Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



Reply to topic  
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
FasterDisaster
So Fast, You'll Crash

Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:08 pm
Posts: 6260
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:57 am 
 

Predators is a really dumb movie, mainly because of the decision to be a half-remake of Predator original. Alice Braga is the best thing about that movie, because she's a total babe... hnng!
_________________
MutantClannfear wrote:
TheDarkHarvest wrote:
slamming brutal death metal

DID SOMEBODY SAY SLAMMING BRUTAL DEATH METAL

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:59 am 
 

We can never be friends, Under_Starmere. The foliage shooting scene is brilliant!
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
Under_Starmere
Abhorrent Fish-Man

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 4098
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:02 am 
 

:scratch: Mmmmokay.
_________________
Visual Art: The Illuminated Night
Drone: IA
Shop: House of the Black Wolf

Top
 Profile  
volutetheswarth
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:37 pm
Posts: 1173
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:07 am 
 

iamntbatman wrote:
if you want to contrast Predators with something like, say, the Doom movie...it's just not even really close
I'd agree with that. I'd also add there's a Lost (tv series) vibe to Predators.

I was probably mostly disappointed because of the hype-train that Robert Rodriguez started before it's release.
Under_Starmere wrote:
For a film that gets hailed has a "pinnacle" of action flicks, Predator has shockingly little actual action in it. Really most of it's just guys stalking around, being alert and sweaty, uselessly shooting foliage, and then getting one-shotted or killed off-screen. I won't say it just plain sucks, because it's got its cool points, but.... eh.
That's the point though, it's taking these unstoppable killing machines out of their element. Also, it's depends what you consider action, if you think Chuck Norris is the pinnacle of action films than you'll probably chuckle at Predator, but it's a very action orientated film without the overblown unrealistic barrage of action hero stupidity.

Top
 Profile  
Under_Starmere
Abhorrent Fish-Man

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 4098
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:47 am 
 

Nah I get you, it is a cool concept, and also fuck Chuck Norris, I just think they could've found realistic ways to infuse more action into the scenario. If the Predator had been given more of a run for his money (spines?) at least part of the time, it'd be more satisfying to watch. It's understandable, though, as with the cloaking technology in the mix it was hardly a fair fight. I would've been satisfied with just one or two more kills being more of a challenge for our villain. When you're fucking invisible and armed with an auto-targeting shoulder-mounted laser cannon you're not exactly creating the most sportsmanlike conditions, and that sense of these kills being relatively simple, foregone conclusions really takes the tension element out of the picture. Eh, just my 2¢.
_________________
Visual Art: The Illuminated Night
Drone: IA
Shop: House of the Black Wolf

Top
 Profile  
Oiras
Metalhead

Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 3:52 pm
Posts: 767
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 4:07 am 
 

Recently saw Zodiac, I was impressed I must say. I saw this one not too long after rewatching Seven (it must have been over a decade since I last saw that). I probably still prefer Seven, because of Morgan Freeman (I've always liked him but wow, he really nails it here, you really feel this IS a man who's seen every horrible thing there is to see and the cynicism has taken him over entirely), Howard Shore's score, which is low-key yet menacing, the title sequences (I had no idea the opening credit music was a remix by Coil, really cool that they got this much exposure in a movie like this even if most people watching would probably not notice or care), the fantastic cinematography and art direction which without any demons or supernatural guff (outside of the literary material referenced) creates pretty much the perfect vision of Hell itself, one of the best movie villains of all time, the kind of meticulous and creatively sadistic serial killer that manages to be convincing and scary (so many movies go for this kind of killer but fail ridiculously, Saw is the poster child example of this, it's a tightrope act I tell ya, even the much-lauded Silence of the Lambs didn't quite pull it off all that well), the pacing, and of course the ending.

