|
Post by ronnierocketago on Mar 5, 2009 21:29:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by arkadyrenko on Mar 5, 2009 21:58:55 GMT
Ebert was also suprisingly tolerant of BAYFORMERS. And Ebert first dismissed BLADE RUNNER and hated NIGTH OF THE LIVING DEAD. So, excuse me if i don't take everything he says as gospel.
Ebert is usually fail-proof on the more intimate, art-house character-based movies. But on the blockbusters, he's.... well, unpredictable.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Mar 5, 2009 22:02:52 GMT
Ebert was also suprisingly tolerant of BAYFORMERS. And Ebert first dismissed BLADE RUNNER and hated NIGTH OF THE LIVING DEAD. So, excuse me if i don't take everything he says as gospel. Don't forget FIGHT CLUB and mother fuckin DIE HARD. Ebert is usually fail-proof on the more intimate, art-house character-based movies. But on the blockbusters, he's.... well, unpredictable. Pretty much.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Mar 7, 2009 21:51:44 GMT
With these characters and this story I dont know why I was so pessemistic about this, but I was.
Overall I found the movie pretty enjoyable. No where near the realm of the book, but in my opinion probably better than any of the five superhero movies I saw last summer.
My biggest complaint is the opening five minutes, really the only part that wasnt essientially storyboarded by the comic. Its a tacky mess. The use of music throughout the film is horrible too. I like Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix etc, but the mainstream music blaring unneccessarily throughout probably a dozen points throughout the movie was awful. As much as someone like a Scorsese can make a song fit a scene, Snyder cant. The SPOILERS revised ending creates some structural problems throughout the story that annoyed me, but if I explained those it would really sound like nitpicking.
|
|
|
Post by ronnierocketago on Mar 7, 2009 22:44:03 GMT
With these characters and this story I dont know why I was so pessemistic about this, but I was. Overall I found the movie pretty enjoyable. No where near the realm of the book, but in my opinion probably better than any of the five superhero movies I saw last summer. My biggest complaint is the opening five minutes, really the only part that wasnt essientially storyboarded by the comic. Its a tacky mess. The use of music throughout the film is horrible too. I like Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix etc, but the mainstream music blaring unneccessarily throughout probably a dozen points throughout the movie was awful. As much as someone like a Scorsese can make a song fit a scene, Snyder cant. The SPOILERS revised ending creates some structural problems throughout the story that annoyed me, but if I explained those it would really sound like nitpicking. Criticisim is in itself nitpicking. That's why FCM got created in the first place, for us nitpickers. So I say jrod, what about the revised ending doesn't work?
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Mar 8, 2009 0:29:35 GMT
I would suppose that the deaths of 15 million people would lead to quite the clusterfuck of future ramifications for known associates of Dr. Manhattan. Namely, his ex girlfriend (SSII) and work associate (Adrian) would not simply have moved on as the ending would indicate...especially under that administration. I would also imagine the world would be less quick to unite and quicker to pass the blame onto America when attacks came FROM OUR OWN WEAPON. Also, I like the tiger Bubastis, which doesnt really have any reason for existing when the story isnt following Moores storyline.
Its all pretty minor though. Like I said, I did really enjoy the movie.
|
|
|
Post by Valenti on Mar 8, 2009 2:07:00 GMT
Just saw this.
Good: well done action sequences, as you would expect from the director of 300; the philosophy laden dialogue was really melodramatic and almost corny sounding (and unintentionally funny in a lot of places), it was a poor choice sticking so close to the source material. The music was pretty awful, too; again, unintentionally funny in a lot of places, it just didn't fit.
I'm really tired of people praising it simply because it stays true to the source material. Or saying it's bad because it doesn't.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
Post by jrod on Mar 10, 2009 18:59:24 GMT
Just saw this. Good: well done action sequences, as you would expect from the director of 300; the philosophy laden dialogue was really melodramatic and almost corny sounding (and unintentionally funny in a lot of places), it was a poor choice sticking so close to the source material. The music was pretty awful, too; again, unintentionally funny in a lot of places, it just didn't fit. I'm really tired of people praising it simply because it stays true to the source material. Or saying it's bad because it doesn't. Id disagree. Put this story into Hollywood's hands, and you get LXG, From Hell, or V for Vendetta. yuck. the acting wasnt great, the music cues were terrible, and the ending is flawed...but overall I thought the movie worked, mainly due to its compliance to the source material.
|
|
|
Post by arkadyrenko on Mar 12, 2009 22:32:00 GMT
The director of 300 doesn't do good action scenes. All he does, he takes the most irritating stuff being used in comercials and hip hop videos and shove it in movies without any other concern then "lookee, it's so kewl" crap.
If i want to watch good action in a comic movie, i watch THE DARK KNIGHT.
And if i want to watch a smart movie, i watch THE DARK KNIGHT.
|
|
|
Post by arkadyrenko on Mar 14, 2009 19:46:41 GMT
And jrod, when you comented in the Watchmen "Coming Soon" thread if it made sense that you wished this movie had never been made, trust me, it makes perfect sense. I understand you perfectly.
|
|
Blib
Ghost writer
Posts: 623
|
Post by Blib on Mar 19, 2009 3:43:58 GMT
I saw the novel on sale, 40% off, at a store today so I bought it. I read the first chapter and I'm already hooked. I wanted to make sure I read it before actually seeing it.
|
|