Pacific Rim

Saw it at Lucas in SF today. For sure beat my expectations. It's a big,. fun, popcorn movie that won't ask much of you except to enjoy the utterly predictable but fantastic ride.
 
Well, I really wanted to like it but just didn't really work for me. The tugs on the emotional heart strings felt like a dog food commercial or something, the emotional images where there and they worked, but they just didn't go together to make a compelling story.

I was really impressed by the CGI. It was definitely spectacular, but I could have done with 80% less CGI and a better story. It started to feel like the last Transformers towards the end, I just had had enough giant robot vs monster combat and wasn't entertained by it any more.

There was no real tension in the movie, no worry for the characters or what would happen. You knew what would happen, another giant robot vs monster fight.

Ron Pearlman and Charlie Day were bright spots in the movie and I would have liked to just ditch the giant robots and watch a story about their characters.

I love a good romance subplot, but the one in this movie was so superficial and contrived it just did not work. It could have really added to the story if they spent any time on, but they didn't.

Really wanted to like it, but thought it was just ok. C+ or B-, definitely not in the GI Joe category of bad, worth a watch on the big screen to see all the CGi if you like that sort of thing, but just not as good as I had hoped.
 
Another thing I have to say I really liked about the movie, was that despite the fights being cut quickly, and a lot of the battles taking place in dark areas, I never once felt like I didn't know what was going on. They managed to make every single shot quickly and accurately show what was happening at that instance. I think that's a remarkable feat in itself, as most movies these days have action sequences that are borderline unintelligible.
 
From http://www.deadline.com/2013/07/pac...ustralia-and-begins-baffling-global-roll-out/

After seeing the film I was playing games online with a bunch of guys and told them that my wife saw the film and she said it was really good. So we start talking about it. All the players were surprised to hear that the film was good. They said that they had no intention of seeing the film based on the advertising. Their impression was that it looked like another dumb Michael Bay Transformers film. Maybe word of mouth will help.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a common issue- word of mouth could give this movie momentum.
 
This movie is a cross between Godzilla and Transformers, all VFX and explosions, but no real story. Perfect for 11 year olds. Unfortunately lots of movies are made these days aimed at 11 year olds.
 
Duke M. said:
This movie is a cross between Godzilla and Transformers, all VFX and explosions, but no real story. Perfect for 11 year olds. Unfortunately lots of movies are made these days aimed at 11 year olds.
Click to expand...

Did you see this movie? That's a common preconception before watching it; can't judge it based on the trailers (totally different experience vs. the trailers. Worth checking out. Great movie!). It's more of a cross between Armageddon and Independence Day. Nothing like Transformers (in terms of story) or Godzilla (other than giant monsters from the sea smashing cities- which this movie tongue-in-cheek pays homage to). There is a story, silly and far-fetched, but fun.
 
It's a pretty silly movie. The audience that I saw it with was laughing at most of the dramatic moments. Such a goofy movie!
 
JCS, gotta say I strongly disagree with you saying there's a solid story here.

This movie was great to see in 3D, big dumb fun. The several corny 'emotional' bits were cringeworthy though.

VFX were amazing.

3/5

EDIT: oh and was that the worst overdone Aussie accent ever? It's in the running at least.
 
Last edited:
tmnt said:
JCS, gotta say I strongly disagree with you saying there's a solid story here.

This movie was great to see in 3D, big dumb fun. The several corny 'emotional' bits were cringeworthy though.

VFX were amazing.

3/5

EDIT: oh and was that the worst overdone Aussie accent ever? It's in the running at least.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, except about the Aussie accent (no idea).

A good script doesn't cost much more or less than a bad script. Before spending 200 million bucks making a movie, make sure you have a solid script.

I'm a fan of the hero's journey. I like it as a formula and it's the basis for many if not most of the movies I like. However, when it's done well you have to look back at the movie to see the formula. This one was like it was a check list of elements and beats of the hero's journey. Those beats absolutely work, but they have to be organic. When you just stick them in between giant robot fights it doesn't make for a good story. And that's what this story felt like.


Spoilers:

Do I care about any of these people? No, I really don't. The other Drift teams piloting the Jaegars, the Chinese, Russian team, are just 2d characters, very cartoon like. Oh no! there goes the Chinese Jaegar they're gonna die! So what? What do I know about them? They played basketball. Whatever. The Russian team is awesome at what they do! How do I know? Someone in the movie tells the main character, so the audience can find that out....hmmmm, good to know. Now I really care about them dying... ok, not really.

If someone dies while you're connected to them in the Drift it leaves you scarred emotionally. How do I know that? The lead character tells his co-star that so YOU the audience can hear it. How bad is the emotional damage? So bad it makes you go work on a giant concrete wall for a couple of years. Gee, that's really bad to have to work like regular people. Awful!

The female Jaegar pilot, Rinko Kincuchi, once ran away from a giant monster (kaiju) and it made her cry when she was a little kid. Wow, now I really care about her so much. I hope big monsters don't make her cry again.

The big reveal, the head of the Jaegar program is Rinko's adopted Dad or whatever. And why did you need to keep this a secret exactly? Why couldn't you just say I found this little girl after a monster attack and raised her as my daughter? It's not really a Darth Vader moment or anything. Whats' the point in the big reveal?

The love story...well we know the two main characters fall for each other because during a big monster fight at the end of the movie the guy looks over at the girl and says, "I have really bad timing..."(and also a really bad script to work with), and then he grins at her. yea, big romance there!

It was bad.
 
Gillvane said:
I'm a fan of the hero's journey. I like it as a formula and it's the basis for many if not most of the movies I like. However, when it's done well you have to look back at the movie to see the formula. This one was like it was a check list of elements and beats of the hero's journey. Those beats absolutely work
Click to expand...

They don't work here because they don't follow through on them. As I mentioned in a previous post, they laid the groundwork for Charlie Hunnam's character being this reluctant hero in the opening scenes. His brother dies while they are connected in the drift, and he doesn't want to go back into a suit because he's afraid of that happening again. But it only takes Stacker one scene to convince him to get back into a suit. And then, that's pretty much it. This is what the movie should have focused on more, Charile's reluctance to get back into the cockpit and his emotional difficulties. There should have been drama as to whether or not he could be an effective pilot again. There isn't. He's pretty much awesome as a pilot all the way to the end. This is why his story feels flat and unengaging to people, because it is, and since he's the lead character, the movie feels flat. A movie with a similar arc that works would be Top Gun. Maverick is a a cocky pilot. His partner dies. He has a major crisis of confidence, and the climax of the movie is focused on wether or not he can get over it to save the day. I'm not going to claim Top Gun as some great masterpiece (although to some it is), but in this aspect it is very effective because it takes its emotional conflicts to their darkest point of crisis. The only emotional conflict in Pacific Rim is with the Japanese girl, which is why she should have been the lead. Pacific Rim is a bunch of half-baked concepts stitched together with jaw dropping special effects and production design.
 
Last edited:
Batutta said:
They don't work here because they don't follow through on them. As I mentioned in a previous post, they laid the groundwork for Charlie Hunnam's character being this reluctant hero in the opening scenes. His brother dies while they are connected in the drift, and he doesn't want to go back into a suit because he's afraid of that happening again. But it only takes Stacker one scene to convince him to get back into a suit. And then, that's pretty much it. This is what the movie should have focused on more, Charile's reluctance to get back into the cockpit and his emotional difficulties. There should have been drama as to whether or not he could be an effective pilot again. There isn't. He's pretty much awesome as a pilot all the way to the end. This is why his story feels flat and unengaging to people, because it is, and since he's the lead character, the movie feels flat. A movie with a similar arc that works would be Top Gun. Maverick is a a cocky pilot. His partner dies. He has a major crisis of confidence, and the climax of the movie is focused on wether or not he can get over it to save the day. I'm not going to claim Top Gun as some great masterpiece (although to some it is), but in this aspect it is very effective because it takes its emotional conflicts to their darkest point of crisis. The only emotional conflict in Pacific Rim is with the Japanese girl, which is why she should have been the lead. Pacific Rim is a bunch of half-baked concepts stitched together with jaw dropping special effects and production design.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. Top Gun works and hits the beats just like it should, and Pacific Rim just kind of goes through the motions. I also left the movie thinking the main character was very boring, very flat. I never felt concerned he was going to fail, I never worried about him dying, I never felt triumphant that he succeeded in the end. I just felt like there were lots of big robots and big monsters.

