Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1706593/


i-M5Qx57_UU




Looks good. Looks like it has elements of Hancock, Akira, and Kick Ass rolled into one.




Don't get your hopes up: it's a "teen" movie which means it will have to do cheesy and/or stupid things.



Still, looks fun, at least.

The end sequence reminds me of Smith vs. Neo.

This looks extremely interesting. I'll have to keep my eye on this.

That does look pretty badass.

What Neph said. Well said Neph.

Stop agreeing with me so much. Its creepy. uhuh

Originally posted by steverules_2
But you did report Robtard mhmm

Actually, I didn't. I didn't report jack to anyone or anything. Even when I first pointed out he created a duplicate: still didn't report.



I'll leave it up to Impediment to address whenever he feels like it. It's not like the world will end because duplicate threads exist.


Originally posted by Nephthys
This looks extremely interesting. I'll have to keep my eye on this.


What has me worried is they can easily screw this up with some angsty teen emo crap.

They are trying to do a "Battle LA" with a "Cloverfield" meet up. Not sure how that will work.



Well, actually, I am a bit reminded of Cocoon...at least the "origins" of their powers reminds me of that...sort of.


Originally posted by Turr_Phennir
That does look pretty badass.

What Neph said. Well said Neph.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Stop agreeing with me so much. Its creepy. uhuh

It's hard to tell if either are serious.

peaches

Calling it now, best movie ever made.

Except there's no Kaneda, so, there's that.

The trailer did'nt really do much for me.

Originally posted by Kazenji
The trailer did'nt really do much for me. Well, you're dead inside, so.

Meh i've seen better stuff that has come out this year.

Nothing has or ever will come out that is better than this movie.

Originally posted by Mindset
Nothing has or ever will come out that is better than this movie.

That's what you said about Sucker Punch...

I'm going to watch this movie and the whole time be like "that's bullshit I should get powers not these clowns"

This looks pretty cool, I'd totally end up becoming evil though.

Not sure how likeable the characters will be for a full length movie..?

They kinda came across as irritating for the few minutes of the trailer.

Also, I'm not being racist but do we still need a "token black guy" in films these days?

What makes you think he's the "token" black guy, as opposed to just... a guy who happens to be black?

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
What makes you think he's the "token" black guy, as opposed to just... a guy who happens to be black?


I'm just saying, based on a 2 minute trailer, he seems the "odd" one out in the trio of friends.

He's neither the main lead nor is he the antagonist or comic relief of the group.

He's conservatively dressed (whereas his friends are casual), he labels the angry driver in the truck as a "redneck" & his friends joke,"that it's always the black guy" when he uses his power to move/steal the parked car.

Or maybe I'm just looking too hard into a 2 minute trailer.

looks so dope.

Interesting...

Felt like revisiting high school for a while there - except the popular clique has even more power.

It was hard enough to get through a math class with kin of these dudes, lame jokes and immature stunts included. I won't be paying to watch three guys kicking it around in front of the camera...

Definitely a DVD rent, though. So my bestie and I can make fun of them throughout the film. I anticipate many PIS.

Maybe if the trailer were less "stream of conciousness" I might find it more interesting.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I'm just saying, based on a 2 minute trailer, he seems the "odd" one out in the trio of friends.

He's neither the main lead nor is he the antagonist or comic relief of the group.

He's conservatively dressed (whereas his friends are casual), he labels the angry driver in the truck as a "redneck" & his friends joke,"that it's always the black guy" when he uses his power to move/steal the parked car.

Or maybe I'm just looking too hard into a 2 minute trailer.



You are so correct. You perfectly described the contemporary black movie character

Looks lame imho.

To make it good they need to introduce Magneto in there somewhere and he comes in to lay on the whoopass on that rogue mutant.

Originally posted by Placidity
Looks lame imho.
.

Same here.

Originally posted by Placidity
Looks lame imho.

To make it good they need to introduce Magneto in there somewhere and he comes in to lay on the whoopass on that rogue mutant. Originally posted by Kazenji
Same here. both of you can eat a telekinetic dick.

It looks like trash. fight me

No, I'm with you on this one...

Yeah, looks stupid. Bad idea for a movie. Clearly Hollywood is running out of ideas. Although, someone compared it to Hancock... well I certainly hope it's better than that piece of shit movie.

Oh please - do any of you guys remember what you were like when you were these kids' ages? What you thought was hilarious and what you thought you needed to say or do?

If any of you are groaning, then that's exactly what you can expect from this movie.

These kids are in like their earl to mid-twenties.

The super-majority of us are these kids' ages.

That's their real age, yeah. But don't you think they're probably playing high school students?

If not, well then, oops on me.

I'd gotten the impression they were college students or fresh out of college.

I only watched the trailer once though, like a month ago.

Originally posted by Mindset
Well, you're dead inside, so.

lol

Originally posted by Quincy
I'm going to watch this movie and the whole time be like "that's bullshit I should get powers not these clowns"

It's beginning to get to me too. Not that it should be me - I can curb my fantasies with reality - but that it always happens to irresponsible teens or some such. "The Chosen One" in the entire history of storytelling, is never someone who is initially excited about it or possessed of some amount of maturity. It just isn't statistically believable. I can't ask the "sudden responsibility" genre to have a conference and figure it out, but I wish one of them would break the mold.

I mean, Christ, I've thought about what I'd do in all SORTS of unreasonably impossible situations. And so has everyone else within a 10-year age radius of me. It's our generation. Reflect that, damnit.

This movie will disappoint those who think it will be great. Unless you have shit taste in film, then you'll likely be okay.

I've read the director of this movie is being eyed by Fox for the Fantastic Four reboot.

The movie actually surprised me. It was very enjoyable and all three characters were great.

Movie's got an 87% on Rotten Tomatoes.

So, Rob can eat a dick. uhuh

Shocking.

When I first saw this movie's trailer, I was like "Wtf didn't a movie just like this come out ages ago? And didn't it start with a C? Yeah, Covenant, that was it's name. Didn't that movie suck?"

Now Blax says it has an 87% on Rotten Tomatoes.

SHOCKING.

It's a really good movie. It's got regular guys who are given god like abilities basically out of the blue, and they have to cope with that.

Covenant was about 4 rich assholes who'd know about their powers the entirety of their lives and were assholes because of it.

Such a cynical world. The trailer was fine. Watched most of the movie yesterday and it's cool.

Shut the **** up I'll murderise your souls and cast your bodies to Oblivion.

Moviebob gives it a thumbs up. I've rarely heard him give such a glowing review. That makes me strongly consider seeing this.

Is the whole movie filmed with a video camera?......because if it is i'll watch it on Dvd/blu-ray.

I've heard nothing but good stuff about this movie. I'm looking forward to seeing it.

honestly it looks lame. Looks like someone used their homemade camera and tryed to make a movie using the best computer programs out there...im going to wait for the bootleg version.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Is the whole movie filmed with a video camera?......because if it is i'll watch it on Dvd/blu-ray.

Sorta. The whole movie is found footage, but it's not all from a video camera. Certain scenes use security footage or news footage etc...

Originally posted by rudester
honestly it looks lame. Looks like someone used their homemade camera and tryed to make a movie using the best computer programs out there...im going to wait for the bootleg version.

Not at all.

gonna be sick. How would the haters like their crow served?

Saw it this weekend...thought it was decent. Great buildup, but the ending was kind of lame and predictable.

Felt sick afterward from the shaky camera.

With no high expectations...I thoroughly enjoyed the movie.

No "men in black" or CIA chasing the kids. No evil alien menace they have to fight & save the earth from...it was simply a "down to earth" story of how a bunch of kids would cope having super powers.

The fact that they more or less kept in to themselves & not try to take over the world or use their powers too selfishly made the whole scenario more realistic.

The flight sequence through the clouds was awesome. Better flight effects compared to Superman or any of the Xmen films.

Lastly, what impressed me the most was that it was written & directed by Josh Trank whose only 27 yrs old.

I personally loved how it was more about the guys relationship with each other and their personalities and every day lives and the superpower thing was just for added effect. I was a good movie.

It was a character study, for sure.

I feel like this movie is going to be the underrated movie of the year.

People say "character study" when they don't want to admit that a movie they really thought was going to be great turned out to be little more than cliched garbage.

It's too late to save face, Rob. Just bend over and accept that your prediction was wrong this time. I'll be gentle.

Rob, have you seen it yet?

'course he hasn't. 313

Originally posted by marwash22
Rob, have you seen it yet?

No, but I look online for it most days, so within a month or so.

I like the reviews. Look forward to this.

