Immortals

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
...An example of someone who played the "young hunk" god well imo was brad pitt as Achilles. Granted, Achilles was only half god, but he had such a presence that you could believe him being a god. The kids in this movie lacked such a presence. There was nothing about them that emenated godliness.

But to hold so many characters to such a high standard as Brad Pitt is perhaps a bit unfair. Achilles/Brad Pitt was a central character. He had way more screen-time to develop such a presence (plus he's f*#king Brad Pitt). Theseus would be a better comparison, and he was almost equally well done, imo. And I never got the impression that Achilles was a god in Troy. He was a mortal. He was somewhat irreverent toward the gods. However, with the lesser characters in Immortals I definitely got the impression that they were gods, because of their extraordinary strength and all-around bad-assery at fighting.. lol. That was definitely some godlike skeelz.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
And as for hyperion, I thought that was one of the weakest parts of the plot. What POSSIBLE reason did dude have for joining hyperion? It was false tension.

There was a line where Hyperon said something to the effect of: "They treat you as a peasant, but I will treat you like a king." However, I kind of agree: they should have flashed some images in Theseus' mind of power and luxury. On that point I do kind of agree, it should have been emphasized more, but it is there.

I think playing the Gods as a younger cast was a good call. Strength, beauty & youth has always been what Greek mythology (& Greek art) was depicted as.

Their brash acts in defying "the law" & aiding the mortals were true to their "younger" immature, reckless selves than sitting back & watching if they were shown as older & wiser.

The younger gods were always shown as bored, laying around with nothing to do. And like with children, boredom always leads to mischief & getting in trouble.

We've already seen Laurence Olivier & Liam Neeson play an older version of Zuess...a 3rd older version would just have come across as cliched.

That's the thing also, Greek legends don't actually translate too well as a Hollywood big budget film without the Americanisation of characters.

Charlton Heston as Ben Hur. Brad as Achilles. Russell Crowe in Gladiator....they just didn't look or feel right in my opinion.

What impressed me was the Titans. I liked the interpretation which was refreshing as compared to other mediums. Hyperion also stole the show. Witness: Hell.

Mickey Rouke does a good of being a villain but i hope he does'nt keep geting typecast.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Mickey Rouke does a good of being a villain but i hope he does'nt keep geting typecast.

Watched well over half; it's pure fail. Skipped to the final fight; it was nothing new or special.

edit: WTF was up with Zeus' pencil molester stache?

Originally posted by Robtard
Watched well over half; it's pure fail. Skipped to the final fight; it was nothing new or special.

edit: WTF was up with Zeus' pencil molester stache?

Originally posted by quanchi112
What's pure fail about it ?

I think he's just too Robtarded to get it, quanchi.. didn't even watch the whole thing. I think we all know who's "pure fail" around here. 😉

Originally posted by Robtard
edit: WTF was up with Zeus' pencil molester stache?

Probably had to keep it for Musketeers.

Originally posted by quanchi112
What's pure fail about it ?

Story dragged, dialogue was weak, acting was sub-par at best, action was nothing special, characters were forgettable and the costumes were meh, that.

I saw it this week, really just to get a look at henry Cavill, since he's paying the new Superman. I can see why they cast him - he looks even more like Christopher Reeve than Brandon Routh did, and has the same smile.
The rest of the film - passable at best, if you just want action and aren't thinking too much about plot & logic. I knew it would look freaky and bizarre because it's Tarsem Singh directing, and the costume design was really unearthly. And seeing the Olympic Gods as young people was different. But that's about it. The style in the film was new when it was used in 300, but I was always consciously thinking this was just done on a digital lot; never got the epic feeling.

In the late 1960's, Stanley Kubrick shot his 'Dawn Of Man' sequences in a studio for 2001: A Space Odyssey. I was more convinced it was outside than in this one!

And I thought Mickey Rourke was playing Hyperion the Titan, from mythology. But he was just a renegade king in Greece.

Recently i watched Hollywood latest movie "Immortals" i found it really good as it is of my favorite category.
_________
Reputation Management Program

Originally posted by Robtard
...and the costumes were meh, that.

I have to respectfully disagree. I think the costumes are pretty badass. This poster is extremely nicely done...

And this one is quite creative as well...

Originally posted by roughrider
The style in the film was new when it was used in 300, but I was always consciously thinking this was just done on a digital lot; never got the epic feeling.

I know it's a minor detail but the lack of wind blowing made the cliff edge scenes blatantly obvious that it was filmed "in studio". Plus no one seemed "overly careful" that they were walking on narrow paths with such a sheer drop just inches away.

Originally posted by Robtard
Story dragged, dialogue was weak, acting was sub-par at best, action was nothing special, characters were forgettable and the costumes were meh, that.

Originally posted by Robtard
Story dragged, dialogue was weak, acting was sub-par at best, action was nothing special, characters were forgettable and the costumes were meh, that.
[QUOTE=13630675]Originally posted by quanchi112
You made up your mind before you saw this. It never had a chance in your mind.

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. Kennedy

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
I have to respectfully disagree. I think the costumes are pretty badass. This poster is extremely nicely done...

And this one is quite creative as well...

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
They're photoshopped posters... 😐

That's an excellent observation. But this is what we call a message board and we typically try to use language here to communicate ideas. (Unless, of course, you prefer to remain vague and not understood.) Do you have a point that you would like to get across?

🤨 😖leep:

The point is that using a photoshopped picture to explain why the costumes in the movie were not lackluster is retarded, as obviously the editer would throw as much shit on to the picture as possible to make the costumes look epic, hence why movie posters are almost always awesome looking regardless of how well the effects/costumes look in the movies.

Would you like to me use smaller words, or do you get the gist now?

I don't see why that's retarded. The posters show off the costumes, and I doubt whatever photoshopping was done to them drastically changed the costumes. I think the photoshopping probably had more to do with the streaks of fire (or whatever those are) and adding gritty blood and wear and tear. For example, I am quite certain that Hyperion's head-piece there looked pretty much like that in the movie.