Tyson had a cameo role ringside. In the final analysis though it’s all based on the incredible notion that a 60 year old Rocky could hold his own against the younger, fitter champ, and that’s just too hard to swallow. A DVD for a hung-over afternoon maybe, 2 stars out of 5.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:41 am
Jesus, all this film critique is getting a bit high-brow lads, what do ye think? Time to lighten the tone? Then check this out , real comedy!
http://www.fark.ru/media/video/prikols/i1419
April 16th, 2007 at 1:57 am
I really wish I hadn’t watched that.
July 24th, 2008 at 4:15 am
i love mark wahlberg hes so cute lol