Kind of disappointed by the movie. It was fairly entertaining, but also a pretty mindless popcorn flick. My biggest issue was that the commercials spoiled the story and most interesting visuals of the movie. But another thing that really irritated me about it was that it tried to pretend it was smart with a lot of psychology and philosophy references, yet ultimately the characters were 1 dimensional (such as the abusive dad constantly being an abusive drunk rather than us seeing good sides along with the bad, and Andrew being your stereotyped abused/bullied kid who wants to be popular but gets all moody and destructive when it doesn't work out for him)

6/10

That actually appealed to me, Myth. Then again, I'm biased seeing as I'm a Psychology Major.

Originally posted by Myth
But another thing that really irritated me about it was that it tried to pretend it was smart with a lot of psychology and philosophy references, yet ultimately the characters were 1 dimensional (such as the abusive dad constantly being an abusive drunk rather than us seeing good sides along with the bad, and Andrew being your stereotyped abused/bullied kid who wants to be popular but gets all moody and destructive when it doesn't work out for him)

6/10

I didn't think the overall movie was trying to be too deep in philosophy, after all it only one of the characters that kept spouting quotes from philosophers & it was more like a gimmick to irritate his friends & try & pick-up chicks.

As far as most of the characters being one-dimensional, I think this was necessary to the story & the fact that it was filmed by hand-held camera. I mean for us, the audience, to see both the good & bad sides to every character in the movie, you'd literally have to have Andrew "stalking" everyone to witness their entire range of personalities. And as the movie established from the start, Andrew was only interested in filming his life & the abuse he copped at home & not be a voyeur with his camera.

Started out somewhat interesting despite the all-so-generic characters. You could call plot points ahead easily; had an Akira-ish ending.

Still somewhat impressed overall since it was made on a budget of 15million.

Originally posted by The Big O
That actually appealed to me, Myth. Then again, I'm biased seeing as I'm a Psychology Major.

I'm working on my doctorate in psychology, so I love it when movies are psychological. This felt like it was pretending to be, but ultimately was very shallow with its 1 dimensional stereotypical characters.

You have me beat by a couple degrees. I'm working on my Bachelor's. But i personally think that the characters were far from stereotypical. What makes you think they are? I'm just asking for your opinion.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I didn't think the overall movie was trying to be too deep in philosophy, after all it only one of the characters that kept spouting quotes from philosophers & it was more like a gimmick to irritate his friends & try & pick-up chicks.

As far as most of the characters being one-dimensional, I think this was necessary to the story & the fact that it was filmed by hand-held camera. I mean for us, the audience, to see both the good & bad sides to every character in the movie, you'd literally have to have Andrew "stalking" everyone to witness their entire range of personalities. And as the movie established from the start, Andrew was only interested in filming his life & the abuse he copped at home & not be a voyeur with his camera. I agree with all of this.

Originally posted by The Big O
You have me beat by a couple degrees. I'm working on my Bachelor's. But i personally think that the characters were far from stereotypical. What makes you think they are? I'm just asking for your opinion.



I kind of mentioned this in my first post, but I will elaborate. My biggest issue was with the abusive/drunk father. I worked with domestically violent men for over a year, and like most people, they have good sides to them and bad. The father in this movie was 100% bad, which is a stereotype that is usually wrong. They had an opportunity to give more depth to his character, particularly during the hospital scene. That was a moment where they could have shown that he cares at least a tiny bit about his son. But instead, they wanted to stay true to the stereotype and had him yelling at his unconscious son. Andrew himself was very stereotypical too. They set up his story arc as simple as: Kid + Bullying + Abuse = Kip Kinkell. He was moody and the spider torcher also fit right into the stereotype. In the end, Andrew was pretty much a rip off of Carrie with more stereotypical behaviors thrown in.

It's a stereotype that may usually be wrong, but it's not entirely wrong. Plenty of abusive parents out there are 100% bad. You can't say that their aren't, and the fact that he was one doesn't take away from the movie.

@ Myth:

so, you disliked the movie because of your personal involvement with one particular aspect of the film?

that is certainly one way to watch movies.

While I'm not trying to debate, I personally think that part worked out because it allow the character to stay true to itself. All movie long Dad was showing how he didn't care for his son by abusing him verbally, physically and emotionally. If that was because of the alcohol, then sobeit. And Andrew did make reference to his dad's drinking at the beginning of the movie. He also said that he began recording because his dad was beating him. That would lead me to believe that it was an all the time thing or happened enough times that he decided to set a camera up to catch his dad in the act.