Now Zodiac is Fincher's return to the same kind of subject matter but is completely different in approach, while still sharing much of the earlier's films anxious qualities. A more mature film you could say, as it's all about how the wide cast of characters react to the constant developments of the case and the frantic obsession in trying, and ultimately failing, to solve it more than the nature of the murders themselves. A lot more humor too, which I also appreciated. I'm not a fan of everything Fincher has done (I don't like Fight Club and Panic Room was a steaming pile) but when he's on, he's ON. Even if you already know how this all eventually turned out it manages to remain constantly tense. The scenes of the Zodiac killings themselves really take their time to build up, and the dread of anticipation is palpable. All the cryptic lines and expressions by certain people, the vague threats, the constant dead ends, it all makes for a strong atmosphere of unease and uncertainty that never is satisfactorily resolved and hints at things that never can be traced. One of the complaints I've seen is about the length. Yes it DOES feel as long as it actually is, but not in a bad way, just in a way that so much is going on and takes its time getting anywhere that the length is a necessity. Another complaint is that it seems to make up its mind pretty well about Arthur Leigh Allen being the killer, which isn't necessarily true. You do come away thinking he's the most likely suspect but it keeps its distance from an out-and-out indictment. The lack of physical evidence is acknowledged and other potential suspects are considered. Even the ending where the surviving victim identifies who the killer isn't completely sure even if he mostly is. So, yeah I think it handled material never meant to be solved (as it never was) very well all things considered, unlike say the horrendous Black Dahlia movie by Brian De Palma (anyone wants to talk about a "fall from grace" that's "flat on their face" you need look no further than Brian De Palma and some of the disasters he's put out lately). Probably the only things I don't care for were those stupid slo-mo death scenes and the sweeping CGI city panoramas, a couple of things Fincher seems overly fond of today, an area where Seven showed more restraint, being blunt, to the point, with no unnecessary effects. Thankfully these only make up maybe around a minute or so of the movie's running time so no biggie. Oh and I can't forget to mention the amazing use of Donovan's "Hurdy Gurdy Man," during the first murder and the end credits, strangely fitting and haunting as fuck.
_________________
Traders, not traitors (i.e. good ones): croverkill, Wolfhead, Wolfsturm888, Count Rodge, Tokarev

Top
 Profile  
failsafeman
Digital Dictator

Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:45 am
Posts: 9506
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 6:23 am 
 

Good analysis of Zodiac - I quite enjoyed the movie, as it was a much different and much more interesting take on the typical serial killer premise. Instead of focusing on how cool and insane the serial killer is, and how creatively, ridiculously violent his kills are, it's about how the endless, grueling investigation affects people's lives. I kind of hate how serial killers have become so over-romanticized in movies and books, what with Dexter, Hannibal Lecter, Jigsaw, bla bla bla. It's fine up to a point, but I'm kind of tired of serial killers being portrayed as super geniuses who are always one step ahead of the police, etc. It's nice to see a more realistic depiction, as in Zodiac.

Under_Starmere wrote:
Nah I get you, it is a cool concept, and also fuck Chuck Norris, I just think they could've found realistic ways to infuse more action into the scenario. If the Predator had been given more of a run for his money (spines?) at least part of the time, it'd be more satisfying to watch. It's understandable, though, as with the cloaking technology in the mix it was hardly a fair fight. I would've been satisfied with just one or two more kills being more of a challenge for our villain. When you're fucking invisible and armed with an auto-targeting shoulder-mounted laser cannon you're not exactly creating the most sportsmanlike conditions, and that sense of these kills being relatively simple, foregone conclusions really takes the tension element out of the picture. Eh, just my 2¢.

That's the thing though, the whole point for the predator was to stalk the guys. He had the cloaking device and the shoulder cannon, but he was still one dude without any kind of protection vs. a squad of highly-trained guys with automatic weapons, grenades, etc. One grenade, one bullet in the wrong place, and he'd be toast. Hell, he DID get a bullet in the wrong place, though not enough to seriously wound him. That was a big plot point in the movie; here they (and the audience, if you hadn't seen it before) thought they were up against some sort of unstoppable, possibly even supernatural force, but then they realize it's just as vulnerable to their bullets as anyone. "If it bleeds, we can kill it." If they'd made the predator more fallible, have to visibly work harder to kill the guys, it would have totally dissolved the tension and mystery. They'd have just been up against some alien dude. Instead they have to gradually work out what they're up against, what its capabilities are, what its weaknesses are, while it's picking them off with seeming ease - when really, as it turns out, the whole squad vs. one predator is actually a pretty fair fight.
_________________
antonthereaper wrote:
Seriously, why ban me??????? That topic had nothing wrong with it! Theres something wrong with you i can tell you! You're immoral banning of my account! Anyways, i'm creating my own metal arcives.

http://extrememetalencyclopedia.webs.com/

Top
 Profile  
inhumanist
Metal freak

Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:09 pm
Posts: 4145
Location: 50 Forts Along The Rhine
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:26 am 
 

Nobody gonna talk about how Predator is a heavy handed metaphor for Vietnam? :wink:
_________________
Celtic Frosted Flakes wrote:
Compared to how it is here in Sweden, fascism sounds like paradise.
Metantoine wrote:
If Summoning is the sugar of fantasy metal, is Manowar the bacon?

Top
 Profile  
volutetheswarth
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:37 pm
Posts: 1173
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:30 am 
 

I didn't think it was a long film at all. The Lake Berryessa murders are masterfully shot, it truly feels like a picturesc nightmare and you can almost feel each stab wound. The way the two victims act and what they say during the situation seems so real and as a result it's hardly a task to picture being in their shoes.

I'm not a fan of everything David Fincher has done either, I thought The Social Network was a half baked and seriously overrated drama that was trying too hard to be smart, and I simply couldn't get past the first half hour of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button because it looked ridiculous and the story was especially dull. I'm hoping Fincher makes a return to form after 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea failed to launch.

Top
 Profile  
Under_Starmere
Abhorrent Fish-Man

Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:00 pm
Posts: 4098
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:35 am 
 

failsafeman wrote:
as it turns out, the whole squad vs. one predator is actually a pretty fair fight.


Except it wasn't, though ;). Don't get me wrong, I know what you're saying with the points above and for the most part I agree with you, but really it was a fish-in-a-barrel scenario. If they'd caught on a bit earlier to the Predator's capabilities and gradually learned how to defend themselves more effectively against him, even if it was ultimately futile, it would've been more interesting to watch, at least.
_________________
Visual Art: The Illuminated Night
Drone: IA
Shop: House of the Black Wolf

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 4:13 pm 
 

I just watched World War Z. I hate to be "that guy" but...why all the hate, again? I mean I haven't read any in-depth criticism of the movie, just vague murmurs about it being a piece of shit or something. Sure, it was pretty skimpy on the more "intimate" zombie moments that make up the meat of movies like 28 Days Later, but it did have a few that were pretty decent (in the very beginning and very end especially). The main thing that impressed were the mass zombie scenes; all of the Jerusalem stuff was cool as shit, even if it was pretty dumb/convenient that the zombies managed to get over the wall at the exact time that Brad Pitt's character was there. Those fucking massive rivers of zombies were really, really cool. I'd always wanted to see that kind of thing and I think they did a great job of it.

I get that the movie is completely different from the book, sure. And I get that, had it been rated R rather than PG-13 there might've been more satisfying violence and gore, but as I was saying since the movie has a bigger focus on those huge city-scale setpieces rather than intimate zombie encounters the gore wasn't missed too much, I don't think.
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
AcidWorm
Veteran

Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 11:37 pm
Posts: 2699
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:12 pm 
 

Here is the trailer for the movie, Need for Speed. I thought this was a joke at first. It features Aaron Paul whom is Jesse on Breaking Bad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsrJWUVoXeM

I'll probably watch it since I like fast cars and used to play the video games.
_________________
In reference to Baby Metal
tanabata wrote:
I heard one of the moderators blacklisted them because of his subjective opinion. Well If that is the case, you sir have shit taste and you ain't my nigga!

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 18605
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:58 pm 
 

iamntbatman wrote:
I just watched World War Z. I hate to be "that guy" but...why all the hate, again? I mean I haven't read any in-depth criticism of the movie, just vague murmurs about it being a piece of shit or something. Sure, it was pretty skimpy on the more "intimate" zombie moments that make up the meat of movies like 28 Days Later, but it did have a few that were pretty decent (in the very beginning and very end especially). The main thing that impressed were the mass zombie scenes; all of the Jerusalem stuff was cool as shit, even if it was pretty dumb/convenient that the zombies managed to get over the wall at the exact time that Brad Pitt's character was there. Those fucking massive rivers of zombies were really, really cool. I'd always wanted to see that kind of thing and I think they did a great job of it.

I get that the movie is completely different from the book, sure. And I get that, had it been rated R rather than PG-13 there might've been more satisfying violence and gore, but as I was saying since the movie has a bigger focus on those huge city-scale setpieces rather than intimate zombie encounters the gore wasn't missed too much, I don't think.


I haven't read much criticism except for my own on my blog - lots of people seem to like it okay. I just think it's incredibly trite, generic and soulless. It's as disposable a film as they come. Hated the jerky camerawork, the characters with no personality at all, etc. Not like I really expected a masterpiece but there was just no effort put into it, at all really. It was like the makers of the film literally just didn't care.
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: Curse of the Zodiac

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:25 pm 
 

I'm all for letting one's feelings about whatever's happening on screen be a big factor in how you rate a movie (the only factor that counts, if you ask me) but that analysis just...hmm. It leaves me wanting. "It was like the makers of the film literally just didn't care." What does that even mean? Again, it wasn't as heartfelt and emotional an experience as the more intimate zombie movies like Night of the Living Dead or 28 Days Later, but it wasn't really trying to be. It had so much more focus on the big setpiece scenes, showcasing what a worldwide zombie outbreak would do to global society, rather than focusing in tight on how a small group of survivors would deal with their circumstances.
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 18605
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:38 pm 
 

It was trying to focus on the bigger picture and worldwide impact, but I just never thought it did a good job of it. They showed us a lot of different locations and a lot of zombies killing people in those locations, but that was really about it - I never really got a sense of the culture or humanity of these different countries and cities being attacked. It didn't really ever matter where the attacks were taking place. You could have taken that Jerusalem scene and put it basically anywhere else outside of the Western civilized countries and had no difference. Same thing for every place they went. Absolutely zero real exploration of what this worldwide zombie attack really means - there is no weight or drama to it. It's just showing us these things happening without really taking the obvious chances to do anything interesting with the various cultures and countries the characters visit.

Everyone speaks perfect English (except that one scene in the tunnel, ironically taking place in America), and there is never any real exploration of the differences between these places - obviously they couldn't get really detailed with it, that's not the point of a zombie film. But they could have at least made real characters instead of just talking heads to vomit out exposition, which was what most of the characters they met around the world served as. The random CIA guy in the cage; the leader of Jerusalem, et cetera - these could have been really interesting characters and given the movie a lot of exotic spice and personality, even if they only appeared for two or three scenes. But instead they're there to tell us parts of the story the writers aren't clever enough to do any other way, and then just never show up again.

I get it; it was trying to show the world-wide consequences of a zombie attack. But that's just not an excuse in my book to not write real characters that I actually give a shit about. Contagion was a way better representation of this sort of thing, although it was more of an illness/virus than a zombie attack. But that movie at least took the time to engage the viewer and really gave me the feeling of 'worldwide terror' that WWZ just didn't do for me.
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: Curse of the Zodiac

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:52 pm 
 

I totally disagree with you about Jerusalem. That location was picked for a reason: the cultural backdrop was used as a plot device for their building of the anti-zombie wall in the first place, and the "10th man" skepticism that they rooted in Israel's history explained why they were more prepared than other cultures. It was also pretty significant that they were letting people into *their* territory, especially Arabs, even if the Mossad commander wrote the policy off as "every person we let in is one less zombie we have to fight." The Korea location was also used to set up the CIA operative guy talking about how the North Koreans had kept themselves safe by forcefully removing the teeth of their entire population in under 24 hours. Everyone speaks English? In South Korea they were on an American air base with American soldiers. In Israel, most people DO speak at least basic English. Then they went to Wales.

The movie was already over two hours long. There's only so much you can do in two hours, and given the necessary globehopping of the plot, I just don't really think it would have been possible to really have deeper characterization than it already did without completely abandoning what it was trying to do.

Contagion was a good movie, too, but it wasn't a zombie movie. It could afford to have deeper characters because it didn't *need* to have awesome setpiece scenes with rivers of zombies flooding through cities full of people.
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 18605
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:13 pm 
 

Fair points about the English use; I should have remembered more of it. As for the cultural points you brought up, well I guess now that you mention it I can see them - honestly it just never struck me while watching that the film really used those locations to their full potential. I do remember being struck by the Israeli stuff - even so, I dunno, just came and went so fast. You make the point that the globetrotting and scope of the film do not give it time for "deeper characterizations," and that's fair enough. I don't expect them to go deep into detail with any of it and tell peoples' stories or backgrounds or whatever. It was just so, so empty for me though. So little to really grasp onto. That's really the first thing I look for in a movie honestly, most of the time.

