|
|
Post by Chuck on Mar 10, 2011 17:15:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Hygiene on Mar 10, 2011 17:28:11 GMT -5
My interest in this dropped dramatically when I found out it wasn't actually a "what really happened" version of the Battle of Los Angeles, but now I'm intrigued again. In a different way. |
|
|
|
Post by callipygias on Mar 10, 2011 22:05:06 GMT -5
If this was 40-years-old I could see the kitsch interest, but when it's brand new and about to make $100 million--further adding to the embarrassment of our modern cinema--I say it, and everything like it, can go straight to mr cleveland.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus 
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Mar 11, 2011 0:50:07 GMT -5
An alien invasion movie from the director of Darkness Falls and Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. Sounds like the greatest trainwreck of the last decade.
Of course...if the directors of AVPR didn't already make Skyline...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 13, 2011 15:52:45 GMT -5
My good friend wants to take me to this tomorrow.
This is the same friend who forced me to go see "Resident Evil" with him last fall, which remains the single worst movie I've ever seen. He actually thinks this crap is good cinema, and he told me I'm not allowed to bring my "MST attitude" with me this time.
I wonder if he thinks I'm a good friend. He clearly doesn't know me very well.
My favorite line from Ebert's review:
"Young men: If you attend this crap with friends who admire it, tactfully inform them they are idiots. Young women: If your date likes this movie, tell him you've been thinking it over, and you think you should consider spending some time apart."
|
|
|
|
Post by mummifiedstalin on Mar 15, 2011 0:48:05 GMT -5
Roger Ebert: I'm old and i don't like things. But, yeah, this is gonna suck. War of the Worldw without the ironic ending or bother with character and human reaction to chaos.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Mar 15, 2011 14:51:38 GMT -5
So I saw it last night, and it wasn't as bad as I expected. Eckhart is a convincing action hero, and a lot of the firefight sequences were quite impressive.
However, the shaky-cam was horrific. At one point, I had to step out of the theater to keep down the motion sickness. There was an early scene in an office that was a clinic on how not to shoot a scene in an office. One reviewer said it was like they hung a piñata from the ceiling, stuck a camera in it, and just spun it around. There wasn't a single shot in the whole movie that lasted longer than 2 seconds, and the camera never stopped moving. Absolutely nauseating cinematography for the entire film.
Ebert's criticism of the stereotyped characters is spot on. They spent about 5 minutes introducing the stock members of the Marine company, then gave no effort to let the audience keep track of anyone.
All that being said, it wasn't a terrible movie, and if you like your Marines full of "hoo-rahs" and square jaws, then it's a movie that'll get you pumped up. Semper Fi, then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck on Mar 15, 2011 20:07:12 GMT -5
Maybe I'm just old, but stroboscopic editing is not art. Video Mixing is art, but trying to make a film out of it? You might was well cut scenes of video games into the live action footage.
Oh, wait . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by TheNewMads on Aug 4, 2011 16:05:54 GMT -5
1/2 star is about right. this movie sucked, and i say that as someone who loves cheesy action/war/sci fi movies. day after tomorrow, deep impact, captain america, all movies i totally enjoyed. but this thing just was not fun.
roger ebert is a really interesting character, i like him. you should check out his review of "the happening" sometime, he's the only guy i know of who gave it a fairly glowing review, and he makes a pretty good case.
|
|
