| Author |
Message |
Rissa
Member
03-19-2006
| Saturday, August 04, 2012 - 4:51 am 
Let's start over and this time I will try to be nice. LOL Didn't like it. Hard to say if it was because of the original or not but I do agree with the reviewers who said it lacked Arnold's charm. A LOT was changed but mostly nonsensical, can't expand without spoiling. Just don't think the story they came up with was very well thought out. One very minor example that isn't spoiling (because they say it as the film opens, even before credits) is that there are only two populated countries left on earth... Britain and Australia. So why do they make a point of showing that the money has a picture of Pres. Obama? Also, the chases got old really fast. We have chases on foot, chases over tall buildings, chases in cars. After about 20 minutes my dd turned to me and said she was getting really sick of the chases and I had been thinking that it was her type of movie and I was just there for the popcorn. LOL When I asked hubby afterwards he felt the same, not even the standard action-flick-its-just-fun.
|
Sheilaree
Member
07-19-2002
| Saturday, August 04, 2012 - 6:21 am
I wasn't going to see it, it look boring and it didn't make any sense in the previews anyone can tell if you want to see a movie if the movie looks good or not.
|
Pippin04
Member
10-26-2007
| Sunday, August 05, 2012 - 5:45 pm
I am with you Rissa. Also if it is UK and Australia. How come everyone had Spoiler
Click below to view spoiler | | an American accent. We thought maybe the US took over the world. That explains the money |
the part that bothered me was Spoiler
Click below to view spoiler | | the three breasted woman. In the first film she was from Mars. Why did she have three breasts this time? |
|
Rissa
Member
03-19-2006
| Sunday, August 05, 2012 - 6:08 pm
Pippin, the short answer is: Spoiler
Click below to view spoiler | | because of the chemical pollution, but of course the next question is.. why does she seem to be the only one affected? |
The more accurate answer is pandering to the audience of the original and perhaps trying to convince us that they had actually SEEN the original. {sigh}LOL
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Sunday, August 05, 2012 - 8:19 pm
A totally unnecessary remake. The only good thing about it is it makes me want to see the original again.
|
Sunshyne4u
Member
06-16-2003
| Wednesday, August 08, 2012 - 12:23 am
not surprised, havent seen it yet and usually i boycott remakes of classic shows.
i think i'll hold my nose and pretend its a completely new movie and Try Not to compare anything to the original.
my issue with so many movies is that they are full of fakedy fake explosions and other CGI stuff,NONE which looks the least bit real.
we can forgive stuff like the Cab Chase scene from Fifth Element because it was done like a decade ago. But when the same schmaltzie CGI is used in a high budget thriller now, i get PO'd.
that was my issue with Prometheous. I'm a avid watcher of STNG, TOS, Sg1 and SGA. Almost every concept and special effect in Prometheous had already been done to death on SG1 SgA a decade ago.
|
Rissa
Member
03-19-2006
| Friday, August 10, 2012 - 5:10 am
I tend to forgive bad CGI if there is a good story and forgive a bad story if the CGI blows me away. It's when they bill themselves as just a fun action flick with no excuses for storyline and then the CGI is horrible as well that I get ticked. With this one the CGI was pretty good, nothing special but it does the job.
Pippin, was thinking about it and Spoiler
Click below to view spoiler | | Just to be clear... the mutants from the first movie were not Martians, they were humans who had been affected by the polution/radiation in the mines. So in that respect the sequel had the same rationale for the 3 breasted woman but it was totally gratuitous that they chose her to be the only mutant (on the whole planet apparently LOL) |
|
