The Island
- Thread starter Policar
- Start date
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Phil said:
Isn't the keyword here EX-GIRLFRIEND?
John C Lyons
Veteran
Phil said:
ummm dood, nah....too obvious, nevermind.
anyways back to the lack of love by the movie-going public for "the island", this is really unfortunate. $120 million budget. $12 million opening weekend. the first major budget bomb of the summer, right?
now bay is gonna think "see, they all complained when i made a stupid, cliched, emotionless pearl harbor movie, but at least that made some $. thisll be the last original movie with a decent plot im gonna make! day after tomorrow 2, here i come!"
I give it a 7/10 for what it was trying to be, but a 5/10 for what it -could- have been. Would it kill him to have a movie with subtext? I swear at any given moment, whatever is happening in the movie, is what's happening on the screen, nothing else to think about or worry about.
part of the reason the movie bombed is because their advertising budget was apparently spent on coke. I've gone up to about 10 of my non-movie-psycho friends and asked them if they wanted to see it or what they thought of it, and -none- of them had a clue what I was talking about. None. "The island? Scarlett Johannsen? Ewan MacGregor? Michael Bay? Armageddon? The Rock? Bad Boys 2?" (crickets)
Anyway. I liked this movie. It felt really lived in (the world did), I'm a little amazed at some of the technological advances in certain areas, and the lack of advances in others, and the sheer # of just plot threads that were not handled properly.
1. The robots that were scanning his brain/in his eye:
This was clearly something that they just botched. The whole time they're trying to figure out where he is, what he's up to, and what he's thinking, and they've got these mind-reading/traceable robots in his brain and they NEVER think to stop and use them. Finally there's this non-sequitor throw away scene of him pissing them away, and the other team locates him, for a split second, but then doesn't really.
2. Why was the door to the car suddenly inexplicably open during the car chase? I didn't get it.
3. This wasn't really a plot hole, but just funny. They can clone people, they have the coolest desktop interface I've ever seen, flying jetbikes, etc etc. But the only advancement they've made on people immobilization is they've upgraded from the taser to a f#@king harpoon gun.
M.
part of the reason the movie bombed is because their advertising budget was apparently spent on coke. I've gone up to about 10 of my non-movie-psycho friends and asked them if they wanted to see it or what they thought of it, and -none- of them had a clue what I was talking about. None. "The island? Scarlett Johannsen? Ewan MacGregor? Michael Bay? Armageddon? The Rock? Bad Boys 2?" (crickets)
Anyway. I liked this movie. It felt really lived in (the world did), I'm a little amazed at some of the technological advances in certain areas, and the lack of advances in others, and the sheer # of just plot threads that were not handled properly.
1. The robots that were scanning his brain/in his eye:
This was clearly something that they just botched. The whole time they're trying to figure out where he is, what he's up to, and what he's thinking, and they've got these mind-reading/traceable robots in his brain and they NEVER think to stop and use them. Finally there's this non-sequitor throw away scene of him pissing them away, and the other team locates him, for a split second, but then doesn't really.
2. Why was the door to the car suddenly inexplicably open during the car chase? I didn't get it.
3. This wasn't really a plot hole, but just funny. They can clone people, they have the coolest desktop interface I've ever seen, flying jetbikes, etc etc. But the only advancement they've made on people immobilization is they've upgraded from the taser to a f#@king harpoon gun.
M.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Who cares about product placement? If I look at my desk in front of me I see:
12 DVD's with Popular Movie Titles
Morton Salt Shaker (For my Rolled Taco's)
Barnum's Animal Crackers (My son left them here this evening)
My Chinon Super 8
Sony Headphones
My Dell Computer
A stack of Panasonic MQ's
It's a good thing we're not watching a flick that takes place in my office
Get the drift?
12 DVD's with Popular Movie Titles
Morton Salt Shaker (For my Rolled Taco's)
Barnum's Animal Crackers (My son left them here this evening)
My Chinon Super 8
Sony Headphones
My Dell Computer
A stack of Panasonic MQ's
It's a good thing we're not watching a flick that takes place in my office
Get the drift?
krestofre
Knight of the Holy Order
You make a good point John, and if the product is just there, then I don't have a problem with it. After all if an actor opens up a refridgerator and there's Coke inside, there's nothing odd about that. The product placement that I have a problem with is like in Woody Allen's Hollywood Ending where Allen grabs a Mountain Dew and the camera PANS DOWN and FOLLOWS the can of Dew as Allen crosses the living room. I don't see anything artistic in that.
The product placement in The Island is not as bad, but it's border line.
My two cents.
Chris
Actually, I thought the product placement was great. The way I saw it is that it was sort of an ironic critique on rampant consumerism, which the movie pretty clearly condemns. I mean, look who the "bad guys" are. The antagonists are all rich people who care more about money than human lives, and mercenaries: those who kill for money.
The clones are repeatedly called "products" and I think this is part of the message that if we start seeing everything in terms of price and everything as a "product" we strip the humanity from people. The clones also live in an oddly utopian society: everything is provided for them and they are uncorrupted by capitalism, making them the innocent opposites of their "sponsors." I'm probably looking too far into this, and I know that a lot of the product placement was just there to make money, but all the same, this is one movie where product placement worked for me. (Same with Minority Report, actually.)
The clones are repeatedly called "products" and I think this is part of the message that if we start seeing everything in terms of price and everything as a "product" we strip the humanity from people. The clones also live in an oddly utopian society: everything is provided for them and they are uncorrupted by capitalism, making them the innocent opposites of their "sponsors." I'm probably looking too far into this, and I know that a lot of the product placement was just there to make money, but all the same, this is one movie where product placement worked for me. (Same with Minority Report, actually.)
JoshH
Active member
I saw it last night and was pretty much given what I expected. I enjoyed very much the first act, but when the second act begins (those who've seen it will know what I'm talking about), the film turns up the Michael Bay-o-Meter a couple of huge notches and to me, pretty much loses what it had gained in the first 30 to 45 minutes or so. I remember sitting back and thinking, wow, it feels like I'm watching two completely different films within the context of just five minutes. Now granted, Bay knows how to shoot some chase scenes, but I was beginning to settle in to this world he had created, and then BAM, everything runs amok and I'm suddenly thrown into these action/chase sequences that felt so disjointed from the original tone, and yes, generic and cliché. But again, I expected that to some sense.
Maybe this was intended to be a chase movie cloaked in a sci fi wardrobe, and if it was, I missed the point (and retract some statements), I just thought it could have been less generic and in a sense, a little less Michael Bay. But who am I to expect that? Right? Michael Bay makes Michael Bay movies and they are what they are.
And I too liked the product placement. I thought it was good in Minority Report and the same here.
Josh
Maybe this was intended to be a chase movie cloaked in a sci fi wardrobe, and if it was, I missed the point (and retract some statements), I just thought it could have been less generic and in a sense, a little less Michael Bay. But who am I to expect that? Right? Michael Bay makes Michael Bay movies and they are what they are.
And I too liked the product placement. I thought it was good in Minority Report and the same here.
Josh
So, can you guys sum up and describe what Michael Bay and his cinematographers did to achieve the look that was in The Island? I mean, everything from the lighting, to artifacts... What are the characteristics of that classic "Michael Bay" look or that "The Island" look? I am also a fan of the visual style and look; and can't quite figure out what it is.
Also, this is kind of off-topic; but can someone describe to me what Ridley Scott does for his films "Black Hawk Down" and "Kingdom of Heaven" and possibly "Gladiator", because I am also a major fan of the look of his films. What helps give the Ridley Scott look?
Lastly, this is probably a commonly asked question, but what was done to get that nice Saving Private Ryan battle-scene look? It had this strobing look... old film documentary look... Very unsaturated. I'm sure there are a lot of individual threads dedicated to achieving the Saving Private Ryan look.
Also, this is kind of off-topic; but can someone describe to me what Ridley Scott does for his films "Black Hawk Down" and "Kingdom of Heaven" and possibly "Gladiator", because I am also a major fan of the look of his films. What helps give the Ridley Scott look?
Lastly, this is probably a commonly asked question, but what was done to get that nice Saving Private Ryan battle-scene look? It had this strobing look... old film documentary look... Very unsaturated. I'm sure there are a lot of individual threads dedicated to achieving the Saving Private Ryan look.
John C Lyons
Veteran
gordon JL, its shutter speeds that you are probably talking about with the scott/speilberg looks. high contrast too. and it seems that ridley scott has lots of little devices on the ground that shoot dirt up into the air as well during fight scenes which work out quite well in combination. im sure this is just a teeny tiny part of it all and i hope the others with more experience chime in for ya...
and yeah the "look" of the island was incredible! say what you will about the movie but im buying the damn thing on dvd if for nothing else just to admire those brilliant images!
and yeah the "look" of the island was incredible! say what you will about the movie but im buying the damn thing on dvd if for nothing else just to admire those brilliant images!
Gordon JL said:
I think there are various things that make up the MB look. He comes from an MTV generation commercial background so that plays into it. The list includes but is not limited to: Super warm color (for example, he'll use uncorrected tungsten outdoors instead of HMI's), tobaccco grads, heavy backlighting, slo-mo, frenetic cutting.
I like Ridley (and Tony) Scotts style's too. In Ridley's stuff you'll notice there's alway a scene where "something" is raining - and it's not necessarily rain.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
krestofre said:
I didn't know about this. Here is the IMDB listing for Clonus:
Taglines for
The Clonus Horror (1979)
The only thing they don't use... is the scream.
Beautiful young people used again and again and again ...until there's nothing left to use.
Where science and nightmare merge.Welcome to America.
Taglines for
The Island
They don't want you to know what you are.