I think it's just my problem with the film as a whole: it simply takes on too large a scope and bites off more than it can chew. There's a balance between scope and depth, and I didn't think WWZ really had any of the latter. It had a plot, it got some cultural facts right, it got some interesting locales, but it didn't really use any of that to tell a really compelling story about any of it. It's interesting to look at it from the point of view that it's trying to show the whole world plunging into chaos, but we have quite a ways to go in terms of mastering something like that.

I dunno, you asked why people hated it - well that's your answer from my point. Your points are all valid enough, but even so I just don't think the film worked. I don't think I'm really articulating myself as well as I could; oh well - pretty tired.
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: Curse of the Zodiac

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:37 pm 
 

Well, just to be clear, I don't think the movie was *amazing* or anything, and generally I do prefer zombie movies that are more intimate. 28 Days Later will always be one of my favorites, but I also dig the old Romero stuff, the Dawn of the Dead remake, Pontypool, some of the Italian ones, etc. However, I've also seen some shitty stuff that treads some of the same territory, especially recently (recent Romero stuff blows so hard it's really quite depressing, The Walking Dead has been boring as shit for a long time now) so seeing something with a vastly different approach scope-wise was a bit of fresh air. Especially since entire cities getting overrun with huge numbers of zombies is a common trope in zombie movies but is almost never actually shown on that sort of scale.

I'd probably give it a mid-70's on a 100 point scale. Around the same level of enjoyability as 28 Weeks Later. Maybe I'm just mentally exaggerating or something but I vaguely recall people seeing it in theaters and declaring it was absolute shit and a complete waste of time, which is description I'd lob at something like Romero's most recent two zombie movies (with Land of the Dead not faring much better).
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
aaronmb666
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 3:37 am
Posts: 1739
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 12:17 am 
 

iamntbatman wrote:
I just watched World War Z. I hate to be "that guy" but...why all the hate, again? I mean I haven't read any in-depth criticism of the movie, just vague murmurs about it being a piece of shit or something. Sure, it was pretty skimpy on the more "intimate" zombie moments that make up the meat of movies like 28 Days Later, but it did have a few that were pretty decent (in the very beginning and very end especially). The main thing that impressed were the mass zombie scenes; all of the Jerusalem stuff was cool as shit, even if it was pretty dumb/convenient that the zombies managed to get over the wall at the exact time that Brad Pitt's character was there. Those fucking massive rivers of zombies were really, really cool. I'd always wanted to see that kind of thing and I think they did a great job of it.

I get that the movie is completely different from the book, sure. And I get that, had it been rated R rather than PG-13 there might've been more satisfying violence and gore, but as I was saying since the movie has a bigger focus on those huge city-scale setpieces rather than intimate zombie encounters the gore wasn't missed too much, I don't think.


I think it's got to do with Hollywood jumping on the horror/zombie bandwagon and to make as much money as possible, they tone it down to give it a pg-13 rating and convert it to 3D.

I personally enjoyed it to watch once, though it did annoy me that they had the balls to do a 3d version To be fair, every movie last summer(except for Pacific Rim) that was converted, didn't have a "this would look amazing in 3d".

It reminds me of how Expendables 2 was. It couldve been so much more, but they decided to tone it down(because of that piece of shit joke Chuck Norris). Yeah, they changed it to R, but all they did was add cgi blood.

Top
 Profile  
volutetheswarth
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:37 pm
Posts: 1173
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:39 am 
 

Swearing and ultra violence wouldn't have saved Expendables 2, it was destined to failure when it ignored having a worthwhile story to tie the action together. I've already voiced my opinion about that disappointment a few pages back so I'll stop there.

I don't really see what's to hate about World War Z but I also don't see the appeal to see it. I believe the zombie craze has officially worn off me, especially after that tired segment in VHS 2.

