you should probably read the comments i was responding to and see that no-one said anything about special effects, but also no one gave me a good reason for not liking the film.....
First of all, if no one said anything about special effects, then it's presumptuous to accuse them of such. It really doesn't matter if you work in movies, or have access to statistics, or whatever. You don't know what someone is thinking unless they tell you, and to assume ... well, you know how those rhymes usually end.
I haven't seen this movie, although it sounds interesting, but I sympathize with the complaints that have been made. It is entirely possible to build a well-crafted suspense movie, requiring thought and patience by the viewer to be truly enjoyed, without loads of special effects (see
Memento).
However ... lots of people who decide to make an independent movie, shying away from big bucks to retain more creative control, "work really hard" and come out with an imperfect product. The editing can be choppy, the acting can be stiff, and a lot of times certain scenes could stand to be shorter. Folks complaining about too-lengthy dialogue has
nothing to do with the quantity of special-effects sequences, it's a story-telling problem (see
Star Wars: Episode II).
To sum up:
Nobody has to give
you a valid explanation for not liking the movie. Nobody's attacking you, and attacking them hardly raises the level of discourse.
reply
share
MrsClarenceWorley
17 years ago
Look.....STATISTICS means NOT AN ASSUMPTION because it requires research to attain, research done on a wide variety of randomly sampled theatre goers. So it VERY MUCH matters (see definition of statistics and definition of assumption).On this film the statistics showed a disapproval based on a lack of special effects.
Also...many "imperfect products" exist, what product may I ask is perfect? The truth is that every film has its weak points and with independent films many weak points are caused by a lack of funding. Regardless of what makes THIS product imperfect (and it could be imperfect for the reasons you mentioned) it is DEFINETLY NOT to say that choppy editing and stiff acting makes a film "sooooooooooooooooooooooooo stupid." Neither do story-telling problems. MANY MANY movies, historically many more movies than not, have story-telling problems or choppy editing and yet they conveniently avoid being ridiculed by the movie-watching audience.
Yes, everybody and anybody has to give ME a reason for not liking thing movie because debating (which, if you don't know, involves giving reasons) is the exact point of being on this message board.....everyone is required to give logical reasons if ANY discourse is to occur at all....and making ridiculous claims for no apparent reason is what is preventing the level of discourse from rising. It has little to do with me. Each time i write on this board I adequately express my reasoning, which is why so many of you have taken it upon yourselves to try and correct me, considering I actually tell you what I am thinking. Had I merely said "THIS MOVIE IS SOOOOO STUPID" it would have been nearly impossible to react unless the reaction was "yes I agree" or "no, I disagree."
Perhaps if critics of the film gave constructive criticism of value, something well thought out, I would have some food for thought. Most responses I get on this board are an attack on my criticism of the thoughtlessness that occurs here, and NO-ONE is willing to provide constructive input.
reply
share
stevo22
17 years ago
They are an upstart company? So what? That means nothing about whether or not the movie was good. Production is a large part of the movie-making process but it's a PROCESS. We don't judge the process, we judge the end result. And if the end result is *beep* all the indie-cred in the world isn't going to change things.
This is the kind of denial and self-defense that is expected from someone who works on a project that gets hate. It's understandable, you don't want your efforts or the efforts of those you worked with played down. But plenty of reasons have been given and all you've done is attack them and then turn around to say, "well, there are plenty of *beep* movies out there, why are you dissing this one!?!"
Go check the boards for The Hulk or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. They're getting theirs, and so are the rest of the crappy movies. This one's no exception. To argue that the movie is heavily flawed but that that's OK because other movies are flawed as well isn't arguing, it's just lazy. Kudos to the effort that was put into it, but discussion of the quality of the film itself should be an entirely different subject.
reply
share
tim411
17 years ago
One thing (among others) that the movie did a good job of showing is that Dean Cain can act. I was very impressed with his acting. Some of it was a bit much, but some of it was great and shows that he has potential to take on more dramatic roles.
One of the best scenes in the movie is when Cain's character, while inside his car, becomes stuck in a garage. The films antagonist just lightly taps the barrel of his gun against the driver side window. Cain, accepting defeat & the fact that his life is about to end, just sighs... drops his head and give a reflective gaze. Well done.
reply
share
MrsClarenceWorley
17 years ago
tim411, thank you again for your input and i'm glad you mentioned this scene because it is one of my favorites as well. I appreciate that you point out the good and the bad and that you are specific with your thoughts, THAT is what, I believe, film evaluation is all about.
In response to yet another attack on my reasoning, all I have to say is that I NEVER said movies should be hailed ONLY for the effort that goes into them and that even if a movie has many problems, you are obligated to like it because hard work went into it. NO! these are NOT my words. My point is that this film is NOT a stupid film, there is much to be appreciated here. My discussion about problems in films was one of problems not in storytelling, writing, and the like, it was merely about some stylistic glitches or momentarily lapses of otherwise good acting...NOT serious problems that immensely flaw a film. Again responses are hypothetical on this board.....for no-one has spoken of specific instances in the film that had "problems." If any of you REALLY think this film is as bad as you seem to, why don't you express WHY that is....otherwise keep your comments to yourselves.
My purpose here was to advice that independent films are to be respected on a different level because they ARE different from Hollywood films on so many levels. I just believe that criticism on this film has been particularly harsh and this may well be because Independent films are not being judged on their own terms....and yes The League of Extraordinary Gentleman and other big-budget movies that were weak and ineffective are being criticized but the difference is that as an independent film LOST is not a weak and ineffective film.....if one compares it to the canon of independent films Lost is certainly above mediocre and MOST DEFINETLY NOT STUPID. League of Extraordinary Gentleman is being judged within its own Canon and is gravely lacking. The difference is that those who thought Lost was stupid were, I believe, not judging it in comparison to other independent films but to films in general including with larger budgets that can be more "exciting" due to the added advantages of funding.....League of Extraordinary Gentleman had the funds and produced a flawed product......this is a VERY different scenario from Lost.
I am trying to be fair here and explain my reasoning every step of the way so that no-one misunderstands..but I am enraged when people respond by calling the film *beep* or stupid because that says NOTHING....absolutely NOTHING....especially when there IS merit in this film.
reply
share