Plan Your Escape
You have Been Chosen
Plot Summary for
The Clonus Horror (1979)
A young man escapes from a govenment run project called Clonus only to find out that Peter Graves (Jeff Knight) a candidate for Presidency is a conspirator to keep Clonus a secret. Top government officials are aware of it and support the super secret project, because they are cloning themselves to live longer and better lives, at the expense of their clone counter-part, who is no more than a "slave" as far as human rights are concerned. The ethical and moral values are explored as the escapee (Tim Donnelly) known as Richard returns full circle back to Clonus, only to find his girlfriend lobotimized for government security purposes.
Plot Summary for
The Island
Lincoln Six-Echo (McGregor) is a resident of a seemingly utopian but contained facility in the mid 21st century. Like all of the inhabitants of this carefully controlled environment, Lincoln hopes to be chosen to go to the "The Island" - reportedly the last uncontaminated spot on the planet. But Lincoln soon discovers that everything about his existence is a lie. He and all of the other inhabitants of the facility are actually human clones whose only purpose is to provide "spare parts" for their original human counterparts. Realizing it is only a matter of time before he is "harvested," Lincoln makes a daring escape with a beautiful fellow resident named Jordan Two-Delta (Johansson). Relentlessly pursued by the forces of the sinister institute that once housed them, Lincoln and Jordan engage in a race for their lives to literally meet their makers.
And then this wonderful link:
http://www.agonybooth.com/parts/island.asp
Ya know... At least buy the rights to the damn thing. The movie is on Mystery 3000 Thetare fro christsake. The budget is 120 million and they cant purchase the rights or give a point out?
Im glad its flopping now that i know this; K A R M A
My only issue with the product placement in The Island is that it's badly done.
#1. They have Aquafina on tap (irony there
)... but only is it on tap, but the logo is identical to the current logo.
#2. They're playing Xbox. Not Xbox256, Not Xbox revolution, but "Xbox" with the exact logo Xbox has now.
#3. There's an MSN booth... with the same freaking butterfly.
Considering these companies change their names, logos, and marketing campaigns every year or two, it ruined my suspension of disbelief to see today's logo appearing. Sure, I suppose they could have been in the middle of a "nostalgia movement in advertising"... but it felt out of place to me.
That said:
Not a bad movie, but not great. Any message it had for human life etc. was lost in the carnage and deaths attributed to the heroes. Scarlett is a total hottie.
-Spiff
#1. They have Aquafina on tap (irony there
)... but only is it on tap, but the logo is identical to the current logo.#2. They're playing Xbox. Not Xbox256, Not Xbox revolution, but "Xbox" with the exact logo Xbox has now.
#3. There's an MSN booth... with the same freaking butterfly.
Considering these companies change their names, logos, and marketing campaigns every year or two, it ruined my suspension of disbelief to see today's logo appearing. Sure, I suppose they could have been in the middle of a "nostalgia movement in advertising"... but it felt out of place to me.
That said:
Not a bad movie, but not great. Any message it had for human life etc. was lost in the carnage and deaths attributed to the heroes. Scarlett is a total hottie.
-Spiff
Policar,
I agree with you w.r.t. product placement in MR. I think it actually achieved what you mention as far as being a critique on consumerism, in addition to being a great comment on the increasingly intrusive nature of advertising (I know it's just a matter of time until we get the ads that call out to us by our name a la M.R.). Although in this movie I don't think it ever crossed the line into ironic, I think it was just honest to goodness product placement.
If anything, I think the most disturbing/subversive aspect of the movie was the fact that they have a group of people subdued (and self-subduing) with sub-par lives, but the only thing that keeps them going is the hope that something great can happen to them.*
That felt a little too true to life, and made me feel uncomfortable about my -own- situation, which is pretty impressive for any movie, especially a 'popcorn flick'.
M.
*That and the feeling of being one of a few people who is aware of that trend and wondering why other people don't ask the 'big questions'. (probably the common experience of every smart ass upon reading their first philosophy text. 'ooh ooh now I have it all figured out')
I agree with you w.r.t. product placement in MR. I think it actually achieved what you mention as far as being a critique on consumerism, in addition to being a great comment on the increasingly intrusive nature of advertising (I know it's just a matter of time until we get the ads that call out to us by our name a la M.R.). Although in this movie I don't think it ever crossed the line into ironic, I think it was just honest to goodness product placement.
If anything, I think the most disturbing/subversive aspect of the movie was the fact that they have a group of people subdued (and self-subduing) with sub-par lives, but the only thing that keeps them going is the hope that something great can happen to them.*
That felt a little too true to life, and made me feel uncomfortable about my -own- situation, which is pretty impressive for any movie, especially a 'popcorn flick'.
M.
*That and the feeling of being one of a few people who is aware of that trend and wondering why other people don't ask the 'big questions'. (probably the common experience of every smart ass upon reading their first philosophy text. 'ooh ooh now I have it all figured out')
Policar said: