Woah...does this film suck...

bballplaya283 said:
If you go into a film looking to find little things that make it untrue, you will never enjoy it.
Click to expand...

I don't generally, unless its something as GLARINGLY STUPID as this was. It's nearly as bad as the heroes in ID4 hacking into the alien spacecraft, which I guess was using Windows 98 or something..
 
Batutta said:
BUT THEY STILL LIVE ON A PLANET!!! WHICH ORBITS A SUN!!! UNDER WATER!!!
Click to expand...

Yeah but you said the sun is necessary for life to evolve. It isn't providing there is geo thermal.

ACtually I didn't see the movie so don't know what the premise was.
 
brianluce said:
ACtually I didn't see the movie so don't know what the premise was.
Click to expand...

Aliens who are killed on contact by water, land upon and invade a planet which is 70% covered by water.

Because they're smarter than we are.

And it leads to Mel Gibson regaining his lost faith.

Although this time nobody gets tortured.

Except maybe the audience,

just a little bit.
 
I'm always glad to see some people agree with me on here... I loved Signs and saw it twice, but the pure stupidity of the alien... er... stupidity... was... uh... stupid.

We can cloak our ships and run from a cornfield over a two story rooftop w/o even stopping... and we've got the strength and dexterity to hold a child, but damn those doorknobs is rocket surgery.
 
Cheesesailor77 said:
less that and more why would he choose to go somewhere to defend himself. The work speaks for itself. You don't like it, ok. There's no point in trying to convince the guy he did it wrong. He did it correctly, and you didn't like it.
Click to expand...

Right...like the writer and star of Turkish Star Wars...

Both he and the director defended it when people pointed out how some of the film was pirated directly from Star Wars footage and the music was lifted from Indiana Jones...and the cantina scene idea was also lifted. Instead of makeup, prostetics and special effects, they used cheesy gladiator outfits, furry monster suits...and not so special effects.

They explained that they were doing the audience a great service by making a great film, and proving that Turkey could compete with USA when it came to making movies. There was doubt in their minds it was a magnificient movie. They saw themselves as visionaries and pioneers...

Now, the film is widely regarded as pure crap...but so what?

They liked it...

I told a friend of mine about TLITW while we were shooting pool and discussing No Country...He mentioned that he saw Signs, and didn't like it much. It kind of put him off of M. Night's stuff.

Oh, and did Pest22o actually pull off a triple post?

Nice...
 
DeSica said:
Right...like the writer and star of Turkish Star Wars...

Both he and the director defended it when people pointed out how some of the film was pirated directly from Star Wars footage and the music was lifted from Indiana Jones...and the cantina scene idea was also lifted. Instead of makeup, prostetics and special effects, they used cheesy gladiator outfits, furry monster suits...and not so special effects.

They explained that they were doing the audience a great service by making a great film, and proving that Turkey could compete with USA when it came to making movies. There was doubt in their minds it was a magnificient movie. They saw themselves as visionaries and pioneers...

Now, the film is widely regarded as pure crap...but so what?

They liked it...
Click to expand...

...yes, exactly
 
I didn't see it either...but it sounds like Day of the Triffids but with William Wallace...or maybe Mad Max
 
I agree there's a lot of stuff to rip apart in TLITW, and the story was ridiculous. If I'd seen it in the theater I'd have been put off. It made a fine netflick though. Continuity issues plague his movies. Seriously, if he'd just hire some people to go over the scripts and fix the sometimes glaring problems he could really shine. Those WTF moments take me right out of the picture.

Take "The Fountain" as an example of a far fetched script. The movie was all over the map, but after it was over you could map out the timelines (on paper if need be) and it held water. You thought about it. It was also a visual feast. You might have thought it was poorly acted, or melodramatic, or failed in some way, but you could have still loved it.

M's flicks could still have that quality if only the story could stand such analysis. This is his weakness imo, and its a big one. I think his films possess enough of the qualities I look for that he's always "just this close" but yet so far away. M. Night Shyamalan's movies are like really hot chicks with really stinky breath.
 
pest22o said:
wait you dont like ID4? please tell me what's a good film to you.
Click to expand...

Didn't say I didn't like ID4. Even though that film is as dumb as a shoe, it's entertaining in a cheesy, straightforward way, unlike Signs, which is morose, unexciting and stupid to boot.
 
Sad Max said:
Aliens who are killed on contact by water, land upon and invade a planet which is 70% covered by water.

Because they're smarter than we are.

And it leads to Mel Gibson regaining his lost faith.

Although this time nobody gets tortured.

Except maybe the audience,

just a little bit.
Click to expand...

That's funny.

Reminds me of, uh ...

I don't know.

Other Empire's who invaded and blundered on conquering other nations.

Respectfully, that spin on the films premise I have always found the weakest.

-
 
To me, the most interesting part is what kinds of films he'll make going forward. No question in my mind, Sixth Sense was his best movie, and by several classes. It's actually a good movie on its own terms. Because that movie made his reputation, plus scads of $ (as well as scads of $ from Signs), he'll always have the power to make movies... barring a total change in the business. Once you reach a certain level of success, you'll always get "another chance".

That said, I'm genuinely curios about his career going forward. He's young enough to still be able to pull out of the downward spiral he's in. But I wonder if he has the constitution to manage such a feat. His main problem is an insane ego. Probably the most megalomaniacal major director out there, which is saying a lot. It's practically pathological, a medical condition. With a problem that serious, it's impossible to take feedback. So he can't learn from his mistakes. I'm afraid he's doomed. He's not living in reality, can't assess the impact of his artistic choices and won't listen to criticism - looks like a recipe for disaster. Oh well, it'll be interesting to watch the trainwreck :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top