Wasted movie potential

Started by marwash226 pages

Originally posted by steverules_2
Me and my friend enjoyed it
dude basically murders a woman because he was lonely, she gets pissed and wants to kill him, but doesn't, and then because their death becomes more imminent, she just completely forgets that he doomed her and resigns to die with him even though she had the option to go back to sleep.

you thought that was a good story?

Originally posted by Robtard
Mouth has a very good point, imo. If they had turned it from a sappy romance into a psychological thriller midway through where Pratt's character suddenly isn't just a nice lonely guy looking for a human connection, but a dangerous creep in disguise, it could have been a much better film. The bait-n-switch.

Yeah, see, I wouldn't like that twist. I guess I watch so many movies like that that I enjoyed a more charming Romance in space quite nicely. That kind of stuff has been done so much anyway, with Topher Grace's character in Predators (I hated that stupid twist) and the movie was so much like Pandorum that it needed to take a different angle.

Originally posted by Robtard
Mouth has a very good point, imo. If they had turned it from a sappy romance into a psychological thriller midway through where Pratt's character suddenly isn't just a nice lonely guy looking for a human connection, but a dangerous creep in disguise, it could have been a much better film. The bait-n-switch.

edit: Something like 'What Lies Beneath' (2000), to the backdrop of a space ship.

👆

'Fatal Attraction' or 'Swimfan' in Space.

Haven't seen Fatal Attraction in a very long time, but didn't we know that ***** was crazy-cray from the start?

Originally posted by marwash22
dude basically murders a woman because he was lonely, she gets pissed and wants to kill him, but doesn't, and then because their death becomes more imminent, she just completely forgets that he doomed her and resigns to die with him even though she had the option to go back to sleep.

you thought that was a good story?

I enjoyed it yeah

Coulda worked as a thriller sure but that didn't stop me enjoying it

Originally posted by tkitna
Batman Versus Superman

Even though I'm in the minority on KMC of liking it quite a bit, it could've been the superhero movie to end all superhero movies if the script and editing weren't, admittedly, pretty whack. Being a big fan of Man of Steel, Zack Snyder, the comic book lore that inspired the murky plot, and the cinematography made it worthwhile to me, IMO.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Nope. In context of the rest of the Trilogy it's very good. They drew from philosophy and literature motifs. It's brilliant. Are there too many characters? Yeah, maybe... but they were inspired by stories like LOTR and no one complains about too much shit going on in those movies.

Agreed, Leech. The Wachowskis spoon-fed a bit too much philosophy to us, the audience, in Revolutions, but I still feel it is a very good film and ending to the trilogy.

Originally posted by Dreampanther
Man on Fire with Denzel Washington. Really enjoyed it up until just before the end. I still don't understand why they decided to change the original story's ending. I can only assume Hollywood wanted to try and use their film to create a message that violence is bad or live by the gun, die by it or some such ridiculously stupid sentimental nonsense.

Anyway, if they had stuck to the original story Man on Fire would have been one of my favourite movies. As it is, when it's on I tend to watch only the middle part and then switch to something else.


Can I ask how the book ended? IMO, Man on Fire is both Denzel's and Tony Scott's finest two hours on film.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
I am also going to throw one out there that some people might have issues with, but that's just how I feel about it: Age of Ultron. It's not a bad movie by any means. But I feel like it just retread a lot of the same stuff from the first Avengers film. It could have been really great, like the first one was, but it didn't quite live up to its predecessor. And like I said, this isn't just a thread for bad films. Average to good films can also be mentioned if people feel that they could have been even better.

Also, agree here as well, even though I'd say the first Avengers was a smashing success because all the characters came together for the first time and their dialogue and interactions with one another were just SO on point. Whedon did a great job with his material. However, it's pretty much Independence Day with superheroes. Age of Ultron could've been a much better movie had Whedon been given more creative control and Disney not wanted to set up the Phase 3 individual movies in the big team-up show-stopper of Phase 2.

Originally posted by Robtard
Haven't seen Fatal Attraction in a very long time, but didn't we know that ***** was crazy-cray from the start?
for sure. i just meant in terms of the theme of the movie, not the twist aspect.

Although I wasn't excited to see the movie at all, the final product sucked so bad I left my living room whilst watching the Netflix rented DVD: Cars 2.

All Pixar had to do was take Lightning McQueen and friends to a world Grand Tour racing-type event. Instead, they made Mater meet discount James Bond, the car. Biggest blight on Pixar's record to date by far.

Originally posted by TethAdamTheRock
What was wrong with Man Of Steel?

I don't feel like typing a book. Better question is, what was right about it?

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Weirdest f-ing looking aliens ever!

And yeah if the aliens were from the future & knew their fate rested on humanity's actions...why the hell didn't they just simplify the whole dam communication problem?

Because free will doesn't exist in Arrival's version of reality.

The Purge- The definition of wasted potential. Those movies could have been brilliant, but even the best one in the series, Anarchy, is only passable.

the dceu

Originally posted by John Murdoch
Can I ask how the book ended? IMO, Man on Fire is both Denzel's and Tony Scott's finest two hours on film.

Two major changes that changed the tone completely, imo.

1) Pinta wasn't "miraculously" still alive and unharmed after weeks and weeks of captivity. She was found dead in a car, suffocated on her own vomit. She had also been repeatedly raped by her captors (hence my derisive "Hollywood ending" comments).

2) This meant that Creasy didn't just get out of hospital to start hunting them down. Like the mercenary he was, with decades of experience and training, he mapped out a campaign to wipe them out. All of them.

Thus:

His best friend and long-time mercenary partner, Guido (not in the movie, though Walken's character is based on him) arranges a place for him to stay on an island in Malta and he goes off to rebuild his strength, regain his skills and lay out his plans.

Due to the connection he had with Pinta, he finds himself able to experience love again and slowly falls in love with a woman, Nadia, while on the island. She knows about Pinta and his plans and supports him. When he's ready, he leaves her and starts his war:

Everything he does, every kidnapper and enforcer he finds, extracts information from, blows up, executes - is all designed to do one thing: Terrify the guy at the top to the point where he decides the only thing to do is hole up in his base, built like a fort and guarded like a prison.

This is exactly what Creasy wants. The one thing they never fought was somebody like him. He is not a tough guy from the streets with a grudge. He is not an assassin. He didn't do covert ops. He is one of the deadliest soldiers alive, with decades of military experience in some of the worst places on earth, used to full-on assaults.

Now, picture this guy, doing a HALO drop late at night, stocked up on ammo, with grenades, submachine guns, assault rifle...

Then imagine what happened when he dropped into the middle of a fortress, facing guys whose experience consists of bullying shop owners and kidnapping children. They had nowhere to run. They had nowhere to hide. They had never been in a war before.

The book ends with an epilogue, where Creasy returns to the island, wounded (everyone thinks he's dead) and finds Nadia waiting for him with news: She's pregnant.

Originally posted by tkitna
I don't feel like typing a book. Better question is, what was right about it?

I didn't find it so bad. Was it spectacular? No, but the only part that truly made me cringe is when Johnathan Kent lets a tornado kill him for no actual reason.

I loved that they had the balls to have Superman just full on kill a guy. Also at least it wasn't like on Smallville when Clark killed someone in a way that he could have easily just avoided doing it, but Zod in the movie clearly wasn't going to stop until he was dead.

Originally posted by Surtur
No, but the only part that truly made me cringe is when Johnathan Kent lets a tornado kill him for no actual reason.

That was ridiculous.

How about Jor-el? The dude dies, but yet appears 100 more times in the movie helping Clark and Lois. Stupid. Die already for cripes sake.

Speaking of Jor-el, what about the dragon he was riding around on? Is this a Superman movie of Game Of Thrones?

Amy Adams as Lois. Puke.

The great villain and military leader Zod who constantly got his ass kicked. First by the formidable scientist Jor-el and then by Clark who's never thrown a punch in his life. Yeah Zod was more laughable than terrifying.

Superman snapping the neck of the villain and killing him. Are you serious? Its Superman. He overcomes and finds a way, but no, he just murders the bad guy. Could they have gone any further away from the character than that?

I remember seeing this movie with my son and buddy (whos a huge Superman fanboy) and when we walked out he said, 'man that movie sucked didnt it'. He couldnt have been more right. Just awful. I think its the worst movie in the entire DCEU to be honest.

I liked Russel Crowe as Jor-El, but to each their own.

Kal had been on earth longer than Zod and thus was more accustomed to his powers. Of course he was gonna win. Zod came off as the better fighter otherwise though, at least to me.

Chris Reeves Supes strangled his evil doppelganger to death in Superman III, and sent Zod and his gang plummeting to their deaths at the fortress of solitude in II. Still not seeing why the neck snap's such an issue. Zod clearly wasn't gonna stop till he was dead as pointed out, and there was no magic mirror to throw him in.

Note: I don't see MoS as some good movie, but the other DCU films so far sadly make it look great by comparison.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Note: I don't see MoS as some good movie, but the other DCU films so far sadly make it look great by comparison.

This. That is sad.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime

Kal had been on earth longer than Zod and thus was more accustomed to his powers. Of course he was gonna win. Zod came off as the better fighter otherwise though, at least to me.

Jor-el is a scientist and beat the hell out of him though. It just didnt make sense.

Note: I don't see MoS as some good movie, but the other DCU films so far sadly make it look great by comparison.

I guess you could throw a dart at that crap sandwich and anybody would have an argument regardless of where it landed.

Originally posted by Surtur
The Star Wars prequels.

This would be my pick as well. Never forget seeing TPM and watching a rowdy opening night crowd go from totally psyched to stunned silence as the realization of how bad it was set in. It was like expecting the mailman to hand you a check for a million dollars from Publishers Clearing House and instead it turns out to be a letter from your doctor saying you have cancer.