MovieChat Forums > Prelude > Replies
Prelude's Replies
Lol!
I miss the fuck outta those emoticons! [sad5]
Yep, the same! [wave]
Just fuckin' with ya -- a little IMDb nostalgia!! [laugh] ;)
Lol, it does sound like an industrial solvent now that you mention it!
"Sandrine must be kept out of reach of children. If Sandrine gets in your eyes wash out with water and seek medical help immediately."
I think it may have French origins.
I love Keanu, I think he is often a better actor than most think, and I really like Point Break, but I have to say, this was one of his less believable line deliveries, bless his heart! I just didn't buy it! :) But he was generally pretty good in this movie.
I didn't know that about City of Angels -- very interesting! It's always a shame when that kind of bickering happens over a production and the director's vision is compromised. It certainly would be something to see a director's cut.
Glad to hear it; I'm boycotting IMDb and Amazon.
Now when I want to look up something, I'll do search and usually click on the Wiki page, which, interestingly, is now the first result while IMDb comes second.
I guess it's just the law of diminishing returns, where they were having to reach and reach for thinner and thinner material or new ways to play out the basic premise.
That's always going to be something that makes more and more of a sow's ear out of the silk purse of the original.
City of Angels was the only sequel worth giving a watch, but even with that, I've always thought the casting of Perez was just....odd. Why him? Nothing about it made much sense. He was *good* but still, I found it weird casting.
I agree, I thought she was fine, very natural, and had great friendship chemistry with Brandon/Eric.
I'm only just catching up on these sequels, and I liked this one, some good suspense, it's as good as the first one, certainly no worse.
What the *beep* -- whoah it's not working for me. ;)
I agree -- at least provide a logical reason why he needs to inveigle his way into the family in the first place. Terrible writing.
What bothers me more than why he killed them is why he even went to all the trouble of winning their trust and moving into their lives in the first place. There was even less rhyme or reason to *that* than to why he killed them -- he killed them because he was military-brainwashed to kill anyone who discovered he wasn't who he claimed to be.
But why bother even targeting this family? He had money, he didn't need a place to stay. There was no reason to claim to know their son. He didn't need anything from them.
I was waiting to find out that something awful had happened to him because of the son and he wanted revenge on the family -- that would give substance and and explanation to his motives to even hook up with them.
Or that he killed the son and in a sick way wanted to do the same to the family.
HOrrible flick, nothing made any damn sense.
I agree, nothing made any sense regarding his targeting of this family. I kept expecting to learn that their son had done something bad to him and this was his long-con revenge. There was no point to his taking all the trouble of befriending this family, why did he need them in any way?
By the time all the shooting starts you hate the guy so much you just want him to die already.