Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Movie Recommendation: Paranormal Activity

Movie Recommendation: Paranormal Activity
Thread Tools
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2009, 11:12 AM
 
I wasnt expecting anything from this movie at all. I heard 'blair witch' and figured it was 'one of those', and given the juvenile attempts at a decent horror movie over the past 10-20 years, i was hoping to get a couple of laughs in.

It was 'cheep azz tuesdays'(ie half price) here, and my buds n me had nothing better to do. So ....it was a packed theater, with some annoyingly loud people scattered around. Not the best setting to watch a horror flick imo.

The progression in the movie was simple, yet masterful. The characters were crude, yet perfect for instilling fear by enabling the audience to identify with them. There must have been a total of maybe 60-90 seconds worth of special effects in the entire movie (90 minute movie i think). Gore was almost completely absent. The audio(you'll know what i mean) was perfect. Never mind that the entire production cost around $11000 or the entire campaign was akin to a grassroots movement.

Jaws was the first movie in which i experienced 'fear of the unknown', then to a much lesser extent 'Blaire Witch'..... this movie takes that concept to the next level.

We've seen a few movies shot in this format...Blair Witch and Cloverfield come to mind. But i tink this was the first movie i've seen where that format made complete sense.

After the movie i wasnt sure if i liked it or not. the 'horror' was that subtle. it wasn't till i got into bed that i found myself reluctant to fall asleep (for real). So get ready for a subtle yet powerful horror movie. Where 'The Exorcist's power and psychological horror were acted out on screen and seen in the story and characters, this movie exploits similar elements in the audience themselves, imo. This has been, by far , one of the couple of movies that actually scared me.

Enjoy.
     
jokell82
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2009, 11:41 AM
 
This was quite possibly the most overhyped movie of the year. I went in expecting to be terrified and it barely made me jump.

It was definitely a cool movie considering the budget, but overall I was unimpressed.

All glory to the hypnotoad.
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 9, 2009, 06:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by jokell82 View Post
This was quite possibly the most overhyped movie of the year. I went in expecting to be terrified and it barely made me jump.

It was definitely a cool movie considering the budget, but overall I was unimpressed.
Really ? I mean i have to admit i walked out not sure if i thought if it was worth it or not. but when i started thinking about it at night, i couldn't get to sleep. Those footprints dude.

If anything it's definitely one of the better horror movies of recent times imo (the only other horror movie i still find scary is the Exorcist)
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2009, 10:21 AM
 
Anyone else seen this movie ? Opinions ?
     
Captain Obvious
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 13, 2009, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Opinions ?
This is one of those "OMG the Secret Garden!!" threads.

Barack Obama: Four more years of the Carter Presidency
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2009, 03:20 AM
 
Something to keep in mind...

I saw this with a friend who had pirated it online. The pirated ending is different than the real ending.
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2009, 08:45 AM
 
It wasn't exactly bad, but it wasn't good. I watched it twice to make sure - because of all the hype and everything - but .. well. Nothing happened in the movie.

It didn't hook me into the illusion. Good movie considering the budget, but that's not saying much since it didn't really have any budget.

I can't get over the fact that nothing happened in the entire movie. .. Saw both endings and the original ending was much better. The reshot ending was ok, but the first one was better.

Can I recommend this movie? No, not really. Overhyped? Most certainly. Bad? No, not as such.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 14, 2009, 12:35 PM
 
It was alright. The acting could have been better. It went between believable and she-needs-to-go-back-to-acting-school.

The CGed crap at the end was annoying. Stupid people are annoying. Other than that, I enjoyed it.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2009, 09:02 AM
 
Come to think of it, i dont think there was movie when i said the word 'moron' so many times (referring to Mischa). Absolutely annoying. As far as the chick, i thought she did a very good job, and quite frankly, the 'acting' is what made it seem all the more real and 'documentarish'(word?) to me.

