![]() |
I was :lol: when
Spoiler:
Not a BAD movie (Ghost Rider) just ok. |
Originally Posted by Boba Fett
(Post 9093123)
I saw it, had low expectations, and ended up being entertained. Ironically there was far less disappointment leaving this film than there was with Quantum of Solace, which I'd rate as a slightly better movie. It was entirely above average the whole way through so I'd give it a C+; whereas Bond had great action and a stellar cast but a story that went essentially nowhere.
For a teen movie, it's very good, and I have no problem with other movies like this, considering most of the stuff I see marketed towards that age group to be thoughtless crap. Will I read the books? No. Would I see a sequel? Most likely. This is one of two movies that my teenage sister has taken me to this year. I would rather sit through Twilight on an endless loop for a day than see One Missed Call again. So yes, there's much, much worse movies. |
:lol: Anyone catch The Soup this last weekend?
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qnGXLnd6XGA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qnGXLnd6XGA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> |
this is pretty amusing too:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AvfGT2aepus&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AvfGT2aepus&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> |
Originally Posted by kantonburg
(Post 9091211)
:lol:
1. Twilight $70,553,000 2. Quantum of Solace $27,400,000 3. Bolt $27,000,000 Seems to me the've done it right How exactly is this done "right"? Since when does quantity mean quality?? Sure, they got the core audience of the book to flood the theaters. And they made a profit. But let's see how well it holds up before you declare it being done "right". Reviews are wildly mixed. And people I know who have seen the film have said it's mediocre at best. |
they said the full official total was 69.6 mil and change, but it went from a 34 mil opening day to a 12 mil sunday.
|
I went and saw the movie this afternoon. I read the books which I enjoyed since I am in a vampire kick lately. I had read rumors the movie didn't do the book justice though not as bad as John Carpenter's take on Vampire$.
I definitely was disappointed. I didn't agree with most of the casting. Alice was definitely hot but didn't feel like Alice from the books. I swear in the books she was younger which obviously would be tough to pull off if they do the sequels. I didn't care for Edward either or any of Bella's friends. The group of friends definitely made it feel more like a Lifetime or ABC Family original movie. I also didn't feel that Jacob fit the character. Another thing that I noticed was the score which I thought was horrible. I usually never even notice the score in movies, but this one just stood out like a bad laugh track. I don't know which was worse though, the Doctor's makeup or the score. Overall I definitely won't be recommending it to anyone I know, but I hope they do the sequels just with another director. |
Originally Posted by Rypro 525
(Post 9095181)
they said the full official total was 69.6 mil and change, but it went from a 34 mil opening day to a 12 mil sunday.
|
Caught this today with the family. I really enjoyed, and yes, I've read the book too, and they're two very different animals, but I thought this one worked quite well. I'm not exactly sure what people were wanting out of the movie. Some of criticisms in a lot of reviews I've found laughable, acting like you have to be a Twilight fanatic in order to follow what was going on. I liked the cast, and it had a decent score and good, though brief, fight scenes. I'll be seeing the next one definitely.
|
Originally Posted by Brack
(Post 9099223)
Caught this today with the family. I really enjoyed, and yes, I've read the book too, and they're two very different animals, but I thought this one worked quite well. I'm not exactly sure what people were wanting out of the movie. Some of criticisms in a lot of reviews I've found laughable, acting like you have to be a Twilight fanatic in order to follow what was going on. I liked the cast, and it had a decent score and good, though brief, fight scenes. I'll be seeing the next one definitely.
|
Originally Posted by Daytripper
(Post 9099404)
A friend gave me the book to read. Should I read it first or wait until after the movie? Or does it not matter (?)
|
Saw it tonight. I thought it sucked. I was happy to hear that this was a huge hit for a female director but having seen it now I'm thinking that she is in fact a pretty lousy filmmaker. I can't believe how bad this movie was. It was like a poorly made TV movie. Why couldn't something like The Namesake (Directed by Mira Nair) be a huge hit and win Academy Award (say, Best Picture?). That would have made me a lot happier for the future of female directors than this mess of a movie.
|
I fully agree... I've heard they are going to start filming New Moon in January... and I have every intention of waiting till it comes to netflix to see it.
|
Catherine Hardwicke nearly ruined this entire movie with her pretentious and visionless style. I thought it was OK, fairly cheesy but had interesting supporting characters...but the colour palate of the movie was bland (typical), the camera work was horrible (why the swirly evil dead style camera work during the 'you're a vampire' scene...weak) and the makeup/effects were dollar store bad (Carlisle Cullen's first scene he has so much WHITE MAKEUP caked on it was distracting...especially because they MISSED part of his neck, and later he's wiped his brow without a makeup touch up). OK but not worth the fanfare - fire Hardwicke for New Moon and it has a fighting chance. 3/5.
|
I dunno about New Moons chances with the same director at the helm. Its a much more "visual" story than Twilight. You also have to consider that Twilight is the pinnacle of the series, the books get progressivley worse (and I'm a big fan of the series).
|
Originally Posted by GenPion
(Post 9110171)
Saw it tonight. I thought it sucked. I was happy to hear that this was a huge hit for a female director but having seen it now I'm thinking that she is in fact a pretty lousy filmmaker. I can't believe how bad this movie was. It was like a poorly made TV movie. Why couldn't something like The Namesake (Directed by Mira Nair) be a huge hit and win Academy Award (say, Best Picture?). That would have made me a lot happier for the future of female directors than this mess of a movie.
What peeves me is I've been waiting for Fox to do a BD release of it for the past few years. |
One thing the movie does well is make the "regular" classmates more interesting than the books do (not saying much but still). Easily the worst part of the books were reading about her classmates outside of the Cullens. Besides that, I think a better director could take this from being an "OK" film to "quite a good one", given a better budget as the stories are a bit more intricate as they proceed. Although it will be interesting to see how they handle Breaking Dawn. That could be down right uncomfortable for a lot of people.
|
Originally Posted by The Bus
(Post 9091447)
I liked Twilight more than Underworld. :shrug:
|
Hardwicke is out for the sequels.
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...ght-franchise/ |
Originally Posted by BJacks
(Post 9118274)
Hardwicke is out for the sequels.
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...ght-franchise/ Yeah, I read that on three different sites in the last hour. I'm assuming it's not just because some found her difficult. At the rate the box-office is going, the movie probably won't exceed 175M. Probably not exactly what the studio was expecting. Not to mention the bad reviews site bad direction. |
Is the box office success of the movie really a question at this point? I mean, come on.
I will reserve judgment on the director switch until I find out who they hire. This makes me nervous though, as I really loved what she did with "Twilight" myself. |
Originally Posted by onebyone
(Post 9118311)
Is the box office success of the movie really a question at this point? I mean, come on.
I will reserve judgment on the director switch until I find out who they hire. This makes me nervous though, as I really loved what she did with "Twilight" myself. Given I read some were expecting Harry Potter numbers, then yes, I'd say the box office numbers are a question. Sure, it made money. But compared to HP numbers, I'm guessing the studios are being greedy. I haven't seen the movie yet. But, again, most of the negative write ups involved the direction and cheap production. I'm going to see the movie soon and will give my personal opinion. Just saying what I've read. |
Thank God. As tedious as I found the books, they have potential to make fun films, but not if Catherine Hardwicke is in the director's chair. I felt like I was watching a shitty music video that dragged on for two hours. I might even see the next one if they hire someone competent.
|
Originally Posted by Daytripper
(Post 9118320)
Given I read some were expecting Harry Potter numbers, then yes, I'd say the box office numbers are a question. Sure, it made money. But compared to HP numbers, I'm guessing the studios are being greedy. I haven't seen the movie yet. But, again, most of the negative write ups involved the direction and cheap production. I'm going to see the movie soon and will give my personal opinion. Just saying what I've read.
Only rabid fans thought it would touch Potter. I just read here that Paramont pictures "at one time controlled the rights to “Twilight” but let them slip away because someone at the studio decided in 2006 that the series was a dud." That has to hurt. |
Originally Posted by Sanjuro37
(Post 9118335)
Thank God. As tedious as I found the books, they have potential to make fun films, but not if Catherine Hardwicke is in the director's chair. I felt like I was watching a shitty music video that dragged on for two hours. I might even see the next one if they hire someone competent.
http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b721...ng_sequel.html Rumor is from one blogger that I read said she wasn't going to be offered the sequel for a while now. Edit: Nevermind, lol |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.