Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 25 May 2017




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
The Adversary wrote:
Michael Bay has directed numerous films, yet he clearly confuses film structure with special effects. Similarly, Uwe Boll has directed 29 films, with more on the way, and we know full well how his films end up.


1. At what point did Michael Bay ever say he wanted to create a solid script and film structure? There is no CONFUSION here, everything he does is intentional. He sets out to create flashbang style over substance, and power to him, because the films are perfect for the people who want that.

2. And how many of these 29 films have you seen? For every House of the Dead (awful film IMO), there is a RAMPAGE (awesome film) and Postal (very fun), and Tunnel Rats was very atmospheric (just a bit dull). I haven't seen Darfur but I've seen some very positive reviews around so it's on my list (it's difficult to tell through IMDb with Boll movies as thousands of people put one star votes on there before the film is even out, some kind of protest they have going on). This is more backing up of my "people are sheep" argument, because the vast majority of people who blast this particular director have never even seen his movies (or have seen just one, or watched one of ThatGuyWithTheGlasses' "reviews"), or only watched his terrible early game adaptations.

3. Has everybody forgotten Darkwatch and Wilderness now? I found Wilderness in particular to be near perfect in its characterisation.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Feb 2010
Notes left: 122
Last seen at: Tennessee
Uwe Boll is not a complete hack...Rampage, Darfur and Tunnel Rats are all solid movies....Even Postal and SEED have their moments....But Boll Bashing is popular among video game fans...Even if they haven't seen most of his films....


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
They're still mad at him for making House of the Dead I think... I dunno. But it is strange, even his original new stuff shows up and they all flock to rate it 1 star on IMDb before it's even out let alone having seen it. People need to grow up and give a guy a chance. A lot of great directors started off making bad films.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Jun 2006
Notes left: 1924
Last seen at: Katz Street
I'v seen nearly all his works, but unlike you guys I just couldn't enjoy even one of them. I understand a difference in opinion, but my opinion is that the man shouldn't be making movies. Though, I also don't think this topic should be turned into a Uwe Boll debate or flame war against him.

_________________
Image
WARNING: Some Parts of Reality May Seem Violent or Cruel.


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
Not really bothered, none of the movies were great (aside from Rampage), but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be doing his job/passion.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Jun 2006
Notes left: 1924
Last seen at: Katz Street
That was meant more as an exaggeration of my personal disdain of Boll than me literally wishing he was out of a job. He can do what he wants, because I am obviously not forced to watch his movies or give them mind (some seem to act like they are, though none on this site that i'v noticed).

_________________
Image
WARNING: Some Parts of Reality May Seem Violent or Cruel.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Jun 2009
Notes left: 2853
I heard Uwe Boll mention on a podcast that he's a Silent Hill fan. The more you know...

_________________
It's not that far.

Screenplay Archaeology Podcast - ALIEN ENGINEERS EPISODE IS UP!


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Feb 2010
Notes left: 122
Last seen at: Tennessee
He actually mentioned once that he wanted to direct a Silent Hill movie...


Top
   
 

Moderator
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 21 Jul 2003
Notes left: 11961
Last seen at: Nova Scotia, Canada
resevil80 wrote:
He actually mentioned once that he wanted to direct a Silent Hill movie...


Revelation felt so much like a Boll video game adaptation it may as well have been.

_________________
Image
"I dreamt last night I saw you
A single spark explosion negotiating with the dead
By the bright lights in some ICU on my chest you put your head
and said "There you are.
There you are.
There's my heart..."


Top
   
 

Woodside Apartments Janitor
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 16 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1129
That's one thing I loved about the first Silent Hill film. Even being a gamer, it didn't scream, "Video game adaptation!" or "Action-y gore film!"

For me, films are not much like games at all in terms of their experience or execution. The games have so much more time to flesh out and adaptations especially need to be wary about how much they try to wrap their exposition, character development and time length over.

This was my problem with Revelation. I feel that the actual scenes and material Bassett did direct were of decent to high visual and performance quality - if you throw pacing, cohesiveness and meaningful character development (all across the board, not just Heather), to the alley.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
And with all the exposition in the film, I still left feeling like I never knew what I was supposed to know about the Order, Rose's presence and purpose, why I should care about the seal, the meaning of the town being so wild like it is, etc. Bassett said that one could watch this film and understand & enjoy it without ever having seen the first, and that's just not true in my opinion. I watched the first film the night before I went to see Revelation and was still left feeling, "Whaa...?"

Now before likers of the film dive into my stew about this - I actually enjoyed watching the film, even loved many parts of it, despite certain absences in necessities. It was fun - a definite thrill ride through hell. I feel the acting was absolutely wonderful all across the board - Kit and Adelaide had this certain chemistry I rarely find in "film couples", as in two characters going through an adventure together.

Bar the ROUND ONE - FIGHT!!! at the end, the scenes with the monsters felt solid, especially the spider doll. Heck, I'll go ahead and admit the fight at the end was cool, even if it was entirely unsatisfying for what was set up until then. The whole sequence with the mannequin factory was very impressive, and I HATE CGI IN MOVIES. So that was surprising for me. Visually, Revelation was a feast.

Yet, a lot of the talent felt wasted or that it just amounted to thrill and chill because the film didn't cover its own in terms of wrapping up loose ends, generating substance and giving the audience time to comprehend and care about the large amount of exposition, spectacle, violence and dialogue. I feel that for all the exposition there was, audiences still didn't have enough to go on to form a good idea of what the hell is going on, who some of the characters even are, and why they're doing what they're doing. I dunno, maybe I'm not expressing this in the right words.

The exposition scenes Bassett did film (as in the flashbacks, I suppose), were really interesting to watch and helped me to care more about the characters and the story - but they didn't seem to flow.

Some even felt like hitting a brick wall. The first film's pacing (at least until Rose and Cybil enter the church after the third Otherworld transition) built up so much apprehension and juice I could hardly stand it. And it bounced back a few more times at the end there, and even the exposition flowed better than Bassett's multiple instances of it.

By the time Heather is handing Claudia the seal I don't know enough about her to really care if she lives or dies, so her defeat kind of feels like an afterthought - especially after the intense and respectable carousel scene.

Which, by the way, I took as a representation of Heather (Sharon) - again being the separated goodness of Alessa - defeating and expelling he evilness and hatred side of Alessa versus simply absorbing it and becoming whole again. I get that she took something away from the confrontation, but in no way was reuniting with her "other half", the darkness of Alessa. Sharon is her own person and doesn't need the nasty hatred of her "other half", so she engages in an (admittedly sorta funny) hug challenge with her other half, and comes out on top as good prevailing over evil.

Anyway, I don't tend to tack number grades on films, or anything really.

So my grades I guess kind of read like weather reports: Revelation is not without its shining moments, and a fun and visually exciting sci-fi/horror/fantasy, sure to quench any thrill and chill cravings one may have. Performances and production quality are better than most films, but beware of some moderate to serious pacing and character development roadblocks. And expect a downpour of exposition and not too much from what it sets up.

I really expected a better follow-up to the first Silent Hill film. While Revelation keeps it real and true to the first film and games (with what some may say are major exceptions and random ass deus ex machina-age), it falls short too many times to be deemed as a successful sequel.

The least it could've done was to strive to legitimately answer some lingering questions from the first film, such as the true origin of Alessa's powers and why the town is like it is, but it didn't even do that. It started to do this and then key characters that could've helped with answers were left in the dust while ones bringing up more questions were left alive or were unforgivably absent.

I get that some exposition tried to show that Silent Hill was built on ancient burial grounds, but c'mon... Why does Alessa have these powers? Why, besides accusing her of being a witch and not having a father, did the zealots from the first film want to sacrifice Alessa? Sure, there's the fact that she has some kind of powers, but why? From where? And why should we care?

Maybe I'm bleeding too much between the first film and Revelation, but I just feel that a sequel is there to continue the story and maybe even tie up some loose and lingering ends from the original. Revelation continued the story in an even more puzzling direction with a lot of flare, but that's all that was there. Like a fun-sized candy-bar - fun and tasty, but always leaves you yearning for a king size.

_________________
Image
Music created by the fans, for the fans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vol. 1 | Vol. 2 | Vol. 3


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 507
Last seen at: Phoenix
wonder's boy wrote:
That's one thing I loved about the first Silent Hill film. Even being a gamer, it didn't scream, "Video game adaptation!" or "Action-y gore film!"

For me, films are not much like games at all in terms of their experience or execution. The games have so much more time to flesh out and adaptations especially need to be wary about how much they try to wrap their exposition, character development and time length over.

This was my problem with Revelation. I feel that the actual scenes and material Bassett did direct were of decent to high visual and performance quality - if you throw pacing, cohesiveness and meaningful character development (all across the board, not just Heather), to the alley.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
And with all the exposition in the film, I still left feeling like I never knew what I was supposed to know about the Order, Rose's presence and purpose, why I should care about the seal, the meaning of the town being so wild like it is, etc. Bassett said that one could watch this film and understand & enjoy it without ever having seen the first, and that's just not true in my opinion. I watched the first film the night before I went to see Revelation and was still left feeling, "Whaa...?"

Now before likers of the film dive into my stew about this - I actually enjoyed watching the film, even loved many parts of it, despite certain absences in necessities. It was fun - a definite thrill ride through hell. I feel the acting was absolutely wonderful all across the board - Kit and Adelaide had this certain chemistry I rarely find in "film couples", as in two characters going through an adventure together.

Bar the ROUND ONE - FIGHT!!! at the end, the scenes with the monsters felt solid, especially the spider doll. Heck, I'll go ahead and admit the fight at the end was cool, even if it was entirely unsatisfying for what was set up until then. The whole sequence with the mannequin factory was very impressive, and I HATE CGI IN MOVIES. So that was surprising for me. Visually, Revelation was a feast.

Yet, a lot of the talent felt wasted or that it just amounted to thrill and chill because the film didn't cover its own in terms of wrapping up loose ends, generating substance and giving the audience time to comprehend and care about the large amount of exposition, spectacle, violence and dialogue. I feel that for all the exposition there was, audiences still didn't have enough to go on to form a good idea of what the hell is going on, who some of the characters even are, and why they're doing what they're doing. I dunno, maybe I'm not expressing this in the right words.

The exposition scenes Bassett did film (as in the flashbacks, I suppose), were really interesting to watch and helped me to care more about the characters and the story - but they didn't seem to flow.

Some even felt like hitting a brick wall. The first film's pacing (at least until Rose and Cybil enter the church after the third Otherworld transition) built up so much apprehension and juice I could hardly stand it. And it bounced back a few more times at the end there, and even the exposition flowed better than Bassett's multiple instances of it.

By the time Heather is handing Claudia the seal I don't know enough about her to really care if she lives or dies, so her defeat kind of feels like an afterthought - especially after the intense and respectable carousel scene.

Which, by the way, I took as a representation of Heather (Sharon) - again being the separated goodness of Alessa - defeating and expelling he evilness and hatred side of Alessa versus simply absorbing it and becoming whole again. I get that she took something away from the confrontation, but in no way was reuniting with her "other half", the darkness of Alessa. Sharon is her own person and doesn't need the nasty hatred of her "other half", so she engages in an (admittedly sorta funny) hug challenge with her other half, and comes out on top as good prevailing over evil.

Anyway, I don't tend to tack number grades on films, or anything really.

So my grades I guess kind of read like weather reports: Revelation is not without its shining moments, and a fun and visually exciting sci-fi/horror/fantasy, sure to quench any thrill and chill cravings one may have. Performances and production quality are better than most films, but beware of some moderate to serious pacing and character development roadblocks. And expect a downpour of exposition and not too much from what it sets up.

I really expected a better follow-up to the first Silent Hill film. While Revelation keeps it real and true to the first film and games (with what some may say are major exceptions and random ass deus ex machina-age), it falls short too many times to be deemed as a successful sequel.

The least it could've done was to strive to legitimately answer some lingering questions from the first film, such as the true origin of Alessa's powers and why the town is like it is, but it didn't even do that. It started to do this and then key characters that could've helped with answers were left in the dust while ones bringing up more questions were left alive or were unforgivably absent.

I get that some exposition tried to show that Silent Hill was built on ancient burial grounds, but c'mon... Why does Alessa have these powers? Why, besides accusing her of being a witch and not having a father, did the zealots from the first film want to sacrifice Alessa? Sure, there's the fact that she has some kind of powers, but why? From where? And why should we care?

Maybe I'm bleeding too much between the first film and Revelation, but I just feel that a sequel is there to continue the story and maybe even tie up some loose and lingering ends from the original. Revelation continued the story in an even more puzzling direction with a lot of flare, but that's all that was there. Like a fun-sized candy-bar - fun and tasty, but always leaves you yearning for a king size.


THere's a separate thread for reviews where this would be appreciated, just sayin. viewtopic.php?f=42&t=25164&start=380


Top
   
 

Woodside Apartments Janitor
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 16 Oct 2010
Notes left: 1129
Haha, woops. Thought I was in that thread.

_________________
Image
Music created by the fans, for the fans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vol. 1 | Vol. 2 | Vol. 3


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
On the subject of Uwe Boll, I find many of his issues (these days) are in the writing. Tunnel Rats created some absolutely incredible suspense in the underground tunnels, a kind of tension I'd not felt in a movie for quite some time, it's just the story and characters were really dull and boring. SEED had some really unpleasant ideas (such as the inclusion of PETA-supplied animal brutality footage which just makes the beginning unwatchable to anybody with a heart) but it certainly knows what to do with the horror and tension. Alone in the Dark had some dumbass characters and dialogue, but the camera certainly knows what it's doing and everything looks great.

So to be honest, if I heard Boll had gotten ahold of Silent Hill, I wouldn't despair but I would certainly hope that he wasn't the writer and that he didn't have control of the writing. Alone in the Dark is an interesting example because the script was penned by somebody else and Uwe intervened and made them rewrite it to include car chases, action sequences etc. (which would be fine in a lot of cases but it turned a movie called "Alone in the Dark" to something more about being in the light with company), House of the Dead on the other hand was just penned by an idiot (in my opinion), with the film's biggest problem being the fact that a bunch of dumb teenagers get their hands on guns (and a sword) and are somehow massively skilled at using them for no good reason. My point is that a lot of the stuff with Uwe seems to be more to do with bad ideas and writing than his aptitude for directing film.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Feb 2010
Notes left: 122
Last seen at: Tennessee
Droo wrote:
resevil80 wrote:
He actually mentioned once that he wanted to direct a Silent Hill movie...


Revelation felt so much like a Boll video game adaptation it may as well have been.


Except for the fact that it had SOMETHING to do with the game lol....I would actually be interested to see what Boll did with a real gaming franchise....It may not turn out to be a good movie, but it would be an interesting watch...

The thing about SEED, its not a good movie, but it accomplished what he set out to do with it, which is make the audience feel genuine disgust.....I mean, I barely made it through the movie because of the way he portrayed most of the violence...and thats an accomplishment in its own right...


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
I thought the hammer scene in SEED was absolutely stunning. To have a woman go from a whimpering woman in a chair to a bloody pulp without the camera cutting away once, it's just not the kind of thing you see in horror films even today, and because of the lack of cutaways (which are usually to mask transitions between prosthetics) it feels very real. Until he jams the hammer into the remains of her head anyway, where, if you look carefully, there is a visible seam where it's been digitally composed. Other than that it's one of the most impressive death scenes I've ever seen.

I'd appreciate SEED a lot more, and recommend it to others, if it wasn't for the PETA video, which I just can't bare to see. I've still not watched more than a couple of seconds of it, I skipped it each time I watched the film.

Dat ending as well, good god. Jodelle Ferland kicks even more horror ass.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 22 Jun 2006
Notes left: 1924
Last seen at: Katz Street
^ I'v missed that one appearently, and from the sound of it i'm not sure I want to. lol Ol' Jodelle seems to like the dark films.

_________________
Image
WARNING: Some Parts of Reality May Seem Violent or Cruel.


Top
   
 

My Bestsellers Clerk
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Jan 2011
Notes left: 388
Last seen at: Nails Reach, UK
Keeping this on topic the film made over double its budget that is brilliant for a horror movie and much better than the first Silent Hill.

_________________
What's the big deal - Laura


Top
   
 

Rosewater Park Attendant
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 18 Apr 2009
Notes left: 1399
It's made £34mllion now worldwide. Much better, DVD sales should secure us a third film, albeit maybe even lower budget.

_________________
Where we're from, the birds sing a pretty song, and there's always music in the air.


Top
   
 

Cafe5to2 Waitress
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 11 Sep 2011
Notes left: 293
Silent_Storm wrote:
Keeping this on topic the film made over double its budget that is brilliant for a horror movie and much better than the first Silent Hill.

Double? Wasn't the budget $20 million? It has only made $33 million worldwide, it would still need $7 million more to fit that description.


Top
   
 

Just Passing Through
 Post subject: Re: Box Office Predictions ?
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 03 Feb 2010
Notes left: 122
Last seen at: Tennessee
It has made 40 million US dollars worldwide...Thats after adding up the Foreign BO from Box Office Mojo...


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: