The UHF of the film world.
Latest news

Marina Antunes [Celluloid 02.17.10] trailer news drama



You can never see every film but during the festival season, it’s that much more difficult to make decisions on what to see. Late in 2009, I had the pleasure of making my way through the Vancouver International Film Festival and standing in line late into the two weeks of the fest, it was recommended that I check out The Exploding Girl (review). I missed my opportunity and was disappointed to find a collection of positive reviews, including one from our own Bob Doto.

The film is scheduled to open in limited release in the US on March 12th and just in time for that release, a trailer has emerged. As per Bob’s review which mentioned the film’s good looks, the trailer too looks beautiful but there’s also something really sweet (though not saccharin) about it. I’m looking forward to seeing Zoe Kazan’s performance as Ivy but more than that, I’m particularly interested in seeing Canuck Mark Rendall’s turn in the film. I thoroughly enjoyed his performance in the little seen Victoria Day and can’t wait to see him in another large role.

Toted as a realistic coming of age tale, The Exploding Girl looks like a little film not to be missed and judging from the review and the fact that it even made Bob’s top 5 of 2009 (a year the had some great titles), it’s one I hope we get a chance to see.

Trailer after the break.



You might also like

avatar

Anonymous (7 years ago) Reply

That's it! I'm officially quitting this site! WTF does this film (which seems just fine on its own terms) have to do with Quiet Earth? Start a sister site if you need to but PLEASE stop littering our beloved dystopian landscape with indie darlings.

avatar

Michael (7 years ago) Reply

Thank you for posting that beautiful trailer. Ignore the previous moron's comment...hopefully he does quit this site...who needs more moronic comments from morons?

avatar

omnia (7 years ago) Reply

Hey guys take it easy. Anonymous be a little more open-minded and Michael, there is no need for name calling. Now shake hands and be friends. Who knows, when the nukes fall, you might just need some antibiotics the other one still has.

avatar

Edwin (7 years ago) Reply

I don't know... I agree with Anon's comments about this sudden influx of these mumblecore trailers and how out of place they are on this site. And Michael sounds like he has some vested interest in the film itself. Whether or not the film is good is irrelevant; it doesn't belong on this website (unless the website is changing to encompass more types of film - in which case, I wish they would just say so rather than sneaking these trailers in). They just seem like tacky promotions from friends of the filmmakers.

avatar

JackCrow (7 years ago) Reply

Not taking sides or 'nutn, but if NO ONE voiced almost a year in Bob's <b>review</b> about it, you'd think everybody should be at peace with it.

The trailer surfaced - fact, the review exists - fact, this is a sort of followup - debatable but standing fact.

What does this have to do with post apocalypse, well, if you EVER known anyone with this condition, and EVEN seen it occur, you'd know it is a shattering human experience for one diagnosed and for everybody else witnessing and helping.

Person diagnosed with carries a bomb that goes of at any time without any cause whatsoever, and for that person it might just be the end of the world as he/she knows it if no one is arounf.

Beside that comparison, for those that do not notice, this site is growing, in a way that everything does, and the interests as well as topics are not just pa but cinematography, contrary to many other sites usually a good one to pay attention to; not an endless list of garbage, but a focused and concatenated view on what to look out for, from the people that share the similar interests as most of us visiting do.

If it was anyone else's, I can guarantee you that that will not stop him/her to share what he likes, saw, and want to relate to others to see, if they choose to do so based on what he/she recommends.

So chill, if you do not like it fine, as I'm also the first to voice if something is bad IMO, or out of place, but we do not have the right to impose to anyone, let alone people who review and take time to present US something they liked, or the public.

After all, clicking the article for more and commenting on it, made you interested enough to engage in, thus the interest no matter the focus exists.

:)

avatar

donc48 (7 years ago) Reply

I once asked the same question the first poster. I liked the response I got and films like this one keep the site fresh, and who doesn&acirc;&euro;&trade;t love puppy dogs with wet noses. You can always eat said puppy dog if the sh#@ ever hit the fan.

avatar

Anonymous (7 years ago) Reply

I totally agree with the first poster which led me to look around the site closer than usual and noticed that Quiet Earth's tagline has been changed and it looks like the site is going in a more all-encompassing independent film direction which is a shame because its niche was so specific and brought us all together for our love of "all things post apocalyptic." So a shout-out to the editorial powers that be: Would you mind telling us about any changes and maybe putting the readers to a vote first? Pretty please? Also, 5 bucks to anyone who can decipher JackCrow's comments.

avatar

quietearth (7 years ago) Reply

We have been covering the same type of film for 2+ years now, including post apocalyptic, dystopic, arthouse, indie, genre, horror, scifi, weird, cult, etc.. whatever we like the looks of.

The only thing that's changed is the tagline, nothing else.

avatar

JackCrow (7 years ago) Reply

It must be a trend signing as an anonymous these days, real balls, without even a nickname.
What I said for the dumb and thick is that you should live and let live.
If the staff wants to cover other genres, and in fact does for a few years now, the merrier.
It is their way of running the site, and it is ours to follow and read it; if we CHOOSE TO.

avatar

Peter (7 years ago) Reply

Jackcrow, I wasn't attacking you personally; just your grammar and syntax. I have no idea what "the merrier," "concatenated" and "Person diagnosed with carries a bomb that goes of at any time without any cause whatsoever" mean. But I do get the gist of what you're saying and you're right that the site should be able to review what it wants. I just think it will start losing fans at a faster rate if it moves too far away from its point of origin.

avatar

JackCrow (7 years ago) Reply

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/merrier
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/concatenated
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/diseases/facts/epilepsyattacks.htm

People come and go, and switch channels, it is a freedom of choice, however, if you like what you read here, it can only enrich you to learn about things that are not the primary focus of the site ( and as the staff member pointed out the focus is on many genres), and in that I see no harm, only personal horizon broadening.

Html is a great tool, so who knows, maybe the site 'll have sections in the future with focused news on each genre, so then you can pick and choose what you want to read exactly.
But stopping dead only at pa, perhaps would result in having news at irregular interval opposed to every day.
There are many aspects the owners should consider, and so far the choice they've made, I have no objections to.

avatar

Dave (7 years ago) Reply

Concatenated is misused and "the merrier" is an incomplete idiom so I agree with Peter on this one. And the sentence he highlighted is a grammatical nightmare. As someone who teaches English, I beg everyone to avoid www.thefreedictionary.com at all costs. Yes, I have nothing better to do right now.

avatar

CoinQ (7 years ago) Reply

thanks so much for posting this.


Leave a comment