|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Saw it in 3D earlier today, definitely enjoyed it, for some reason I liked the 3D best when looking at the artwork, such as the paintings and sculptures. And DAMN, Hyperion was a dick! Probably even more than Commodus from Gladiator!
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Fuck this movie. Yeah, Tarsem knows how to make a pretty shot, but when every shot in your movie is 'art' and you've got cardboard characters, zero story and horrible pacing, it pretty much takes away any of the eye candy factor, because they will be fucking closed, because you will be sleeping.
I was really really looking forward to this - I thought The Fall was really original and interesting but this movie just made me angry from about 1/3 on....nothing redeeming, no heart, not a single shred of substance at all....and that could maybe be forgiven if this thing was kinetic and got any sort of adrenaline pumping. Every really cool shot is in the trailer, which was by far 10 times better than the finished product. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Too much talky-talky, not enough staby-staby during the first hour or so. The last 30-40 minutes were pretty awesome though.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Saw it in 3D today. I enjoyed it. The 1st hour is a little slow and alot of exposition, but the last 45+ minutes is awesome. Great 3D effects and they worked really well for the big battle scene towards the end of the film. Tarsem Singh does know how to shoot a visually entertaining film.
Really liked Henry Cavill as Theseus. Strong onscreen presence, very fit and athletic body and the dude kicks ass in this movie. I'm looking forward to seeing him as Superman in 2 years. The supporting cast is weak though. Liked Rourke as the main baddie, but Joseph Morgan (Lysander) was a poorly developed 2nd baddie considering he's such a badass on The Vampire Diaries. :lol: and Stephen Dorff really? Was Val Kilmer not available? It was awesome seeing him: Spoiler:
I would give this a B and I definitely recommend seeing it in 3D. Question regarding the Gods/Immortals: Spoiler:
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Was this shot for 3-D or post-converted?
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by KillerCannibal
(Post 11001397)
Now pretend it was a 7.1 mix...
Just kidding. Would you say it's on par with 300? Or does it play like a lesser knock-off? personally I thought 300 was better, but here with the mythology and the god battling the titans - the latter half of the film was much better than the slow beginning.
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 11001725)
Was this shot for 3-D or post-converted?
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Pretty mediocre. I watched this in 2D tonight, and while there are a number of cool scenes and ideas, the overall story and the end were pretty silly, and just poor writing over all. I'd give it a C. I really loved the God/Titans stuff, so I was pretty disappointed in the execution.
Things I liked and things that bothered me, all spoilers: Spoiler:
I feel like i'm still waiting for that epic modern Greek/Roman God movie :( |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by Giles
(Post 11001776)
from what I've read online it's a post-convert but shot knowing that the conversion would happen in post (i.e, Piranha)
Why the fuck would you shoot a movie in digital knowing you'd end up post-converting it to 3D? Why not shoot the thing in 3D from the get-go? What blows my mind even more is they shot the film using the Panavision Genesis. The Genesis, amongst other cameras, can be placed in Panavision's own 3D rig (Quasar). Arrgh. Fuck lazy filmmaking. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Calling Tarsem Singh a lazy filmmaker is either a willful insult or an embarrassing display of ignorance. He's one of the most deliberate and visually precise directors working today. You can say you don't like his films, and that's fine and understandable, but dismissing him as "lazy" is simply wrong.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by DJariya
(Post 11001666)
Question regarding the Gods/Immortals
Spoiler:
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
In Greek mythology, the Titans were the first rulers of the Earth. Zeus and the other major gods were born to the king of the Titans. After Zeus deposed his father, they went to war against those who supported his father. It was a massive war. The mountains of Greece are the remains of fortifications, and the clouds are leftovers of the dust that was kicked up. Zeus won. The Titans were imprisoned in Tartarus deep inside the Earth. Except for Atlas, who was forced to hold up the dome of the sky. Humans didn't come into the story until later. Luckily we had a sponsor, who kept Zeus from exterminating us out of hand.
In short, don't worry about the original myths. They won't help you understand the movie. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by DonnachaOne
(Post 11002518)
Calling Tarsem Singh a lazy filmmaker is either a willful insult or an embarrassing display of ignorance. He's one of the most deliberate and visually precise directors working today. You can say you don't like his films, and that's fine and understandable, but dismissing him as "lazy" is simply wrong.
Harold and Kumar had a $19 million budget and used the Panavision Quasar. Immortals had a $120 million budget and could've shot it in 3D with no impact made to the budget or filming... as they were already shooting it with the same, fucking camera to begin with. That's lazy filmmaking. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Here's a breakdown of the reasons for why they opted for post-conversion. Doesn't seem "lazy" so much as it is more suitable to both the budget and Tarsem's shooting style.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118045792 |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by Nick Danger
(Post 11002596)
In Greek mythology, the Titans were the first rulers of the Earth. Zeus and the other major gods were born to the king of the Titans. After Zeus deposed his father, they went to war against those who supported his father. It was a massive war. The mountains of Greece are the remains of fortifications, and the clouds are leftovers of the dust that was kicked up. Zeus won. The Titans were imprisoned in Tartarus deep inside the Earth. Except for Atlas, who was forced to hold up the dome of the sky. Humans didn't come into the story until later. Luckily we had a sponsor, who kept Zeus from exterminating us out of hand.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 11003910)
Intriguing remark. Who was this sponsor?
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by bluetoast
(Post 11003406)
Here's a breakdown of the reasons for why they opted for post-conversion. Doesn't seem "lazy" so much as it is more suitable to both the budget and Tarsem's shooting style.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118045792
Originally Posted by RocShemp
(Post 11004090)
I believe that was Prometheus. I recall he stole fire from the gods and gave it to man. He also tricked the gods into taking fat as sacrifice but leaving the cooked meat to mankind.
Saw it Saturday in 3D. It was pretty dark. The trailers before film were off as well..so I'm sure the film wasn't supposed to be that damn dark. ANYWAY...about the film. I enjoyed it for the most part. As mentioned before..kinda dragging the first 15 mins. I'd probably give it a B. Plot was there but wasn't as strong as the visual. Great visuals great God action w/ some pretty good human kick assery. Was kind of sad about the actual length of the money shot for the film. Could have name dropped some of those gods a bit better by the end cuz I was slightly confused about what happened to whom specifically from 2 of the 5. About the 3D...uh...there were some shots that were probably augmented better visually via 3D but I didn't feel that this film needed it. Unless I somehow...didn't pay attention to how 3D made the visuals better. I'll get it on BD at some point for the right price. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
The link worked for me (after trying it again)...did you get directed to an ad? That might be the problem.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
As far as any 3D post-conversion is concerned, as long as they leave a 2D version intact for people like my wife & I, we'll be happy, as we could both care less about 3D.
I'm anxious to see this movie. -kd5- |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
(Post 11003400)
If I'm shooting a film using the Panavison Genesis and I know the studio is wanting 3D (which was a decision Realitivity made in pre-production), I would've shot the film in 3D.
Harold and Kumar had a $19 million budget and used the Panavision Quasar. Immortals had a $120 million budget and could've shot it in 3D with no impact made to the budget or filming... as they were already shooting it with the same, fucking camera to begin with. That's lazy filmmaking. It would be a fairer comparison to stand Immortals beside Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, which was shot in 3D and, while it looked fine in well-lit scenes, looked videotaped and setbound in dark scenes. One could also look at Transformers: Dark of the Moon, which was shot largely in 3D, but most of the wide shots and all of the slow motion was shot on 35mm and postconverted to allow greater control of the depth and production design. Also, it is not as easy as "using the same camera" to shoot a film in 3D versus 2D. It requires a great deal more planning, setup, much more rigorous blocking, longer production due to reshooting, a larger crew and longer editing time. "no impact made to the budget or filming" is at best disingenuous. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Saw it in 3D. Definitely entertaining and not a sham like most 3D movies. Weak narratively, but movies by Tarsem are meant to be visual experiences, so I won't hold too much against it in that regard. Warming up the idea of Henry Cavill as Superman as well.
While I am certain it was a body double(it was obvious), please do not tell me if it was not Frieda Pinto's beatiful breasts and booty that were on display during the love scene, it would break my heart. :( |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
well they weren't. :(
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
He asked you not to tell him that...:sad:
:p -kd5- |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
I thought this movie was so-so.. Wasn't expecting much after reading some reviews going in.. I thought the visual effects were great, the story was decent.. but i think they could have done without the
Spoiler:
IMO it took away from the movie a lot. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
^ I don't think it took away from the movie as much as just look like a visual for the sake of having something fancy to end the story.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Agreed, especially since it was in the trailers...I had forgotten about it while watching, but then when it came up as an addendum, I was disappointed.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Like many here...I do wish it was a bigger deal in the film itself..cuz jesus titty fucking christ is that thing gorgeous.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC
(Post 11013783)
jesus titty fucking christ is that thing gorgeous.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
I enjoyed it. I know 3D is generally considered a joke around here but I thought this movie benefited from it. It was nothing special story wise but the action was pretty damn awesome. The big "pump up" speech fell way short, which I found disappointing.
And Freida Pinto is beautiful. I wish she didn't use a body double. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Caught a showing today. I was a bit reluctant to go see it but I had a free movie coupon that was expiring today and this was the only thing that remotely appealed to me. Left satisfied, some pretty decent action. Henry Cavill has a bright future ahead of him (Superman role notwithstanding). I doubt I'll ever see it again though.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
This is now on Netflix. I enjoyed it a lot. I actually skipped it in theaters and on DVD, and didn't expect too much from it.
The villians were very industrial and scary. Reminded me of Milius' Conan movies. Gorgous visuals. And very strong, righteous, vulnerable heroes. Regular Tarsem at work there. Some stuff felt rushed. Like the "speech" before the end battle. It's been done so many times, and this one just didn't fit in and feel right. So is the big gate a standard in the fantasy genre (like wizards)? Because I thought I was looking at the exact same set from Lord of the Rings. And a big battle right at the gate? It was a little jarring. |
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Yeah I liked this too. Had a good time with it.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
I enjoyed it as well, very entertaining and gorgeous to look at. Mickey Rourke was clearly having fun, and I was amused that nearly every single scene of his ended with him killing one of his own henchmen. :lol:
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
I thought it was a bore.
|
Re: Immortals (Tarsem, 2011)
Like Tarsem's other films, everything feels very staged. Beautiful only in a superficial kind of way (everything is either sunrise or sunset) but it also felt very sterile at the same time. I'd say it met my moderate expectations.. but I don't see myself watching it again.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:16 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.