While it's true that the director had a chance to redeem the father, he chose not to so he could stay true to the character. There wasn't one moment in the movie where the dad showed that he cared about his son. If there was, please refresh my memory because I only saw the movie once. But if all of the sudden, Dad decided that he did care, the character would lose its merit because of inconsistencies.

And while stereotypes are definitely not nice, some actually do have a ring of truth to them. If they didn't, they wouldn't exist. Andrew may very well have been the stereotypical character, but that's what made him a good character. He was a tortured kid and when he got the chance to do something about it, he took it. Everyone feels that way at some point in their life.

Everyone's saying how cliched & stereotyped Chronicle was...

Christ, name me one movie that wasn't.

Originally posted by marwash22
@ Myth:

so, you disliked the movie because of your personal involvement with one particular aspect of the film?

that is certainly one way to watch movies.

I never said that I disliked the movie, but I do think it is getting overrated. I gave it a 6/10. Also, that was just one particular part of the movie I disliked and think had room for much improvement. My biggest disappointment (which is not the directors/actors fault, rather those who marketed the film) was that the commercials spoiled most of the movie. The entire story was pretty much revealed in the commercials, as were 90% of the impressive visuals.

Originally posted by Myth
The entire story was pretty much revealed in the commercials, as were 90% of the impressive visuals. that's is something i also dislike... which is why i try to only watch action movie trailers once. same with comedies 'cause the post production people tend to put all the funny bits in the trailer.

Originally posted by Myth
I never said that I disliked the movie, but I do think it is getting overrated. I gave it a 6/10. Also, that was just one particular part of the movie I disliked and think had room for much improvement. My biggest disappointment (which is not the directors/actors fault, rather those who marketed the film) was that the commercials spoiled most of the movie. The entire story was pretty much revealed in the commercials, as were 90% of the impressive visuals.

Overrated?
But we're the audience & our criticisms is what a movie strives for to make it popular or not.
I mean we're up to 4 pages of giving our opinions on Chronicle...like it or hate it...does this really mean the movie's overrated?

I don't think the father character had much room for improvement, I mean we're first introduced to him, drunk in the morning, looking to pick on his son for no apparent reason at all.
How can you find room for redemption from that 1st introduction?

And yes, unfortunately, marketing gave too much away for this movie & that's something totally out of the hands of those that created the movie...

gonna see this tonight. kinda excited.

You won't be disappointed, Marwash. Well, hopefully, you won't.

And you said it better than I could, Esau.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Overrated?
But we're the audience & our criticisms is what a movie strives for to make it popular or not.
I mean we're up to 4 pages of giving our opinions on Chronicle...like it or hate it...does this really mean the movie's overrated?

I don't think the father character had much room for improvement, I mean we're first introduced to him, drunk in the morning, looking to pick on his son for no apparent reason at all.
How can you find room for redemption from that 1st introduction?

And yes, unfortunately, marketing gave too much away for this movie & that's something totally out of the hands of those that created the movie...

Overrated is a subjective term. Others rate the movie higher than I do, so obviously I think it is overrated. My statement about it being overrated (and anytime somebody says something is overrated) is as simple as that.

I think there is a difference between redeeming him and making him a more realistic abusive father. It is still really easy to dislike a character who is abusive in one scene and then relate-able in another. I never (or at least usually never) think it is a bad thing to add depth to a character.

Let's just say we agree to disagree. There's nothing wrong with the way you view the movie, Myth. And there's nothing wrong with the way we view it.

Originally posted by The Big O
Let's just say we agree to disagree. There's nothing wrong with the way you view the movie, Myth. And there's nothing wrong with the way we view it.

I completely agree. I never thought there was anything wrong about how others viewed the movie. I simply stated my opinion, others questioned it, and I explained my perspective, but that was never to say that I thought anybody else's opinions were invalid.

Since you both agree to disagree, seal the agreement with mutual oral.

Hmm....that's an interesting way to seal a deal...

Originally posted by Myth


I think there is a difference between redeeming him and making him a more realistic abusive father. It is still really easy to dislike a character who is abusive in one scene and then relate-able in another. I never (or at least usually never) think it is a bad thing to add depth to a character.