Top
 Profile  
FasterDisaster
So Fast, You'll Crash

Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:08 pm
Posts: 6260
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 5:18 am 
 

CGI blood was used in the first one as well, if I remember correctly, as well as Rambo. Expendables 2 is a pretty good movie, but my problem with it is that it feels too staged. Something about the way the action plays out feels too "perfect". There was a certain "rough quality" to the action of the first one that I appreciated. Not so much in the second one.
_________________
MutantClannfear wrote:
TheDarkHarvest wrote:
slamming brutal death metal

DID SOMEBODY SAY SLAMMING BRUTAL DEATH METAL

Top
 Profile  
ScandalfTheShite
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:46 am
Posts: 392
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 7:05 am 
 

Saw Dracula 3000. Possibly the best worst movie I've ever seen in a while. The ending was the best (in two ways at least). You would've expected an epic ending battle of some sort that would save some of this turd. They head with their spaceship to an unknown planet... but it ends there. The spaceship blows up and then come the ending credits. It's like their budget ran up and they had to end that wreck of a movie there! Needless to say Dracula on a spaceship is quite far out idea to begin with.
_________________
Give me the mustard, you bastard!

Top
 Profile  
Aurone
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:17 pm
Posts: 1327
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:10 pm 
 

Troll 2 - Both 1 out of 10 and 9 out of 10 at the exact same time.

This movie had god awful acting, extremely lame writing, bad camera, cheep as shit SFX and a dumb as hell plot...........and it was GLORIUS! Seriously, this is one of the rare occasions where the planets align to make something a failure but at the same time a success. A lot of the acting felt like so underacted that it could have been a porn. But no other actors could have rivaled that of the Goblin Queen, because she didn't underact, she overacted to hell and back. And honestly, I loved her, she was my favorite part of this film, because actress playing her was obviously having the time of her life and it was a blast. Also, props for one scene were he boy gets caught during the church session and the hand reaches up to grab him, that was a legit scary jump scene. This film was everything people have said it is and then some, and it's worth it. Now I just need to see the Room and see just which is worst.

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 18605
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:39 pm 
 

ScandalfTheShite wrote:
Saw Dracula 3000. Possibly the best worst movie I've ever seen in a while. The ending was the best (in two ways at least). You would've expected an epic ending battle of some sort that would save some of this turd. They head with their spaceship to an unknown planet... but it ends there. The spaceship blows up and then come the ending credits. It's like their budget ran up and they had to end that wreck of a movie there! Needless to say Dracula on a spaceship is quite far out idea to begin with.


That movie was awful, but it was hilarious too. The wheelchair vampire? The way the filmmakers just went 'fuck it' at the end and had two of the characters go off to have sex before the ship explode? Just ludicrous.

Troll 2 is awesome, just a ton of fun. So bizarre and bad, but so entertaining and spirited for all that.
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: Curse of the Zodiac

Top
 Profile  
ChineseDownhill
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 11:19 am
Posts: 252
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:00 pm 
 

Troll 2 and The Room are two of the major reasons I continue to seek out bad movies. T2 had "Oh my God!" and The Room, well, just about everything Tommy Wiseau said in that one is quotable. Very glad I've seen both of them, and I may be due for another Room viewing because it's been a couple years.

I wish I could say Battlefield Earth, which I finally got around to seeing, was as enjoyable as those two movies. There were things any schlock fan should appreciate: Travolta's over the top performance, the alien home planet where everything is purple, the absolutely comical abuse of Dutch angles, stuff like that. But at nearly 2 hours, it sort of dragged, and I like my schlock more in the 90-minute ballpark. So BE isn't essential viewing the way The Room is, but I still give it a lukewarm recommendation if you're into that kind of thing.
_________________
Currently listening to
Cradle of Filth - Dusk and Her Embrace

Top
 Profile  
shouvince
Veteran

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:11 am
Posts: 2673
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:25 am 
 

New trailer for The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug has been put up. I like it very much and I only wish December 13th would arrive soon!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbOEknbi4gQ

Top
 Profile  
By_Inheritance
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Dec 25, 2009 8:38 am
Posts: 416
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:31 am 
 

shouvince wrote:
New trailer for The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug has been put up. I like it very much and I only wish December 13th would arrive soon!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbOEknbi4gQ

It looks incredible! I'm a huge fan of all the films and books so far. It doesn't look like this film will disappoint.
_________________
Gods of War Extreme metal. New EP, free download! - http://godsofwar.bandcamp.com
Crypt Lurker Doom metal. Stream full EP - http://cryptlurker.bandcamp.com/

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:55 pm 
 

Hmmm.

I've always thought that The Hobbit is a fun story but nowhere near the epic scope of LotR, so when Peter Jackson announced that the story would be spread out into two (then three) movies I knew that liberties would have to be taken in order to make everything grandiose enough to live up to that scale. However, some of the added content in the first move rubbed me the wrong way (Radagast being made into an utterly goofy comic relief character) while other additions, such as Azog pursuing the dwarves most of the way across Eriador and openly operating just outside of Rivendell were much harder to swallow. Also, unlike the LotR films, which generally were pretty much perfect in their depictions of landscapes and scenery, the art direction in the first Hobbit movie was sometimes pretty...off. Goblin Town was essentially nothing like how it was described in the books (neither were the goblins themselves, really).

So, with those worries already on my mind, I found that trailer troubling. Legolas? A non-Gimli love interest for him? Almost nothing from that trailer really seemed at all related to the source material, except of course the barrels, Smaug himself and a couple other brief flashes. What was all that fighting with orcs? Where was any of the Mirkwood leg of the journey?
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
Thiestru
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:18 am
Posts: 1102
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:48 pm 
 

There was a scene depicting Mirkwood in that trailer; it was the one showing Bilbo with the spiders.

Basically, this is what I was afraid of. A lot of extraneous shit. Fortunately, I resolved myself to this fact a long time ago; you can't stretch The Hobbit into three movies without adding a lot of needless fluff. I know I'll enjoy the movies for what they are, as I did the first one, but I honestly don't understand the need for all this. People just have to meddle.
_________________
Zodijackyl wrote:
Anything but undying, eternal praise for Awaken the Guardian is completely wrong and a disgrace to you, your band, family, and Facebook friends list.


Please check out my music at the following link. Thanks!

http://thiestru.bandcamp.com

Top
 Profile  
Subrick
Metal freak

Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:27 pm
Posts: 5718
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:09 pm 
 

There were going to be people that complained if The Hobbit was just one movie, so of course they felt the need to stretch the story across originally two then three movies. I think they realized that if it was just one movie there was gonna be a ton of people angry at them, moreso than the amount annoyed at it being three movies, hence the story stretching.
_________________
YouTube
Facebook
Sorrowseed Melodic Extreme Metal
Blacksoul Seraphim Doomgaze
Thy Ancient Crypt Blackened Death Metal

Top
 Profile  
Thiestru
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:18 am
Posts: 1102
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:38 pm 
 

Sorry, but no. No one would have been angry with a single, long movie. I personally feel that two movies would have been best; they would have had plenty of time to cover everything in the book, plus set up the backstory that led to The Lord of the Rings. But three movies? That screams 'cash-grab'. You build up excitement over the course of three years, you rake in more money. After the success of The Lord of the Rings, it wasn't even a gamble. And in taking such liberties with the story, they exposed the fact that they didn't pay very close attention to the source material. They aren't bad movies; as I said, I enjoy them for what they are, but they are not honest adaptations of The Hobbit.
_________________
Zodijackyl wrote:
Anything but undying, eternal praise for Awaken the Guardian is completely wrong and a disgrace to you, your band, family, and Facebook friends list.


Please check out my music at the following link. Thanks!

http://thiestru.bandcamp.com

Top
 Profile  
themicrulah
Metalhead

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:00 am
Posts: 1167
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:41 pm 
 

Watching Rubin and Ed today. God, such a weird movie, I love Crispin Glover.
_________________
Treeweaver's new demo EP Aradia is now available!
Official Treeweaver Facebook Page
I SPREAD DISEASE LIKE A DOG, DISCHARGE MY PAYLOOOOAD
A MILE HIGH ROTTEN EGG AIR OF DEATH, ASSAULTS YOUR NOSTRILS!

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 1775
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:58 pm 
 

So I just now realized that Crispin Glover and Christian Slater are, in fact, different people. I really wish I was kidding.
_________________
The Zone takes care of its own.

Top
 Profile  
failsafeman
Digital Dictator

Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:45 am
Posts: 9506
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 8:56 pm 
 

Subrick wrote:
There were going to be people that complained if The Hobbit was just one movie, so of course they felt the need to stretch the story across originally two then three movies.

