Couldve been so much better
So disappointing it wasnt.share
Yeah. And also such a long wait for a new movie. They needed to make more sequels. That way they could’ve kept all the principal actors. But I guess MK Annihilation put the final nail in the coffin, and while it wasn’t a total box office bomb, but it ruined the chance for a successful franchise. Now finally after so many years they decided to reboot it.share
I might watch the reboot which I think is so freaking odd cause I've been obsessing about Mk for the last year or so but I wont give it any credit cause it I feel is based on the reboot game which is total trash.
But with the originals and it's sequels I think they put that nail themselves. Though the games were freaking awesome, something about all these types of games is that inconsistent storylines and terrible character developments. The same thing was with the movies. I mean I did like MK1 and even so 2 not as much though but to give Subzero and Scorpion insignificant storylines and reduce them to goons was such a slap in the face. Reptile was strangely bizarre. The Kitana Liu Kang Romance was from left field. Raiden having such a powerful arc had nothing in the games. Though I didnt like Kano I thought his character deserved more respect and so did Goro who had such an overwhelming presence in the film but again blah story. It had so much potential but ultimately it felt very short and that is what was so disappointing. Somehow Liu Had a brother who's story had more respect than many of the game characters from the game. Total Nonsense.
still the best of the three films ..
despite the flaws.
by three you mean the reboot included?share
yes, live-action titles only.
MK: Annihilation (1997)
I was disappointed in the reboot.
The only thing better was the Scorpion/Sub-Zero angle.
More true to the game and had them fleshed out instead of just mindless foot soilders like MK 95.
I also liked that Scorpion was a protagonist, even though he was a spector from hell his story seemed sympathetic in the game.
The rest of the characters were cardboard cutouts expect for Kano and obviously no Johnny Cage.
If they would have made Cage the central character instead of the new character it would have been so much better.
the biggest blunder was revolving the story around Cole Young (?!)
no one cares about him.
there's literally 38,746 actual MK characters that could've been the "main".
I think they wanted someone from an "outsider perspective" to kind see it from the audience's point of view.
MK95 kind of did that with Lui Kang. It could have been done with any earth realm character. I only picked Cage because he wasn't in the movie at all.
The R rating was better too, but MK 95 just had better characters except for Scorpion and Sub Zero.
The trio of Kang, Cage and Sonya were likable and they had good chemistry. They all had their moment to shine so to speak.
still puzzling to me how people watch TWENTY FIVE YEAR OLD FILMS, with modern eyes, and think a TWENTY FIVE YEAR OLD FILM should be "better"? how does that work? today, our tastes, abilities, and even writing have evolved a lot since then. why would the past mysteriously be equal to now? even the best movies from the past, and the classics don't hold up if you really think about it. but they can still be enjoyed as is.
Do I look at the first movie ever made... 1878 "Race horse", and say it could have been better?
People are weird. :D
I disagree. I watch movies that are current releases and think about how much better they could be. Anymore I have to go back and watch movies from the 80s-early 2000s just to remind myself that movies are good.
Especially wide blockbusters. They're almost all happy meal movies full of cheap junk and sugar. The last movies I watched and thought I couldn't have made suggestions that would massively improve the finished product were Ex Machina, Nightcrawler, and Moneyball. And those were almost a decade ago.
I didn't not mean to sound like all old movies are not as good as todays... my question was particularly this 25 year old film... yes, the graphics stink now, but they were passable back then. Not great, I saw it in the theater and the budget - as well as dated graphics tech - was obvious.
But yes, SOME of todays films stink to, and we should evaluate how current stuff could be better because it is now. But, films from 25 years ago, either enjoy them or not. It's pointless to say "this 25 year old film could be better". that's a captain obvious statement: it could have had better writing, better CGI, better actors etc etc etc.... no matter, what is done is done and over now.
Personally, I enjoy this silly film even if many others don't. The fighting is pretty well done most of the time, and I feel it presented the video game well enough. But, its pointless for me to say, "Man that Goro could have been so much better" It just is what it is.