So again... People-busters.
People is plural. This is about one guy whose plan hinged on ghosts and not other living beings, then became a ghost. They didn't even bust the person, he busted himself then they busted him as a ghost.
That's what made the original concept awesome.
Really? That a god was behind the ghosts is what made the original awesome?
So...god controlling ghosts = awesome.
Man controlling ghosts then becoming one = stupid.
Is that it?
Guess we disagree on a fundamental level.
Rowan isn't a god.. he's a whiny little man, pissed off for no reason.
Doesn't that make the story more grounded though? So what if he's a whiner...he enacted a pretty formidable force of ghosts.
Not 'no reason' just a petty one.
What lead him down this path rather than going on a shooting spree?
Well he could have picked up a rifle and killed maybe a few dozen people.
Or he could have gotten an army of ghosts.
I mean...if you wanna really lash out, you want a gun or an army?
He has no direct interaction with anyone who's particularly mean to him.
Isn't cinema full of great villains whose childhoods we don't see? Do we need a thorough origin for every prick bent on world domination?
Something pissed them off, they became a prick, they hatched a plan. That's not enough?
Are there "good ghosts" or are they all bad ghosts?
Movies and whatnot that have ghosts usually say they're dead people with unfinished business, or can't accept that they're dead, or some such. Do we need a breakdown for all the types of ghosts and their various origins?
then what kind of challenge do the protagonists face?
An army of ghosts? Isn't
what more important than
why when it's just a *beep* load of hostile ghosts?
reply
share
MovieMan74
8 years ago
Oh man.. You are Rowan...
Do we need a thorough origin for every prick bent on world domination?
Something pissed them off, they became a prick, they hatched a plan. That's not enough?
I don't know.. We sure heard enough about Erin's dead Neighbor who as a ghost would be at the foot of her bed when she was a kid, going through therapy, being teased called "Ghost Girl" by other bullies... meeting Abby in High School and being friends, writing a book, then drifting away to pursue a career path and then have it taken away when her past comes to light.
I mean look.. Think about it like this. They could have had a comparison between two different lead characters. Rowan who was "bullied" and found inspiration in their book.. And of course explore that. Just develop his character... instead of slapping an actor with a "Just act like a creep" role. Then perhaps have a scene where Erin could try to reason with him. But no.. He's just a weak villain.
All they had to do was invest more character development in certain areas.. The movie bombed.. it failed for a reason.. And all your arguing against any points isn't going to change things.
The biggest sin is never learning from your failures.. and this board is full of people who are arguing against facts.
It's clear you're in a full time job defending this movie on IMDB.. so good luck.
reply
share
Schlacko
8 years ago
I'm Rowan? Rowan is full of hate and wants to destroy all of mankind.
I'm discussing a movie I liked.
If anything, you're Rowan.
We sure heard enough about Erin's dead Neighbor
In context, I doubt that was a real ghost. I mean yeah ghosts are real, but that doesn't mean every ghost encounter is legit.
She's a protagonist. Protagonists get more backstory than antagonists.
Just develop his character... instead of slapping an actor with a "Just act like a creep" role.
Yeah but, when would they do this? If they do it too close to the climax it ruins the pace. If they do it too early, it's feels disconnected from the main cast. I'm not saying some backstory on him is out of the question, just that there's a lot of ways for it to go wrong.
Then perhaps have a scene where Erin could try to reason with him.
That's kind of a dumb cliche. He spends years of his life studying the ghostly principles and working towards a goal, then some stranger tries to talk him down? If it succeeds there's no climactic battle. If it fails then it's horrible cliche.
Saying it bombed is a bit of an exaggeration. I know it's technically a failure since it didn't make 2x its production budget, but it made 1.58x its production budget, which isn't
that bad.
You throw in DVDs/Blue-ray/streaming/TV licensing, it'll be pretty close to 2x.
reply
share
Mandrake1979
8 years ago
After reading your replies, you are either a Troll or a massive moron. Neither is a good thing.
reply
share
DeepConvection
8 years ago
"When you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names."
- Elbert Hubbard
-------------------------------
"All great truths begin as blasphemies."
- George Bernard Shaw
reply
share
Mandrake1979
8 years ago
Hello,
I don't have to answer his/her statements, movieman has adequately done so. I have stated my opinion on a forum due to this morons stubborn attitude and not accepting facts. Nothing vile in my statement. Vile is something else entirely.
"I increasingly fear that nothing good can come of almost any adaptation, and obviously that's sweeping. There are a couple of adaptations that are perhaps as good or better than the original work. But the vast majority of them are pointless." - Alan Moore
I like quotes as well :)
reply
share
Natalia-Alianovna-Romanoff
8 years ago
After reading your replies, you are either a Troll or a massive moron.
Which is why I found it pointless to speak to that poster after a few days of arguing with him. A worthy add to my ignore list and not worthy to speak to. Just another hypocrite that doesn't think he's a bigot who likes to make baseless generalizations Never mind putting certain facts into account.
reply
share
MarwoodWalks
8 years ago
Schlacko, you are getting your arse kicked!
"Don't you hear that horrible screaming all around you? That screaming men call silence."
reply
share