MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Super Amazing HOT MIley Cyrus Sex Tape Trailer – Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengence

SEO SUCKS!

But this trailer… it actually looks like it could be the rare comic book movie that really gets it… is that possible?

19 Responses to “Super Amazing HOT MIley Cyrus Sex Tape Trailer – Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengence”

  1. anon says:

    wth? i see no sex tape..

  2. JoeLeydon'sPersonalPornStar says:

    Oh David, your superior SEO sucked me in! But I still could care less about comic book movies.

  3. JoeLeydon'sPersonalPornStar says:

    Or, actually, could NOT care less. (Dang that need for real grammar!)

  4. anghus says:

    probably the best marriage between creators and material in the current crop of comic book movies.

    Easily as good as Joe Johnston and Captain America and Nolan/Batman. Ghost Rider is pulp. They got the pulpiest guys in the business. Rock on. My film cock is hard.

  5. sloanish says:

    I really, really hate those guys. And I really hate that I’m in the minority on that.

    As the Cranks come full circle and become looked at as trash art, we all lose.

  6. JKill says:

    I’m mixed on Neveldine/Taylor because I love the two CRANKs but despise GAMER, which is such an ugly, mean-spirited nihilistic celebration…but

    I have to say that trailer worked perfectly on me. The look of the movie and the action is seriously cool. The first GR is defintely towards the bottom quality-wise of the current super hero movies, but Cage is really fun, funny and awesome in it, so I’m glad they’re giving the character another spin. Looks fun.

  7. Chris says:

    Is Nic Cage really gonna pee fire on people in this movie? Cause I may be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure that’s fairly high up on the cinematic must see list. I’m not a fan of Crank, but I dig what they were going for, and this looks like a great match between filmmakers and source material. Bring on some more Cage mega-acting!

  8. 16666 says:

    Am I the only one who liked the first Ghost Rider movie? I’m not saying it was great art, but I think it achieved what it set out to do – entertain. The villain and the girl character were rather blah, but I enjoyed the effects, and Nic Cage and Peter Fonda in the same movie – come on! I was surprised by all the hate and yet it did well enough financially to warrant a sequel.

  9. Pete B. says:

    You’re not the only one to like the 1st, 16666. I enjoyed it as well. The extended (or Special Edition) was even better as it fleshed out (no pun intended) the secondary bad guys.

  10. Martin says:

    I’m not a comic book fum but I like this. Dark, violent, cheesy, and crazy, I like it.

  11. LYT says:

    I liked the first Ghost Rider, but understand why people don’t as it took a gothic, horrific character and made him an over-the-top Nicolas Cage, something I just happen to enjoy.

    Still waiting for a good Bad Lieutenant/Ghost Rider mashup, what with Mendes and Cage starring in both.

    sloanish – I don’t think you’re in the minority disliking N/T, given that none of their movies ever screen for critics. Maybe just the minority here.

  12. storymark says:

    “Gets” what, exactly? And is it really that rare for a comic film to get “it”?

  13. sloaner says:

    LYT – Hearing someone like Patton Oswalt cheer those guys on chills my soul.

  14. LexG says:

    I don’t get the “Miley” thing?

    Where is she?

  15. Foamy Squirrel says:

    You can’t see her? It’s totally obvious to me, and she’s showing her feet too…

  16. LexG says:

    Finally somebody with a sense of humor on here

  17. funny video says:

    Thank you for another wonderful post. The place else could anyone get that type of info in such a perfect approach of writing? I have a presentation next week, and I am on the look for such information.

  18. 女装 says:

    Hi there, I found your website by the use of Google even as searching for a similar subject, your site got here up, it seems to be good. I’ve bookmarked to my favourites|added to bookmarks.

  19. Great points altogether, you simply received a brand new reader. What would you recommend in regards to your put up that you simply made some days ago? Any positive?

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how many recappers, while clearly over their heads, are baseline sympathetic to finding themselves routinely unmoored, even if that means repeating over and over that this is closer to “avant-garde art” than  normal TV to meet the word count. My feed was busy connecting the dots to Peter Tscherkassky (gas station), Tony Conrad (the giant staring at feedback of what we’ve just seen), Pat O’Neill (bombs away) et al., and this is all apposite — visual and conceptual thinking along possibly inadvertent parallel lines. If recappers can’t find those exact reference points to latch onto, that speaks less to willful ignorance than to how unfortunately severed experimental film is from nearly all mainstream discussions of film because it’s generally hard to see outside of privileged contexts (fests, academia, the secret knowledge of a self-preserving circle working with a very finite set of resources and publicity access to the larger world); resources/capital/access/etc. So I won’t assign demerits for willful incuriosity, even if some recappers are reduced, in some unpleasantly condescending/bluffing cases, to dismissing this as a “student film” — because presumably experimentation is something the seasoned artist gets out of their system in maturity, following the George Lucas Model of graduating from Bruce Conner visuals to Lawrence Kasdan’s screenwriting.”
~ Vadim Rizov Goes For It, A Bit

“On the first ‘Twin Peaks,’ doing TV was like going from a mansion to a hut. But the arthouses are gone now, so cable television is a godsend — they’re the new art houses. You’ve got tons of freedom to do the work you want to do on TV, but there is a restriction in terms of picture and sound. The range of television is restricted. It’s hard for the power and the glory to come through. In other words, you can have things in a theater much louder and also much quieter. With TV, the quieter things have to be louder and the louder things have to be quieter, so you have less dynamics. The picture quality — it’s fine if you have a giant television with a good speaker system, but a lot of people will watch this on their laptops or whatever, so the picture and the sound are going to suffer big time. Optimally, people should be watching TV in a dark room with no disturbances and with as big and good a picture as possible and with as great sound as possible.”
~ David Lynch