I wasnt too happy with the final scene in the movie either (the last 20 seconds or so)....a bit over the top. im sure the non-theatrical release would have been scarier with less special effects.

<spoilers>
The scene with the footprints totally freaked me out. i guess it has a lot to do with the fear of the unknown. as in when you hear that low pitched sound, you dont know where the thing is, if it's looking at you, etc.

The scene where she gets dragged out of the bed scared the crap out of me.

I guess my fear stems from the fact that all those weird things happened to them at times when we would be in 'deep' sleep. so even if that stuff did happen, you would never really know. And this invisible thing just standing there, planning something, doing whatever just creeps me out.
</spoilers>
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2009, 10:33 AM
 
So which was the CG ending, then? Not having seen any of them, I think the endings are:

1. A friend comes over and she kills her, coming back into the room with a bloody knife...?

2. She walks to the camera and slits her throat.

3. She throws hubby farther than humanly possible, leans over his body, and her face distorts...?
"Everything's so clear to me now: I'm the keeper of the cheese and you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it.
That's why he's gonna kill us. So we got to beat it. Yeah. Before he let's loose the marmosets on us."
my bandmy web sitemy guitar effectsmy photosfacebookbrightpoint
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 15, 2009, 11:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by RAILhead View Post
3. She throws hubby farther than humanly possible, leans over his body, and her face distorts...?
Thats the one i've seen. The face distort was a bit much imo. they could have ended it after she walks back into the room.

If you haven't seen any of them, you've missed out imo by knowing the story and what to expect.

I think the real star of this movie is the sound design. You dont see much, but those sounds really stick (low feq hum, footsteps, shrieks... almost everyday sounds you hear, but when you hear them after watching this movie hehehe.... )
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 6, 2010, 06:05 PM
 
Saw it. Horrible flick. I could barely stay awake, it was totally predictable, ending was lame, etc., etc.

Her being drug out of bed and down the hall was cool, though.
"Everything's so clear to me now: I'm the keeper of the cheese and you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it.
That's why he's gonna kill us. So we got to beat it. Yeah. Before he let's loose the marmosets on us."
my bandmy web sitemy guitar effectsmy photosfacebookbrightpoint
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 6, 2010, 08:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by RAILhead View Post
Saw it. Horrible flick. I could barely stay awake, it was totally predictable, ending was lame, etc., etc.

Her being drug out of bed and down the hall was cool, though.
Agree 100%. Really boring, saw both endings.
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2010, 01:12 AM
 
I guess it's a love it or hate it sort of thing, sorta like Blair Witch Project.
     
Oisín
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 7, 2010, 07:43 AM
 
I saw it a couple of weeks ago and had absolutely no expectations whatsoever, since I’d never heard of the movie before seeing it (hype? what hype? I’m immune to hype! ).

I liked the acting a lot (though Mischa’s character was annoying)—it was natural and it felt a lot more like watching regular human beings than most other movies. In fact, I thought it was one of the best horror movies I’ve seen for a long time. I tend to think horror movies are ridiculous and obvious, but this one was only obvious, and it didn’t detract from the movie that it was obvious and predictable. The plot and the ‘boo!’ moments weren’t what made the movie a horror movie, it was the constant underlying tenseness of their entire situation.

 


Edit: I also never saw Blair Witch Project, so I didn’t have much to compare to.
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2010, 06:36 PM
 
Yeah, this movie was terrible compared to the hype. Barely startled.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2010, 07:03 PM
 
I liked Blair Witch Project.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2010, 07:09 PM
 
The ending of Blair Witch was genuinely unnerving. I didn't see this movie yet, but my g/f did and she was very unimpressed.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2010, 07:13 PM
 
It could have been good with better acting and if they had just left off the end.

If anything, the best part about the movie was how they explain filming it using a standard 2.35:1 movie camera instead of a handycam. Hehe.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2010, 07:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
It could have been good with better acting and if they had just left off the end.
Am I forgetting the real ending, or are you talking about the part in the house near the end?
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2010, 09:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
I liked Blair Witch Project.
Me too. It kept me interested. This one seemed cliche and predictable. I own Blair Witch.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 13, 2010, 12:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
Am I forgetting the real ending, or are you talking about the part in the house near the end?
The one where she crawls up to the camera and turns into the Master Control Program.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 09:22 PM
 
All in all better than the Blair Witch Project, but not by much.

Both movies better than Inglorious Basterds (Tarantino's latest tripe)
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 09:52 PM
 
Dude if you don't like Inglorious Basterds, I don't know what to say. The dialogue and acting were amazing. Go watch Die Hard or something else edited for people with severe ADD.
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 09:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
All in all better than the Blair Witch Project, but not by much.
I didn't care for the movie, but I like Blair Witch Project. What did you like about the movie that you thought was better than Blair Witch?
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 10:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by downinflames68 View Post
Dude if you don't like Inglorious Basterds, I don't know what to say. The dialogue and acting were amazing. Go watch Die Hard or something else edited for people with severe ADD.
Speaking of ADD, it was quite clear that Inglorious Basterds was written for people suffering from ADD and actively sniffing glue.

Oh yes, it was that bad and worse. It would have been more honest and much more respectable if Tarantino had just filmed himself flipping the bird towards the audience for two hours while yammering a non-stop monologue about tits and milk and strudles.

This movie was possibly the stupidest thing I've seen - that was intentionally made.

Story? Nope.
Plotholes? Aplenty.
Characters? Laughable.
Music? Inappropriate.
Setting? Seemingly random.
Scenes? Far too long.

I put it in the same category as Delta Farce with Larry the Cable Guy.

Was there even a solidly written character in the movie, that made any sense? How badly miscast is Eli Roth? Or that guy from the Office? Or Brad Pitt, who is from the south - but can't fake a redneck dialect to save his life.

There was no noticable story in this movie and it delivers no punch. Hitler and Nazi exploitation has been better done in Wolfenstein 3D and that's a *computer game*!!

Sure Tarantino is an overrated director to a degree that is unprecedented, but I have always forgiven him for wasting my time. This time, no. It was that god-awful.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 10:09 PM
 
Loved it. Saw it 3 times.

Edit: PWNED:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inglourious_basterds/
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 10:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
I didn't care for the movie, but I like Blair Witch Project. What did you like about the movie that you thought was better than Blair Witch?
I had higher expectations for BWP, so it fell from a higher perch. When I saw Paranormal Activity, I expected something cheap and very much BWP inspired. It was a little better than my very low expectations - I liked the better vantage point the camera in PA had.

The running camera in BWP was a bit much. I realize that was part of the experience, but it was mostly running and darkness and whining and screaming - when anything happened that is..

So PA was IMO a little bit more refined, but still nothing special. Nothing happened in it. Same could be said about Blair Witch Project, I suppose.

These kind of movies aren't really my favorite - hyped beyond merit and ultimately a letdown. Good efforts, but not worth a full-price ticket.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 10:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by downinflames68 View Post
Loved it. Saw it 3 times.
Saw it once, am still trying to erase it from my mind. It didn't have a point. It didn't have anything... it was just Tarantino doing whatever.

It was forced, the dialogue was sooo stupid and never funny (e.g. jew, squirrel, rat). Mexican standoff in 1944 was the least of the anachronisms and yet Tarantino thought it was necessary to have people speak in their 'native' language for realism I suppose.

There wasn't any realism anyhow, so it was completely unnecessary - everyone could just speak with german accent and french accent and pretend to be speaking in other languages - like is normal in Hollywood movies.

What the hell was Eli Roth supposed to be doing there? Acting? I'm not sure yet... but whatever it was, it was bad. Inglorious even, though not by design.

Whatever, I suggest you see that movie (? or POS as I prefer to call it) at least another 10 times. Or 20. In fact, I suggest you watch that movie until you get it, that it is crap. Enjoy, I'm sure you will.

... dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb movie that expects the audience to be at least equally dumd dumb dumb dumb dumb
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 11:10 PM
 
Wow, I've never known anyone to have a burr up their arse about a frakking MOVIE.




And Rob, I think is one of the first times I've ever agreed with you about anything! Inglorious Basterds was a top-notch flick. I guess some people just don't get it is all.
"Everything's so clear to me now: I'm the keeper of the cheese and you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it.
That's why he's gonna kill us. So we got to beat it. Yeah. Before he let's loose the marmosets on us."
my bandmy web sitemy guitar effectsmy photosfacebookbrightpoint
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 15, 2010, 11:37 PM
 
Go watch Die Hard and jerk off dude. Srsly.
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 12:36 AM
 
I too watched Inglorious Bastards over the weekend.... overall....meh.

When it comes to Tarantino, the only one of his movies i do like (and i mean all time top 20) is Reservoir Dogs.... didnt like any of his other works. DeathProof was ok.

Brad Pitt's acting was laughable in IB, imo. He did the accent just fine, but if you looked at the expressions on his face, body language and eyes...it seemed like he was reading the lines off the script as opposed to acting(compare that with his performance in Snatch, which i thought was great). Eli Roth did an alright job tho. The 'Jew Hunter''s scene in the beginning was masterfully done...great attention to detail and awesome character building, but it was all downhill from there. The premise and story seemed very promising, but the execution left a lot to be desired. I liked the compositing and colors in the movie and the sound design.

Overall, i wouldnt consider myself a fan of Tarantino, purely because more often than not, i do not like his work. It's unique and stylized which i appreciate, but none of his recent works seems to have the attention to detail and character design as Reservoir Dogs did, IMHO. I guess he set the bar pretty high with that one.

On PA, i guess i would put BWP and Cloverfield in the same 'format'(handycam)..... Cloverfield having the best production values, but i got more of an emotional experience watching PA. BWP was interesting at the time cause it was a new 'type'/'experience'...but thats about it.
     
Hawkeye_a  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 12:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by downinflames68 View Post
Go watch Die Hard and jerk off dude. Srsly.
Dude, are you dissing Die Hard ? *tsk tsk*
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 12:39 AM
 
I'm ambivalent as far as Tarantino -- I just think some people took the movie a little too serious.
"Everything's so clear to me now: I'm the keeper of the cheese and you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it.
That's why he's gonna kill us. So we got to beat it. Yeah. Before he let's loose the marmosets on us."
my bandmy web sitemy guitar effectsmy photosfacebookbrightpoint
     
downinflames68
Baninated
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 12:50 AM
 
How can you take a fantasy hitler drama action movie seriously?

And no, die hard is fine. It's just sorta the McDonalds of movies. Explosions+car chases+ fights= die hard, served a billion ways by hollywood, over and over and over.
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 12:52 AM
 
Yes.
"Everything's so clear to me now: I'm the keeper of the cheese and you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it.
That's why he's gonna kill us. So we got to beat it. Yeah. Before he let's loose the marmosets on us."
my bandmy web sitemy guitar effectsmy photosfacebookbrightpoint
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 09:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by RAILhead View Post
Wow, I've never known anyone to have a burr up their arse about a frakking MOVIE.




And Rob, I think is one of the first times I've ever agreed with you about anything! Inglorious Basterds was a top-notch flick. I guess some people just don't get it is all.
Ugh you said 'frakking' and that's sad. Not because BSG is the TV equivalent to IB (both being overhyped trash), but because a forced meme is always sad.

Anyway, I have seen IB and that's what I saw. A bad movie - very overrated movie actually. I dare say that had it not been directed by Tarantino, it would have been panned universally for being overly long, unoriginal and really just a movie-nerd circle jerk where the director is showing how many movies he's seen and how many he can rip off.

