|
On July 27 2013 07:33 strongandbig wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2013 10:23 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Worldwide total so far: $185,015,627
Not counting the books and other merchandise. sadly it appears that when you include the marketing budget it will still lose money. anyway can anyone explain the stick fighting? That's still bugging me.
It's supposed to be a measure of combat compatibility, how well each person can read each other's moves on an instinctive level. It's kinda new-agey bullshit, but it makes sense given the whole drift mechanic.
|
Just watched the film and I have to say, Pacific Rim is just pure fun. The film is silly, cheesy and stupid but who cares when all that fits so good together and creates an awesome experience.
|
On July 26 2013 10:23 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Worldwide total so far: $185,015,627
Not counting the books and other merchandise.
Doesnt seem that impressive
|
On July 27 2013 08:18 Faster69 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2013 10:23 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Worldwide total so far: $185,015,627
Not counting the books and other merchandise. Doesnt seem that impressive
It's not hasn't broken Budget yet but I am sure it will I heard it hasn't opened in China and japan yet.
|
On July 27 2013 08:18 Faster69 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2013 10:23 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Worldwide total so far: $185,015,627
Not counting the books and other merchandise. Doesnt seem that impressive
It's impressive for original material with no blockbuster stars signed on. Still needs to make more to warrant a sequel though.
|
finally got a chance to see it. not sure i agree with this movie getting "good" reception by critics. the fight scenes were incredibly fuckawesome but the story, writing, and characters were truly, unforgivably, beyond cheesy. 6/10, would watch again when stoned.
|
So I just saw the movie with some friends and I really liked it. They didn't like it because it "had a bad story". Well...whatdy'a expect from a movie featuring giant robots vs alien megamonsters? I didn't really care about the story, I just wanted to see the kickass fighting scenes, which, may I add, were kickass.
Tbh, I didn't think the story was bad anyways. I didn't really focus on it though. I loled when the wall broke. Who the hell's idea was it to build a wall and hope the monsters can't get in? lol.
My favorite (non-fighting action scene) part was when we get introduced to the black-market Keiju dealer in Hong Kong and he's that semi-famous actor that I've seen in a couple of other movies. That guy's a boss and it just seemed funny to see him playing this strange character.
|
The funny part is that I'm increasingly realizing that the story wasn't bad. It's just a casualty of the internet giving everyone access to every creative work from human history and overly snarky people drawing comparisons to denegrate original works as derivations, when all of creation is derivation. Cliches are used so often because they are effective ways of telling a story, just because they're used often does not mean they are any worse ways of telling a story, just more open to direct comparison to other works.
The "bad storyline" or "overly cliched" complaints about Pacific Rim and similar movies (and video games for that matter) are more results of the age we're living in where critics are becoming more and more impossibly harsh rather than any sort of defect in the movie/game.
At least, on a wide scale.
There's always been a certain class of nerd that can't deal with mild continuity issues or unrealistic/unscientific things in sci-fi movies. But those people are and have always been nothing more than a pain in the ass to go to the movies with so they're worth ignoring anyway 
EDIT: I'd be remiss to not mention that the definition of cliche is something that's trite, hackneyed, stereotyped, etc. but that definition has been so utterly expanded that it is much closer to "overused" which describes damn near everything. I realize the post makes very little sense with a strict definition of "cliched".
|
On July 27 2013 08:32 a176 wrote:
finally got a chance to see it. not sure i agree with this movie getting "good" reception by critics. the fight scenes were incredibly fuckawesome but the story, writing, and characters were truly, unforgivably, beyond cheesy. 6/10, would watch again when stoned.
I thought it had a good story. The story and everything existed to set a stage for the robots and create tension. It didn't overplay its hand or try and make character plots the dominant force. They were just there to flavor the setting. I think that's worth acknowledging.
|
On July 27 2013 09:49 deth2munkies wrote:
The "bad storyline" or "overly cliched" complaints about Pacific Rim and similar movies (and video games for that matter) are more results of the age we're living in where critics are becoming more and more impossibly harsh rather than any sort of defect in the movie/game.
No, they're absolutely not, and there is no such trend.
On July 27 2013 06:05 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 04:27 kwizach wrote:A copy/paste of a question in my post on page 39 that I'm genuinely wondering about: With regards to Elba's original final plan, can somebody explain to me how it was supposed to work? From what I understand, they were simply planning on getting the Aussie jaeger to put a nuke inside of the portal, correct? And this was supposed to be his new revolutionary idea? They mention earlier in the movie that they tried nuking the portal but it didn't work, and we're supposed to believe that in ten years of conflict they never thought about putting a nuke inside the portal rather than on the surface? What?! I think the plan was to time it such that they carry the nuke in when a Kaiju comes out, thus opening the "door" for them. At least, thats how I figured it with the mathematician trying to predict when they will emerge and such.
That can't have been it, considering the two scientists specifically discovered the original plan would not work because you needed kaiju DNA to be going through the portal at the same time. If the original plan had been to use the portal at the moment a kaiju was going through, it would have actually worked.
On July 27 2013 06:48 karazax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 04:27 kwizach wrote:A copy/paste of a question in my post on page 39 that I'm genuinely wondering about: With regards to Elba's original final plan, can somebody explain to me how it was supposed to work? From what I understand, they were simply planning on getting the Aussie jaeger to put a nuke inside of the portal, correct? And this was supposed to be his new revolutionary idea? They mention earlier in the movie that they tried nuking the portal but it didn't work, and we're supposed to believe that in ten years of conflict they never thought about putting a nuke inside the portal rather than on the surface? What?! They said that their theory was that the increased frequency and number of Kaiju meant that the portal was stabilizing and would stay open rather than closing after each attack.