Honestly they definitely could have done it in one. The old Rankin/Bass cartoon did it in like an hour and a half, and while they obviously cut some stuff, they still did a really good job. Peter Jackson & co could have done it in one three-hour movie no problem, but of course, they would have made one third of the money than with a trilogy. I'm not complaining too hard, I quite enjoyed the first one, but I'm not kidding myself about their motives, either.
_________________
antonthereaper wrote:
Seriously, why ban me??????? That topic had nothing wrong with it! Theres something wrong with you i can tell you! You're immoral banning of my account! Anyways, i'm creating my own metal arcives.

http://extrememetalencyclopedia.webs.com/

Top
 Profile  
Subrick
Metal freak

Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:27 pm
Posts: 5718
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:20 pm 
 

Oh don't get me wrong, money absolutely had a hand in it too. Why else would one think Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was split into 2 movies, or Kill Bill, or the last Twilight movie (although in that movie's case, splitting it into 2 movies led to a TON of pacing and padding issues, and this is a series of movies that stretched the premise of each novel to 2 hours of boring padding)?
_________________
YouTube
Facebook
Sorrowseed Melodic Extreme Metal
Blacksoul Seraphim Doomgaze
Thy Ancient Crypt Blackened Death Metal

Top
 Profile  
Metantoine
The XVI, dominar to over 258714 subjects

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:00 pm
Posts: 8459
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:25 pm 
 

Ah come on, Kill Bill is a very lame example. It was more than 4 hours so it got separated into 2 movies and they're both pretty different so it works really well. It wasn't a book that got separated to make more money out of it.
_________________
Metantoine's Magickal Realm
Last.fm
Halberd (doom/death)

Top
 Profile  
Subrick
Metal freak

Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:27 pm
Posts: 5718
Location: United States
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:39 pm 
 

Kill Bill does work very, very well as two separate movies, but it was still originally intended to be one giant 4 hour movie that got split in half. Money still had to be a bit of a factor in the decision to separate the movie, but I'll admit it wasn't the best example ever.
_________________
YouTube
Facebook
Sorrowseed Melodic Extreme Metal
Blacksoul Seraphim Doomgaze
Thy Ancient Crypt Blackened Death Metal

Top
 Profile  
Metantoine
The XVI, dominar to over 258714 subjects

Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 5:00 pm
Posts: 8459
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:40 pm 
 

Yes, money but I'm pretty sure it wasn't Tarantino's decision. And to be honest, I don't really want to watch a 4 hours movie at the theater.
_________________
Metantoine's Magickal Realm
Last.fm
Halberd (doom/death)

Top
 Profile  
volutetheswarth
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:37 pm
Posts: 1173
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:47 pm 
 

I would have liked The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions to have been one film. Considering the ending eludes to some greater discovery for Neo, the introduction of various new characters, a world between the real and fake, that The Matrix still has many secrets. The last film serves merely as a long drawn out conclusion (that could have been summed up in half an hour), almost entirely scrapping what it built upon previously. Why introduce these new elements if not to build upon them?
Spoiler: show
Instead we got a train station as the big mystery no one has ever discovered, and 'It's ends tonight".. "I know it does" cue ridiculously overblown cartoon fight that's an utter let down.

Edit: Or alternatively for Revolutions to not have been released and to be left with questions.


Last edited by volutetheswarth on Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 7300
Location: Innsmouth
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:07 pm 
 

Hah, I must've been fuming so much about all the other extraneous crap in the Hobbit trailer that I missed the spiders completely. I'm sure it will still be an enjoyable movie, especially if it climaxes with Bilbo's confrontation with Smaug, but...I dunno. The LotR movies took liberties, but in the form of leaving things out, giving certain lines to other characters, expanding on certain elements that weren't really major parts of the book (Aragorn & Arwen's romance, Boromir & Faramir's relationship in the extended edition) but they didn't quite go so far as having entire plot lines fabricated and tossed in the mix.
_________________
Lippyass Major wrote:
Getting a band inked into your skin permanently is always a sign of dedication and intelligence, and I have a lot of respect for the people who do it.


COMA VOID | GLOAMING | FAUSTIAN ORBS

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic Go to page Previous  1 ... 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437 ... 476  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group