Originally posted by ares834
Are you serious? The trailer looked like shit. The acting was porn level in quality and the special effects looked as if they came from a PS2 game.
I've juz re-watched the trailer again...yeah the acting or choice of actors is questionable but the budget still looks decent...
Games/Thrones telemovie budget I guess..?
Originally posted by Kazenji
Looks bad.... based on what?personally it looks great.
Based on atrocious acting, terrible CGI, woefull dialogue.
Pretty muchseems to have too high expectations for movies, Expecting almost every movie to be oscar winning quality.
Na. It's not too much to ask for something not to be utter shite given the production costs of most cinema released action movies nowadays. It must get to the point when they realise during the making of it that it's going to be crap but know they've spent so much on it that they have to release it to recuperate some of the money.
To illustrate my point I need only say 2 words.
John
Carter
Doesn't he think_everything_looks bad?
The irony being the thread above this in this forum I have a post that proves this generalisation wrong.
I call shit when it looks shit. And great when it looks great. Most of the time I'm right and some of the time I'm wrong. Trailers can be odd that way. An example being that the 3rd Man of Steel trailer was nigh on perfect and while the film was decent, never lived up to how the trailer made it look. It's difficult when they cut a trailer and basically outright lie about the tone of the film though. Jason Statham's Hummingbird is an example. Trailer made it look almost like a typical Statham action movie when it was mostly about his awkward relationship with a nun.