Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
Same story different setting, and has been done 100's of times before in Sci Fi. Aliens, The Thing, Leviathan, The Fly. I could go on, but you get the point. Plus, they're far from a "master race". At best, this little colony threatened [b]A city.Sci Fi is a derivative genre, granted, but you can only be so original, Hence, human/cockroach hybrids. Original, but that's where the ingenuity ends. [/B]
They were the result of a genetic experimentation. And since there is the popular belief that roaches can survive a radiation and all that atomic stuff these Uber-cockroaches qualify for the title "master race".
You can say mimic is a typical sci-fi monster movie. But I don't recall anything involving superpower roaches prior to this movie. So in that perspective...is original.
Originally posted by DarkWizard
You Fella's didn't enjoy it?They had some stuff that wasn't thought of before, and I thought it was intriguing. Nevertheless, I hope you enjoyed 'Serenity' for exploring the Sci-fi genre. I know I did. Firefly fo life!
Originally posted by DarkWizard
You Fella's didn't enjoy it?They had some stuff that wasn't thought of before, and I thought it was intriguing. Nevertheless, I hope you enjoyed 'Serenity' for exploring the Sci-fi genre. I know I did. Firefly fo life!
It was ridiculous. Depended way too much on visuals and had tons of holes in it. Also, it was dumb that it went from a Pitch Black which was a hypothetical situation of what would happen if they crashed on a planet with an unknown alien race. Riddick delt with fighting godly figures. Its not a good mix to go from aliens to gods. Its like Ripley from Aliens in a movie with gods.
As for Serenity. I avoided it. I've heard a lot people say its good but I go more off the description and from the descriptions of the movie, it didn't sound good. I may see it sometime though.
Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
..and it's entirely true. At times, the similarities were so blatant, I think Joss Whedon was borderline plaguerizing.
Characters=Similar
Plot=Different
I agree when you say the similarities were blatant. But Serenity Explored the side of criminals in space, that Starwars Didn't. Making it a relatively fresh movie, IMO.
Originally posted by Myth
It was ridiculous. Depended way too much on visuals and had tons of holes in it. Also, it was dumb that it went from a Pitch Black which was a hypothetical situation of what would happen if they crashed on a planet with an unknown alien race. Riddick delt with fighting godly figures. Its not a good mix to go from aliens to gods. Its like Ripley from Aliens in a movie with gods.
It didn't have to rely on visuals, it had a very rich and intriguing storyline, not to mention a central focus that took a character from antagonist to hero, which is throwing that plot device in reverse.
"Pitch Black" is Science Fiction. Just like "Chronicles of Riddick", and just like "Aliens". Something that isn't presented as fact to begin with can't really have holes, now can it? It's not fair. I'm sure you like "Donnie Darko" and "Back to the Future" and the like, and as a friend as told me, the concept of time travel is inherently flawed because the characters in said movies are fast forwarding to a time where they don't even know if they exist or not, which ruins the whole movie. Being so overly analytical can ruin the fun of any movie, which as why it's entertainment, and not Science Fact.
Back to Riddick. Riddick is one of the most original Sci Fi characters of all time, as "Pitch Black" was as a movie. Riddick obviously had a lot of backstory, and who's to say that all of this didn't exist BEFORE "Pitch Black" was even written?
There's hardly anything really far-fetched in "Riddick". He's on the run from a bounty hunter, tracks down Imam, being one of the only people who knew where Riddick went, finds out Riddick's hometown is being taken over, and takes them on. There are no gods to speak of. They're warlords, plain and simple. The Elemental's are just another crazy race of spirit-based begins. It's Science Fiction, guys. I don't hear anyone complaining about Riddick having eyes that allow him to see in the dark? That's impossible, but it's obviously "forgiven" in a movie that was otherwise pretty "normal" aside from a bunch of ****in' aliens.
So, no, "Riddick" was much more than eye candy, the quality of which put the movie over the top for me. It's one of the better, more cohesive and plausable Sci Fi storylines of the past decade.
Originally posted by Impediment
Ummmm....................How did this discussion go from Guillermo Del Toro to a sci-fi flick that isn't even one of his movies? bored
Thread Evolution. It's the need to move off of the subject when someone disagrees with another. Or Someone Compares something on the subject to something remote, but comparable. I started it.
But to get on the subject. Del Toro has a nack for the CG fights. Although they aren't very believable. I think his crew does a great job making the switch from CG to Real-time people. Which is a good quality to have.