I'm not trying to pick a fight or debate for the sake of debating....
I just enjoyed the movie for what it was.

But as I stated earlier on,it's impossible to give characters "depth" when you're using a "Blair Witch-Style" perspective of filming a movie.
We're seeing the movie from Andrew's point of view & if he's the one that's grown up in an abusive house-hold & clearly is the victim, then it's difficult to see the father in any other sense.
The father clearly blames everyone else but himself for the hardships in his life.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn


But as I stated earlier on,it's impossible to give characters "depth" when you're using a "Blair Witch-Style" perspective of filming a movie.

I completely disagree with this. I've even stated a specific scene in which they easily could have.

It would have made no sense. Everyone can't be redeemed, especially if there's no reason for it. His dad showed nothing redeemable, and to redeem him just because at the end would have proved nothing.

Originally posted by Myth
I completely disagree with this. I've even stated a specific scene in which they easily could have.

The hospital scene?
But that was too far into the story & too late for character redemption.
It was a pinnacle scene that finally threw Andrew over the edge.

Name another movie where a hand-held camera was used & the characters actually had depth to their personalities?

I've never used to the word redeem, so I don't know why people are getting stuck on that word. I just wish he was a more believable character. It is very possible for him to be hate-able and yet have moments where he is isn't a complete tool-bag. It not only would add depth to the dad's character, but would add depth to Andrew's because then we would see that the bad out weighs the good in his eyes, rather than needing to be bluntly knocked over the head to understand there was abuse. To me, subtlety can go a long way, and the movie just completely lacked all forms of subtlety, particularly regarding the characters. It is fine if you prefer the movie to not have any of these elements, but it is certainly not impossible for them to be included.

As for the name another hand held camera style movie, why does that matter? There is a limited number of hand held style movies out there, and I think it would do them good to branch out. I've enjoyed several of the films in this genre, but none of them have been great.

Chronicle was an hour & twenty four minutes long.
A relatively short film to focus on a sub-character's personal complexities.

I'm simply saying because of the hand-held approach, Andrew's character would've had to plant "spy cameras" all over his household in order to catch any more "depth" or good sides to his father.

We knew his father cared/loved his sick wife & that was enough of a good trait to give him substance. But turning to the bottle because he was un-employed & dealing with mounting medical bills all led him to easily blame someone else than consider himself a loser.

saw it. liked it.

lol @ the people complaining about the shaky cam, there were probably 5 total minutes of shaky cam in the entire movie, the rest was surprisingly focused.

One thing that bugged me just a little was that they went black dude dies first trope on us. I thought Steve was a much more charismatic character than Matt. Though, i didn't mind it all that much considering it made more sense for the cousins to face off in the end.

question: did anyone else think Steve was more powerful than Andrew? I think so because Steve was the first to move something on a large scale and was the first to figure out how to fly. I think Steve vs Andrew would have been more epic.

as for the philosphical stuff some people were complaining about; i don't get where you were coming from. Only one character was into it (Matt) and it was kind of a running joke that everyone else was also in on... even the chick Matt was into was mocking him about it. So no, i don't think the movie was "trying to be too philosophical".

Concerning the dad, it was a 90 minute movie! Not even sure it was that long; for them to get into this whole side story about how complex the dad is, would have made no sense in the context of the movie. More to the point, why would it be so unbelievable that he had no redeeming qualities? Actually, that's not even accurate! The guy was clearly distraught over losing his wife... he simply hated his son for whatever reason and blamed all his problems (including missing his wife's final moments) on him.

anyhow, i give it a strong 8 overall.

Oh and i heard rumors that they were already thinking sequel... how? two of the three are dead! O_O I guess they'd have to focus it all on Matt; perhaps have him run into other people with powers who have already come in contact with that thing before this movie took place. There's definitely potential for a sequel.

I'm spent discussing whether they could add depth or not. As said earlier, lets agree to disagree.

On the last thing that marwash22 said, they wouldn't even need the same characters, just a similar premise. They could show the military finding the Krypton looking rock thing and show what happens if some military guys who are corrupt with power get their hands on the telekinesis powers. We already know that they were sealing off the area and they likely were intrigued with all the superpower shit they saw displayed by Andrew and Matt.

Sequel potenial....how about Matt coming back with an army of floating Buddhist monks.

OMMM-MYGOD!