I watched the Star Wars criticism video on youtube the other day and one point was the light saber battle between old Obi Wan and old Darth Vader where Obi Wan dies last for about 30 seconds. They cross swords two or three times, then Obi Wan lets Darth kill him. But it has huge emotional impact in the movie, and everyone is like, OMG! Obi Wan is dead!

Flash forward to teh pre-quels and the battle between young Obi Wan and young Darth Vader that lasts for like 15 minutes in the middle of some river of lava. It's boring and you don't give a crap. Eventually you're like, I hope they both fall in the lava so this will finally be over.

They spent so much time on Robot battles in Pacific Rim there was no time for the story, but without the solid character build up you don't care about the outcome of the Robot battles.
 
tmnt- a 3/5 rating means you liked the movie? So you liked the story- right? As silly, weak, ridiculous, and flawed as it may appear upon reflection, you walked out having enjoyed the experience. If there was no story at all, just a sequence of special effects shots, it's not likely many folks would like it. Analyzing and taking this movie seriously doesn't make sense: it's completely absurd and tongue-in-cheek, even if the actors are being serious.

Planet Earth in the real world deems this the most popular video ever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bZkp7q19f0. Completely absurd. Understanding why the planet loves this type of entertainment goes a long way in producing entertainment products of your own that have wide appeal.

In the end, it's art. I had low expectations and walked out entertained. No analysis during the movie; just watched and enjoyed the silly spectacle.
 
Yes I liked the movie but can't say I thought anything at all of the story. I feel as some others in here do in that I had absolutely no investment in the characters at all. So basically I thought it was hugely flawed but still a pretty good popcorn flick.

If I were to review it from a more critical viewpoint it probably would have got a 2/5.

Did anyone else expect the scientist with the tats to be in the end battle controlling one of the Kajui (sp?). Would have added something new and made for a more exciting ending.
 
jcs said:
In the end, it's art. I had low expectations and walked out entertained. No analysis during the movie; just watched and enjoyed the silly spectacle.
Click to expand...

Well it's not like I sit there and analyze the movie while it happens. I always want to be totally absorbed in the story. When I don't feel it, I think about why the film didn't work for me after it's over to try and understand why.
 
Batutta said:
Well it's not like I sit there and analyze the movie while it happens. I always want to be totally absorbed in the story. When I don't feel it, I think about why the film didn't work for me after it's over to try and understand why.
Click to expand...

Yep. You find yourself going, huh. There's pretty good actors, cool idea like in this case giant robots, great fx and cgi, so why am I kinda bored? And it's almost always because of a flawed story.

Sucker Punch is another example, although PR is a LOT better than Sucker Punch. In Sucker Punch there's Nazi storm troopers, dirigibles, tons of hot girls with machine guns, a fantasy dream world, giant Ninjas, robots, explosions, more hot girls, so...why am I kinda bored? Because the story sucks.
 
When the movie started, I was analyzing... a few minutes later I realized it was really fun, and stopped as their work won me over.

I'm sure I'm a bit biased as I have spent many years writing rendering and physics code (real-time for games, not movies). Seeing the amount VFX & physics going on all at once surely had a subconscious effect on me (and done so well!). That and watching the movie with post Q&A with John Knoll, head of ILM and VFX supervisor also had some emotional effect on the appreciation for what they created (the director, Guillermo del Toro was also supposed to be there, but was sick).

There's a lot more to this movie and the story. Great info in the user reviews at IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1663662/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt, the FAQ is good: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1663662/faq?ref_=tt_faq_1#.2.1.3, full page too: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1663662/. Once I understood what Guillermo was trying to do, I appreciated what they created even more. Great job guys!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top