I've actually made a few good solid points above as to why I thought IB was bad, but you posted a gif. Well done, certainly you are the target audience of Inglorious Basterds!
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 09:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by downinflames68 View Post
Go watch Die Hard and jerk off dude. Srsly.
Dude. I love it when people on the internet use the word 'dude'. Like 'dude that's offending my gentle emotions'.

Honestly, that you even put Die Hard and jerking off in a sentence says a lot about you, pal. (I also love it when people use 'pal')

I really don't know why Die Hard pops into your mind when discussing PA or IB, but I know that while more than 20 years later people still know Die Hard - nobody will remember Inglorious Basterds 20 years later. That kinda is the point and the difference between a good movie and a bad one.

Duuuuude.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 09:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by RAILhead View Post
I'm ambivalent as far as Tarantino -- I just think some people took the movie a little too serious.
I think you're in some other discussion, I sure didn't take IB seriously. Just as mindless entertainment, but it wasn't good. And it wasn't just bad, it was bad in a non-entertaining way. That's the worst kind.

Originally Posted by downinflames68 View Post
How can you take a fantasy hitler drama action movie seriously?
More than two hours of my life I'll never get back - that's the serious part. It was such a stupid movie that I seriously suspect that the people who liked it ... well let's just say there's a reason. How large a part of your society watches FOX news and believes it is a news channel?

That's sort of the point. There's a lot of stupid people out there, or at least people who can't be bothered to think for themselves - so they see a movie that doesn't really make any sense, but it has flashy colors, trippy dialogue and an incoherent plot.

What to do? Well, we gotta look cool so we better like it. It's an artsy film you see.. the point is so carefully layered in the movie that you have to be extra attentive to notice it.. Oh yes, it's a Tarantino movie, so it's not stupid. Oh no, he's genius! Right?

Right? Ever heard of the Emperor's New Clothes? Good story.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 10:43 AM
 
I thought the "story" and plot was pretty obvious for you to say there wasn't one.

But oh well, you have a burr up your arse about this flick so that's fine. No reason to discuss it. And besides, your posts in this regard are giving me massive Starman vs Shif flashbacks. Ugh.
"Everything's so clear to me now: I'm the keeper of the cheese and you're the lemon merchant. Get it? And he knows it.
That's why he's gonna kill us. So we got to beat it. Yeah. Before he let's loose the marmosets on us."
my bandmy web sitemy guitar effectsmy photosfacebookbrightpoint
     
residentEvil
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 11:01 AM
 
IB is a great movie; watched again a few days ago. blu-ray has a lot of fun stuff in it too.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 01:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by residentEvil View Post
IB is a great movie; watched again a few days ago. blu-ray has a lot of fun stuff in it too.
Sounds like the adjective 'great' has suffered some intense inflation. The only great thing about IB was its length. Which was quite great.

Originally Posted by RAILhead View Post
I thought the "story" and plot was pretty obvious for you to say there wasn't one.
There isn't a story or a plot when you can remove any scene at your own choosing and it won't change anything about the movie - except improve it by making it shorter, but that's obvious.

Seriously, pick a scene and skip it. Did IB change at all? But wait there's more - you could also remove entire elements out of the movie and it wouldn't change a damn thing!! Impressive in a pathetic sort of way.

Try this: Remove all scenes with the 'inglorious basterds' .. funny thing is it doesn't matter whether they are in the movie or not!

I've never seen such shoddy screenplay.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 01:36 PM
 
I thought the dialogue was top-notch, and the parallel story lines are only as important as eachother. I find it refreshing when a movie doesn't end up with the same pacing as everything else.

Yes, it was long.
Yes, the IB themselves were not the main draw of the movie, you know what? That's cool, and interesting. Something I can't say about any other movie I've seen recently (Wolfman, Sherlock Holmes)

Movies are completely subjective, I heard from a friend that Zombieland was so awesome and it turned out to be one of the worst movie experiences in recent memory.
     
Mrjinglesusa
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Why do you care?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 01:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
I think you're in some other discussion, I sure didn't take IB seriously. Just as mindless entertainment, but it wasn't good. And it wasn't just bad, it was bad in a non-entertaining way. That's the worst kind.



More than two hours of my life I'll never get back - that's the serious part. It was such a stupid movie that I seriously suspect that the people who liked it ... well let's just say there's a reason. How large a part of your society watches FOX news and believes it is a news channel?

That's sort of the point. There's a lot of stupid people out there, or at least people who can't be bothered to think for themselves - so they see a movie that doesn't really make any sense, but it has flashy colors, trippy dialogue and an incoherent plot.

What to do? Well, we gotta look cool so we better like it. It's an artsy film you see.. the point is so carefully layered in the movie that you have to be extra attentive to notice it.. Oh yes, it's a Tarantino movie, so it's not stupid. Oh no, he's genius! Right?

Right? Ever heard of the Emperor's New Clothes? Good story.



And then there are people who think it makes them "cool" or "enlightened" to hate movies that everyone else likes and that the majority of professional movie reviewers gave rave reviews.

It's fine that you didn't like the movie. However, your disdain is a bit over-the-top considering how well received this movie has been.

Story? Nope.
Plotholes? Aplenty.
Characters? Laughable.
Music? Inappropriate.
Setting? Seemingly random.
Scenes? Far too long.
Story? Did you even watch the movie?
Plotholes? You have any specific examples?
Characters? "Jew Hunter". Pwned
Music? Inappropriate how?
Setting? Random how? You want it set in 1944 United States?

There isn't a story or a plot when you can remove any scene at your own choosing and it won't change anything about the movie - except improve it by making it shorter, but that's obvious.

Seriously, pick a scene and skip it. Did IB change at all? But wait there's more - you could also remove entire elements out of the movie and it wouldn't change a damn thing!! Impressive in a pathetic sort of way.
Wow, you are REALLY grasping now. Take out the OPENING SCENE and you have no movie. That one scene sets the stage for EVERYTHING that is to come later. Take out the scene in the pub and "Jew Hunter" would have never known who the traitor was.

As much as you hate this movie, you have yet to provide any rationale, coherent argument for why you consider it to be such a bad movie.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 03:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post

And then there are people who think it makes them "cool" or "enlightened" to hate movies that everyone else likes and that the majority of professional movie reviewers gave rave reviews.
Good thing I'm not one of those people - far from it, but nice projecting!

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
It's fine that you didn't like the movie. However, your disdain is a bit over-the-top considering how well received this movie has been.
Oh so it's ok that I don't like the movie (great!) but not that I don't like it very much - based on the fact that a lot of people like it... thus it must be good. I'm just not seeing it.

Yes, this is known as the "Emperor's new clothes" syndrome. The very fact that it offends you and seemingly quite a few others that I don't like this movie (at all) is a very strong indication of this syndrome. But it's largely irrelevant - I think the movie sucked, yes - but I can substantiate those claims quite well.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
Story? Did you even watch the movie?
Regrettably, yes. It was like a crossover of Top Secret and 'Allo 'Allo, with outrageous accents and all. I'm still not sure if it was going for being a parody or not.. I sincerely doubt Tarantino knows either.


Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
Plotholes? You have any specific examples?
Quite a few. In the opening scene there was a farmer who spoke french and english - that's like coming into a farm in Idaho in 1941 and expecting the farmer there to speak Portuguese.. it doesn't make sense - but you don't see this when you are from USA - we all speak forrin here in Yurp. A plot hole.

Shoshanna goes to París, owns a cinema and speaks English all in 3 years! What? That she owns a cinema would be pretty impossible and where did she learn English in 3 years? París? She grew up on a dairy farm, and she spent 3 years in Paris, a long time before the American army arrived. Where would she have learnt English? Hello plothole!

Shoshanna's film in the end is in English.. anyone of you Yanks notice that? Nobody in that room could understand the film. Hans Landa wasn't in the room. No reason given for her speech being in English, just because (they needed another plot hole?)

Security at the cinema - wasn't there. The top commanders of Germany all in one theater and two guards. That's not even slightly believable. No reason given, just a hole in the plot.

How did the Merry Cans know that the Natsees were killing Joos in the middle of WWII? That's not really possible, and never explained. The Merrycans just know. A plot hole.

The absurd ignorance of Tarantino of Europe is a plot hole in and of itself. He's the epitome of a loud, dumb American (though not fat, he is quite high on coke, which is pretty annoying in and of itself) e.g. that he doesn't know the difference between Nazis and the Wehrmacht. That's wow: stupid!

Mexican standoff in a beer-cellar in 1944. Plot hole or just a stupid writer? We may never know.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
Characters? "Jew Hunter". Pwned
Did you just write 'Pawnd'? Well then this movie *is* for you!!

The Jew Hunter.. yes probably the closest thing to a character, but I'll come back to that.
- Mike Myers's part was what? Parody? Serious? It was stupid, yes but was it supposed to be.
- The Inglorious Basterds were completely interchangeable and had no character traits - just mindless killers and pretty boring. So interchangable that they can be dealt with as a single character! Neat. (That includes Jew Bear/Eli Roth..)
- Shoshanna.. uhmm she went through some weird transformation from being a dairy-farm girl to being an English speaking, revenge seeking cinema owner in Natsee occupied París. Another character from the first scene, she came off cold, distant and unsympathetic. In Natsee occupied France all had lost something, not just her. Boo hoo. In the end she just comes off as nuts.
- Zoller the natsee was a really strange character, but peripheral. He was as annoying to the audience as he was annoying to Shoshanna.
- Von Hammersmark was a completely pointless character along with her british counterpart. Introduce them and kill them. Haha. Didn't expect that one, did you? But then I didn't care one way or another - all I saw was 15 minutes of my life gone into the aether because Tarantino can't edit his films. Every frame a gem!
- lt. Aldo was a one dimensional character (like all the rest) where the audience saw no development, no personality, just him whining about killing natsees. Fine, but unsympathetic and irrelevant. Mostly he was just a comic relief. That's what every good movie needs - a comic relief to distract the audience from the vapid plot. The accent was stupid (and strangely Pitt is from Louisiana) and the facial expression was a groaner.
- and finally the Jew Hunter. See here is a good actor making the best he can out of a pretty one dimensional badguy character. Casting is fundamental. Larry the Cable Guy as Hans Landa wouldn't have worked. So Christoph Waltz is a perfectly cast actor - but what about the character? Does he make sense? Actually he's just about the only character who evolves - which sort of makes him the lead (although he's not billed as such), much like Samuel Jackson was in Pulp Fiction. Though fun to watch and overacting his stereotypical natsee to perfection, his character seems to go insane in the last act. All the time so smart, so calculating and so perfect judge of character and then in the final act he's like someone else. Everything you had learned about him earlier in the movie didn't count any more. Now he was just stupid.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
Music? Inappropriate how?
David Bowie in 1944 pretty much all of a sudden, while in other movies, e.g. Romeo+Juliet musical anachronism was part of the movie.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
Setting? Random how? You want it set in 1944 United States?
Actually yes - the setting was completely gratuitous, just for the hell of it. It could have been in Chicago 1944, instead of natsees you have gangsters and instead of Brad Pitt you have a government agent who sets up a gang of vigilantes. Hans Landa becomes the top assassin of the gangsters. Hey it could even have happened some years earlier and then Hitler could have been Capone!

For instance. There was no reason for this movie to be in 1944 France. Not for the plot anyway.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
Wow, you are REALLY grasping now. Take out the OPENING SCENE and you have no movie. That one scene sets the stage for EVERYTHING that is to come later. Take out the scene in the pub and "Jew Hunter" would have never known who the traitor was.
Hahaha right, without the opening scene this would have been a far tighter script - but that was the only scene Hans Landa was really the star and thus a powerful opening... and had to be there. Not for the plot, but to have at least one scene dominated by a competent actor, because that wouldn't happen again in the movie.

No that scene wasn't necessary and would have cut away many plot holes - such as the whole thing about Shoshanna learning english, going to París, owning a cinema.. etc. The pre-story didn't need to be shown, not like that. I think the audience would realize pretty fast that Shoshanna is hiding, that she doesn't like natsees and that she really hates Hans Landa.

Take away the utterly pointless barscene and just cut to Hans Landa picking up the clue after the whole thing had ended. Why on earth does the audience need to see how that clue became to be? Isn't this a fantasy??

And why was the bar scene (and so many others) pointless and just a waste of space? ... Creating tension in a scene with endless dialog only works if you find the characters interesting or worthy of empathy. This film had none of that. And the characters in the bar-scene were completely uninteresting and thus the audience didn't care one iota whether they live or die.

The characters were one dimensional and silly. Even the villains were boring in the end. Brad Pitt was especially horrible and his character with his whole crew was a joke. To risk trivializing a tragic time in history should only be done if the end result is worthy. This was boring and entirely predictable garbage.

Originally Posted by Mrjinglesusa View Post
As much as you hate this movie, you have yet to provide any rationale, coherent argument for why you consider it to be such a bad movie.
It didn't have any Transformers in it - now that would have been cool! Though funny you should mention it, I have provided plenty of rationale and quite coherent arguments as to why this is a bad movie - at least I've not even used words like Pawnd and frakking to ruin the argument for me.

The problem with this movie and Tarantino in general is that he's always making the same crap over and over again and with less and less interest - and it shows. The guy is repeating himself and it is getting old.

It is time the fanboys out there realized that Tarantino has become an idiot pothead who pulls ideas out of his ass and passes them off as works of art. You have been fooled again. This is derivative crap that has been done before and far better, even by Tarantino himself.

IB is what happens to a once talented writer after almost 20 years of coke and being told constantly you're a genius.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 04:33 PM
 
The 'Jew Hunter' character was magnificent, and every scene with him in it was brilliantly written and delivered.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 04:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
The 'Jew Hunter' character was magnificent, and every scene with him in it was brilliantly written and delivered.
Sure he was easily the best character, the only one with dimension and development. However, what happened to him in the final scenes? Did he sniff glue off camera?

That wasn't the same Hans Landa in the final three scenes as the Hans Landa in all the previous scenes. The calculating, intelligent, perfect judge of character and a tactical genius.

So no, I can't agree that every scene with him was brilliantly written, though there was nothing wrong with the delivery. Perfect delivery.

But the character just changed without so much as a warning and became somewhat limited in his mental abilities.

Oh some might say that a lot of the things in the movie gleefully don't make sense, yet it's so very intentional. It's amazing.... no it's just stupid. Because it doesn't make sense.

I swear that if this turd wasn't made by Tarantino, nobody would have liked it. Any more than its italian namesake.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
paul w
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vente: Achat
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 04:50 PM
 
I enjoyed much of Inglourious Basterds, and of course Waltz deserves the Oscar, even if it means a repeat of his thoroughly bizarre Golden Globe acceptance speach.

The opening scene with the glass of milk was one of the best things I've seen all year. Who cares if there are insane plot inconsistancies - the film was practically an hommage to those inconsistancies (the Americans supposed speaking Italian being undone by Waltz was hilarious).

The bar scene where everyone dies was well done also. I think one thing is clear - Tarantino is pretty good at scenes with lots of dialogue and underlying tension. When things have to actually start moving forward, plotwise, it's less so.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 05:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
Sounds like the adjective 'great' has suffered some intense inflation.
It really seems like you only ever show up here when you're on a depressive streak and really need to tear into others for sport.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 16, 2010, 05:07 PM
 
TrollyTrollyTrollyTrollyTrollyTrolllllllllllll
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:02 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,