Originally posted by marwash22
One thing that bugged me just a little was that they went black dude dies first trope on us. I thought Steve was a much more charismatic character than Matt. Though, i didn't mind it all that much considering it made more sense for the cousins to face off in the end. And that's why Steve had to die. It symbolized the breaking of the bond between the two cousins. It also would have been slightly less believable and sped the movie up if Andrew killed his cousin and had to fight someone who was just a friend. That would make the end fight exponentially shorter because Steve wouldn't hesitate to kill Andrew because they were only just friends. Matt, on the other hand, didn't want to kill his cousin. At least, that's how I interpreted it.

Originally posted by marwash22
question: did anyone else think Steve was more powerful than Andrew? I think so because Steve was the first to move something on a large scale and was the first to figure out how to fly. I think Steve vs Andrew would have been more epic. I kinda believe that they were sorta equal. Steve simply showed raw power while Andrew demonstrated finesse in the use of his power. Steve himself said something along the lines of how he couldn't focus and concentrate like Andrew could and that's why he couldn't do the things his friend did. I may be wrong but I only saw the movie once. It was also shown that Andrew practiced on the regular while Matt and Steve more so played with their abilities. So they probably had the same level of power but just utilized it in different ways.

Originally posted by marwash22
as for the philosphical stuff some people were complaining about; i don't get where you were coming from. Only one character was into it (Matt) and it was kind of a running joke that everyone else was also in on... even the chick Matt was into was mocking him about it. So no, i don't think the movie was "trying to be too philosophical".
The tone of the movie itself was philosophical. The tone of the movie was "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and Andrew was the vessel of that philosophy. Again, my personal opinion. This could be interpreted differently, as well.

And I'd definitely go see a sequel of this movie

I sw it and I enjoyed it though I really didn't dig the whole Black dude dying first thing. I also think they should've developed the weather manipulation thing that Andrew had when Steve died. C'mon Lightning makes everything cool

I would see a sequel to this as well.

That'd probably be in a sequel, wakka......

Well Something like that would've at least added to the scene of the final fight.

Err...I find it funny how this was made on a considerably low budget yet was really enjoyable.

It was barely a fight, lol. More like a final display....

It was a scuffle between two people with superpowers. Even if it was a tad unimpressive it was still a fight...

Not reading all of this I just want someone to answer my question: Is this worth watching ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
Not reading all of this I just want someone to answer my question: Is this worth watching ?

Yes it is. Even if you end up not liking it, it's still worth a watch at least.

Originally posted by wakkawakkawakka
It was a scuffle between two people with superpowers. Even if it was a tad unimpressive it was still a fight... I suppose you're right.

Good+movie+i+finally+saw+it+saturday. +Steve+was+the+best+one+in+my+opinion+but+andrew+w
as+a+beast. +Could+it+be+possible+that+if+there+is+a+sequel+co
uld+andrew+and+steve+come+back+or+better+yet+would
+they+be+able+to+explain+how+that+could+happen+but
+more+importantly+would+it+make+sense%3F%3F+I+ask+
this+because+of+the+fact+that+when+andrew+tries+to
+stab+matts+hand+it+bent+the+fork+and+it+didnt+hur
t+matt+at+all+but+it+made+a+red+mark+so+to+me+it+k
inda+dont+make+sense+unless+i+missed+something+in+
the+movie. +Unless+the+only+way+they+can+die+is+by+eachother+
but+then+the+fork+would'v+went+through+matts+hand.+

Originally posted by marwash22
question: did anyone else think Steve was more powerful than Andrew? I think so because Steve was the first to move something on a large scale and was the first to figure out how to fly. I think Steve vs Andrew would have been more epic.

They directly addressed that in the film. It was stated, shortly after he moved the car or before that Steven was more brute force and Andrew had more finesse and precisions. That was partially established with the lego stacking vs. the car moving.

Originally posted by marwash22
as for the philosphical stuff some people were complaining about; i don't get where you were coming from. Only one character was into it (Matt) and it was kind of a running joke that everyone else was also in on... even the chick Matt was into was mocking him about it. So no, i don't think the movie was "trying to be too philosophical".

Indeed. It was more of a tool he was using to sound cool and get with a chick

Originally posted by marwash22
Concerning the dad, it was a 90 minute movie! Not even sure it was that long; for them to get into this whole side story about how complex the dad is, would have made no sense in the context of the movie. More to the point, why would it be so unbelievable that he had no redeeming qualities? Actually, that's not even accurate! The guy was clearly distraught over losing his wife... he simply hated his son for whatever reason and blamed all his problems (including missing his wife's final moments) on him.

I don't understand Myth's need for the dad to experience a positive change. The father already had the positive attributes about him: he was head over heels for the mother of that family. We saw his father arguing, furiously, with the insurance company trying to get medicine for the mother. He also took care of the mother, frequently, because the father did remark that the single time he left the mother's side, she died (she most likely suffocated due to her shallow breathing problems...remember when Andrew turned his mother and she could start breathing again? That was what sh*t was about). So the father had the "blame the child" problem. Common in abusive homes with messed up parents: they sometimes have a "whipping boy" due to a "crazy people" perspective on what the child is doing: http://psychology.chass.ncsu.edu/pss/pdf/parent%20cluster%20paper.pdf


Originally posted by marwash22
anyhow, i give it a strong 8 overall.

I do, as well. I give it a weak, 8, however.

Originally posted by marwash22
Oh and i heard rumors that they were already thinking sequel... how? two of the three are dead! O_O I guess they'd have to focus it all on Matt; perhaps have him run into other people with powers who have already come in contact with that thing before this movie took place. There's definitely potential for a sequel.

I agree. sequel dis birch! I think there's still hope that Andrew is still alive. Last time I checked, being impaled, right down the center of your guts below the ribs, just destroys your mobility below the waste, may cause internal bleeding (but the poles can sometimes stop the bleeding...with a very nice seal, surprisingly) and will damage some of your small intestines. It's a devastating wound but you can survive from it with immediate medical care...and he was surrounded by police so it is not too crazy to assume that Andrew could receive immediate medical care. So there's still room for a wheel-chair bound Andrew...well, an Andrew that lost his leg's mobility...he could still fly, though.

Also, they could find out what the creature was inside of the crystal in the cave. They could take the movie an entirely different direction, if they wanted to.

hi does anyone know where I can download this movie.....online..I know its online now..but I cant find a link for it that doesnt allow me to download additional stuff.

Originally posted by Jack Angel
Good+movie+i+finally+saw+it+saturday. +Steve+was+the+best+one+in+my+opinion+but+andrew+w
as+a+beast. +Could+it+be+possible+that+if+there+is+a+sequel+co
uld+andrew+and+steve+come+back+or+better+yet+would
+they+be+able+to+explain+how+that+could+happen+but
+more+importantly+would+it+make+sense%3F%3F+I+ask+
this+because+of+the+fact+that+when+andrew+tries+to
+stab+matts+hand+it+bent+the+fork+and+it+didnt+hur
t+matt+at+all+but+it+made+a+red+mark+so+to+me+it+k
inda+dont+make+sense+unless+i+missed+something+in+
the+movie. +Unless+the+only+way+they+can+die+is+by+eachother+
but+then+the+fork+would'v+went+through+matts+hand.+

That is annoying as shit to read, but this is the explanation that you missed: During the fork scene, they were talking about how to make a force field by imagining there is one there. Therefore, they are only protected when consciously making a force field. When Andrew dies, he wasn't expecting the spear from his back, so I think his guard was down.

Originally posted by dadudemon
They directly addressed that in the film. It was stated, shortly after he moved the car or before that Steven was more brute force and Andrew had more finesse and precisions. That was partially established with the lego stacking vs. the car moving.I also stated this. It was also pointedly obvious to me even if it wasn't stated.

Originally posted by dadudemon
sequel dis birch! I think there's still hope that Andrew is still alive. Last time I checked, being impaled, right down the center of your guts below the ribs, just destroys your mobility below the waste, may cause internal bleeding (but the poles can sometimes stop the bleeding...with a very nice seal, surprisingly) and will damage some of your small intestines. It's a devastating wound but you can survive from it with immediate medical care...and he was surrounded by police so it is not too crazy to assume that Andrew could receive immediate medical care. So there's still room for a wheel-chair bound Andrew...well, an Andrew that lost his leg's mobility...he could still fly, though.

Also, they could find out what the creature was inside of the crystal in the cave. They could take the movie an entirely different direction, if they wanted to. I agree with this to the max.

Originally posted by rudester
hi does anyone know where I can download this movie.....online..I know its online now..but I cant find a link for it that doesnt allow me to download additional stuff.

*Facepalm*

I saw it it was really good. u suck for not telling me,,you suckkah! im going to cry now...sad endding

whats facepalm mean..I mean people say it but no one ever explain what its truely means??

Slap forehead with the palm of your hand??? what theee?

Apparantly Josh Trank is thinking of doing a Venom Movie as in the Spider-Man villain.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Apparantly Josh Trank is thinking of doing a Venom Movie as in the Spider-Man villain.


How can you have a Venom movie without the antagonist...Spiderman?

Unless it's a Sony production, it's not going to happen.

^ I personally always preferred the Venom comic books to the Spider-man comics.

I'd love to see a movie focused around Venom vs Carnage.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
How can you have a Venom movie without the antagonist...Spiderman?


Theres way's around.

I never knew Venom had his own comic book series.

But on his own, what's a villain supposed to do...?

Not sure what happen with the Eddie Brock/Venom series

but with Flash Thompson he's working for a villain called Crime Master only because if he does'nt do the jobs Crime Master will kill his friends.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
I never knew Venom had his own comic book series.

But on his own, what's a villain supposed to do...?

Venom is more of an anti-hero than a villain to me. He hates Spider-man because of his jealousy, but outside of attacking Spider-man, he often wants to help the city and in a sense replace Spider-man. I think a movie about him could do a quick origins story (modified a little if needed to keep Spidey out), then introduce that Carnage's symbiote came down too. The origins for Carnage could be more drawn out throughout the movie, so that the first half of the movie is Venom getting used to his symbiote, while introducing Kasady and his insanity in human form, then by the 2nd half of the movie Kasady becomes Carnage and goes crazy on the city.

By the way, one of my childhood favorite comic story lines was when Venom went completely nuts and started having split personalities and multiple heads, then had to fight Juggernaut (The Madness storyline).

http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/1/12871/1628085-kitty_super.jpg

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSt5P8kGsJ-_6gfcpRrv2x8jOJO_tv5E7AmYIZxhxgjUosas8rd6k0-xZo3

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/6816/madnesscover.jpg

For Venom's origin be better off using the one from the 90's animated series rather then trying to do Secret Wars.

Thanks for such a great information that i was looking for on this movie.

Now Trank is attached to doing 'The Red Star' adaptation

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=88194

Oh wait... do you think that there would be a sequel?

Just saw this. Pretty good movie, up until the end (which was poorly done, imo.)

Originally posted by Galan007
Just saw this. Pretty good movie, up until the end (which was poorly done, imo.)

Yeah, I didn't like the ending too much. I mean, it was alright. But it could have been done a lot better.

Originally posted by dadudemon
But it could have been done a lot better.

Ninjas.

Originally posted by Robtard
Ninjas.

Those hoodies they wore...could be ninja-ish.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Those hoodies they wore...could be ninja-ish.

Maybe an outer space Mormon angle?

(Btw I'm not even going to respond to JesusIsAlive on that Faith thread. That guy seriously has a dangerous attitude.)

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, I didn't like the ending too much. I mean, it was alright. But it could have been done a lot better. The burned emo kid (Andrew?) bothered me. It was cool how he was tossing cars around, but in the final scene (just before he's impaled) he starts screaming incessantly, as though he's going to collapse the entire city, yet he merely succeeds in... Breaking all the windows in his vicinity? Weak.

I did like how they showed each character's telekinetic progression--from lifting legos, to catching baseballs, to moving cars, to flying, etc.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Maybe an outer space Mormon angle?

(Btw I'm not even going to respond to JesusIsAlive on that Faith thread. That guy seriously has a dangerous attitude.)

lol


(no worries, mang. JIA is legendary in those parts of KMC. I definitely do not hate the guy and I do agree with some things he says...but he just approaches stuff the wrong way half of the time.)

This is very nice movie...

Just saw the lost footage edition of chronicle

Good shit man

Has potential.

Thought it was dope. Watched it online because everyone said I'd be disappointed.

I agree with the other poster who said it would have been better if he started bringing down buildings with that epic scream in the climax. But it was cool.

Nice, brief and disturbing superhero flick. The camera gimmick didn't really bother me and I feel it was effective in making it seem more realistic.

I Watched Chronicle Movie online with Friends, One of the best movie, very enjoyable movies Stuffs used...