Ah, it could have been that, even though it still makes no sense - why would it stabilize once one week intervals (or any interval) are reached rather than two weeks intervals? If anything, the moment you could predict it would stay stable was if there was a moment when there would be a continuous flow of kaijus.
|
I wathced this movie last week. It had the same effect to me as HellBoy. I never knew what to expect as I had no idea about the movie, I was even expecting it would bomb, and at the very least I'd have 2 hours of relax time despite the movie. BUT it turned out, the movie is awesome! I highly recommend it.
|
On July 27 2013 12:03 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 06:48 karazax wrote:On July 27 2013 04:27 kwizach wrote:A copy/paste of a question in my post on page 39 that I'm genuinely wondering about: With regards to Elba's original final plan, can somebody explain to me how it was supposed to work? From what I understand, they were simply planning on getting the Aussie jaeger to put a nuke inside of the portal, correct? And this was supposed to be his new revolutionary idea? They mention earlier in the movie that they tried nuking the portal but it didn't work, and we're supposed to believe that in ten years of conflict they never thought about putting a nuke inside the portal rather than on the surface? What?! They said that their theory was that the increased frequency and number of Kaiju meant that the portal was stabilizing and would stay open rather than closing after each attack. Ah, it could have been that, even though it still makes no sense - why would it stabilize once one week intervals (or any interval) are reached rather than two weeks intervals? If anything, the moment you could predict it would stay stable was if there was a moment when there would be a continuous flow of kaijus.
Perhaps, but it was just their theory and after the scientists mind melded with the Kaiju, they discovered the theory was wrong, and the only way to get thru was with a Kaiju who would open the gate.
Beyond that, for me it was a popcorn movie not meant to be over analyzed. It's certainly not going to go down as an Oscar winning script or anything, but it was one of the most visually impressive movies ever in IMAX 3D and the story was "good enough" for me to enjoy it.
|
On July 27 2013 09:49 deth2munkies wrote:
The "bad storyline" or "overly cliched" complaints about Pacific Rim and similar movies (and video games for that matter) are more results of the age we're living in where critics are becoming more and more impossibly harsh rather than any sort of defect in the movie/game.
This is not the movie to take up that fight on. Writers are also in the modern age and should be able to write to modern standards (or a bit lower for blockbusters). The criticism for PR is a result of the script and plot being so lazy/shit to the point where a single night's editing before going into production could've substantially improved things. The visuals were amazing but there's no denying everything else was barely half-ass.
To the "oh it's robot vs monsters it doesn't need plot" people. Having a decent plot aids immersion and makes sick fight scenes even more enjoyable (e.g. Matrix I). I'd much prefer that than cynical film companies selling films based on trailers alone.
|
They did cut out an hour of characterization to make the movie more succinct.
|
On July 27 2013 15:27 Antisocialmunky wrote:
They did cut out an hour of characterization to make the movie more succinct.
If this is the case. Then I am buying the DVD for the uncut version.
|
sadly, the director said he wont be releasing them 
|
On July 27 2013 09:49 deth2munkies wrote:
The "bad storyline" or "overly cliched" complaints about Pacific Rim and similar movies (and video games for that matter) are more results of the age we're living in where critics are becoming more and more impossibly harsh rather than any sort of defect in the movie/game.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Once you're at least in the "I watch a movie now and then" category, it's impossible to see this movie as anything but a complete cliche.
Personally I loved it (copy/pasted plot included), to speak in starcraft terms - it was really fucking well executed. Generally I don't watch movies in which the whole story unveils itself in the first 20 minutes, then again, I wasn't really interested in the plot to begin with.
It's not that the writers can't come up with something better - with this kind of a movie, it's probably better to have a simple easy to follow/predict script and let the audience focus more easily on what it came to see - fucking shit being torn up in 3D. Don't think the script was bad because the writers were lazy, but more that it was their intention to begin with.
|
I thought it was a terrible movie.
So cliche and cheesy.
|
On July 27 2013 15:33 icystorage wrote:sadly, the director said he wont be releasing them
Not the complete cut be some of the scenes will be special features. Hopefully they'll have some scenes with the other pilots.
|
On July 27 2013 15:53 n0ise wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2013 09:49 deth2munkies wrote:
The "bad storyline" or "overly cliched" complaints about Pacific Rim and similar movies (and video games for that matter) are more results of the age we're living in where critics are becoming more and more impossibly harsh rather than any sort of defect in the movie/game.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Once you're at least in the "I watch a movie now and then" category, it's impossible to see this movie as anything but a complete cliche. Personally I loved it (copy/pasted plot included), to speak in starcraft terms - it was really fucking well executed. Generally I don't watch movies in which the whole story unveils itself in the first 20 minutes, then again, I wasn't really interested in the plot to begin with. It's not that the writers can't come up with something better - with this kind of a movie, it's probably better to have a simple easy to follow/predict script and let the audience focus more easily on what it came to see - fucking shit being torn up in 3D. Don't think the script was bad because the writers were lazy, but more that it was their intention to begin with.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't at least try to create characters that aren't so damn one-dimensional. And all the same kind of one dimensional. Nobody cares about clichés in a good movie because they have a reason to be. You can just hear the screenwriters say "this worked in that movie, let's put it in". Well it doesn't work here.
The worst example being the rabit hole scene. They create something that they didn't mention before, and don't mention again in a failed attempt at creating a panic scene and some background to a character that would already need a personality before we knew what happened to her.
This move is annoying and saying they wanted it bad makes it even sadder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
