Bad, bad, bad. The script is weak, the acting is subpar, and even Anthony Hopkins misses the mark. Some scenes are just ridiculous, a total waste of money and time. They didn't even make good use of New York City, other than flying over the same Grand Mosque five different times. Real subtle. After such an intriguing first installment, this one is just a complete mess. I'm skipping the third movie just like I did with the whole Twilight saga.
Well, I didn't actually start this thread, but my brain led me here while I was a little tipsy (haha) kind of pulled me in. Anyway, it’s a truly phenomenal movie. Even though I mentioned earlier that it might be a few points better than Triangle, I've changed my mind. After all, I've watched Triangle several times now and it still fascinates me. For sure, this film stays in my top 10. Maybe, if I can stay conscious after watching Triangle, I'll give this one a go too. If you haven't seen it, highly recommend it if you liked Looper. It's basically a much lower-budget version dealing with time travel..
Austin Rodriguez5 said:It’s been ages since I watched this, so I went looking for the thread.
A total masterpiece. The concept is brilliant and executed with incredible precision. After the credits rolled, I spent hours reading up on it just to wrap my head around how the entire system works. It’s genius without feeling overblown or pretentious. 😁
My only gripe is that it can be a bit of a struggle to follow because of all the heavy technical jargon.
A little tipsy right now. But I recall you giving that movie a thumbs up over on Looper. Honestly, this movie is a total indie gem. I'd definitely recommend it to any sci-fi fans out there. By the way, just an idea. Imagine watching this movie while you're buzzed. It would be quite an experience. Might be worth a shot. Seems like it could be great.
Basically, it just proves what I was saying back during Prometheus. I'm honestly gravitating more and more toward movies where you have to fill in the blanks yourself. You brought this topic back from the dead, Austin Rodriguez5, so I went back and read my very first post. Everything else just feels monotonous and exhausting lately. I’d definitely recommend checking out the Triangle thread—there were some great discussions there—and Cronocrimenes, which I think I actually started myself. Maybe Exam, too. It's a shame these kinds of films aren't more mainstream. Basically, I'm about to go rewatch Triangl. I'm really in the mood right now. I'm pretty much a legend at this point. Cheers!
It feels a bit staged though. How did he know he’d be reading that letter? And if she opened it from a yellow envelope with a heart on it, how could she possibly know who sent it? Maybe it's just life experience talking. I actually had a stalker once for a while, so I just used to toss letters without opening them. That was back before email and Facebook. Hehe.
Patrick Martin said:Honestly, the mom is just there so we can get a better look at Caesar and his illness. She isn't the main focus. I think he basically wore her down with how he acted.
I think the director nailed the ending. It couldn't have been more impactful.
I don't know, it feels like I've seen this before. I can't quite place it, so maybe that's why the ending didn't hit home for me.
Patrick Martin said:I think he had "serious" intentions and "plans" from the get-go. When he opened up to his mom, he always mentioned how things were different with Clara. He was basically dating her; she just didn't realize it 😁. in the end, he used the chaos to throw the cat under the bus ( 🤦 )
yeah, those relationships are interesting
sure, everything worked out perfectly for him in the end. imagine if the fiancé/Marcos stayed alive and put the baby through a DNA test. that would have been quite a show.
what a twist with the mom? the old lady is exhausted. and it seems like the little boy is the main reason she ended up in bed.
that scene felt a bit pretentious, but it turned out cool since they caught him anyway.
true, that scene, the rooftop moment, and the final letter reading were top tier🙏
this movie has enough flaws. I don't feel the need to watch it again, at least not anytime soon...
I guess I'd be curious to see what happened with the mom. Is he somehow responsible for her condition? If he wants to hurt everyone, is it wrong to assume he did the same to his own mother?
That would have been a much more powerful ending than the whole baby thing.
Patrick Martin said:Not sure. Just remember it vaguely. It gets better with time. That part where he entangles the girl's fiancé felt a bit overambitious. The ending saved it though. Really saved it.
See, that's what I mean. Glad you watched it.
SPOILERS!
I feel the opposite. It’s like a sixth sense—everything builds toward that conclusion, but it still doesn't land for me. Why? It would be fine if he intended to manipulate her from the start. But it doesn't make sense because that wasn't his goal. He just drifted along. The pregnancy thing feels more like an accident. Like he says: "I can actually do this right." I liked his chemistry with the kid, the grandma, and even Mimi in that first half way more. Character dynamics were better. That scene at the end where he kills that poor woman? Heartbreaking. Truly great. But that ending let me down. He's free, she has his baby. I honestly expected her to toss the baby off a balcony; that would have made more sense. Even killing the fiancé wasn't really his plan. Everything important just happens by chance. Feels too forced.
And what about the mom?! It's cool that he tells her everything and she's suffering, but that's it. I was waiting for a twist involving her. Nothing happened.
Then there's all that pacing around the apartment. Honestly, before he spilled that liquid, I thought it would be funny if she just fell asleep and snored while waiting for him. Then he drinks half a liter of it and walks around the house in the middle of the night, and she just holds it to her nose and it's over. Same for the fiancé.
Though, that scene where he steps between them is hilarious!
END OF SPOILERS!
Doubt I'll give him another shot since the second part was such a letdown. Such a shame. A shame.
An interesting movie. Not sure if I'd recommend it or not.
The first half is pure Hitchcock. Great tension, slow build, getting inside the protagonist's head. Everything unfolds gradually. Very exciting and high quality. Some scenes are actually creepy. Huge potential.
But then the second half starts (there's no formal break, but you can feel the shift) and
SPOILERS!!!
It turns into American Psycho in Spain. It starts minimal and intriguing, but ends up unbelievable and senseless. Like the whole premise was just built around the final scene. That second half ruined it for me. Character behavior is unrealistic. Tension drops hard. Just stupid stuff that's hard to ignore. (And someone here recently started a thread about how "stupid" American movies are). In American Psycho, his constant stalling is part of the point. It makes sense. But the transition here is so forced. It's hard to believe they even filmed this. In the first part, you're guessing what happens next. After that, it becomes too predictable. Definitely annoying. Plus, leaving the ending open regarding his mother just feels like unnecessary clutter.
Such a shame. So much potential. That whole hiding under the bed bit was masterfully done.
END SPOILERS
I won't call it a fantastic movie. It has great elements, tension, and solid acting (Caesar and Mimi), but I can't believe someone could mess up a film this badly in 2011.
Why did I post this? Maybe someone who saw it wants to share their thoughts. Maybe I missed something. Would love to chat with anyone who watched it. Henac, let me know.
wiredraven82 said:Yeah, you read the question right. Are Americans just a clueless movie nation because they keep remaking great Asian and European horror hits—and even non-horrors?
I got this idea after leaving a comment on a thread about the Spanish horror flick REC, which I think is amazing. I'll just paste my original comment here so I don't have to type it all out again:
First off, the original Spanish REC is a top-tier horror movie. The American version is total shit. Same goes for the American version of The Ring, or the American version of the Thai film Shutter. All their other shit where they clearly HAVE to mess with incredible non-American horror movies...
Personally, it doesn't bother me since I just pretend their remakes don't exist. But it’s pathetic. Nothing original can come out of the US anymore, so they just have to remake everything and shit it up.
Sorry if some people take offense, but I really don't get this "nation" when it comes to moves like this. What's the issue with watching the original Spanish REC or the Japanese The Ring in American theaters? Are people too slow to read subtitles, or can they just not handle anything that doesn't have that specific American "vibe"?
I guess they have to inject a dose of American stupidity into these remakes just so the average citizen can understand them.
To go further, this isn't just limited to horror, though horror is what irritates me the most. Honestly, I could grab a can of gasoline, gather every American remake of an Eurasian horror film, set them all on fire, and watch them burn while having a cigarette.
For example, regarding American versions of non-horror films, I think of the Spanish film Open Your Eyes, which was released in the US as the American version: Vanilla Colored Sky. Interestingly, both feature Penélope Cruz.
So, I'll end by asking the same question again: What's the problem with watching the original Spanish REC or the Japanese The Ring in American theaters? Are people too slow to read subtitles, or can they just not handle anything that doesn't have that American "vibe"?
Best regards ☕
Two Word: Scorsese, Departed Nuf said.
Also: Let Me In, The Girl with... They are all good movies, sometimes even better than the originals.
Clearly, America is becoming a massive hit in Hollywood. The movie is a blast, great action, and seeing the Burj Khalifa in IMAX felt totally real (I’ve actually been there and climbed halfway up—they don't let you go all the way to the top). Basically, nothing too heavy to think about. Solid action sequences, good acting, funny, and they mention America. Highly recommended if you love action (personally, I'm not a huge fan of the series, but the fourth one is really good).
First mistake: watching this at home. No, a movie like this belongs in a theater. All three films follow this exact concept. Nothing much happens for a while, people relax, they start chatting with each other, and then: Bam! Pure screaming in the theater.
I'll be bold and say the third one is the best so far. The atmosphere is seriously tense enough to cut with a knife once it starts up. They clearly bumped up the amount of Paranormal Activity here—they didn't really need to, but hey, it works most of the time.
For me, the true horror is the atmosphere and the psychological impact. Plus, since kids are involved, the stakes feel way higher. There are some moments that genuinely make you freeze up. I've seen just about everything, but I was still jumping out of my seat.
And just like the second one, where I thought the marketing was off, it turns out almost nothing shown in the trailer actually appears in the movie. It’s basically a fake trailer, I assume, because they can't show even two or three actual scares without ruining the whole thing. If you see it in the trailer, it won't shock you when you watch the film.
I'm glad they're connecting the story. As things progress, it'll be interesting to see how they handle the filming aspect; they came up with a clever idea using VHS here.
Naturally, I'm curious about what's going on with that old woman and where Katie took the child in the second part.
Anyway, highly recommended. Even for those who have lost their patience lately—it's plenty "popcorn" enough that you won't die of boredom, and stuff starts happening after the first thirty minutes.
Some movies just require the right headspace. So far, I've skipped Babel, Mandalay, Antichrist, and Changeling... Just waiting until I'm in the right mood for stuff like that. I'll get around to them eventually.
Then there’s a totally different category of films I intentionally avoid and will never watch: Twilight, I Am Number Four, Green Lantern, and Captain America.
I actually started watching Iron Man 2 in the theater and walked out halfway through. First time I've ever done that in a cinema.
Sorry, folks, this movie is just bad. 👎 The best part was that photo at the end during the credits again. The first one was actually pretty good. Just to be clear, they didn't know whether to pee or poop in this one. I'm really wondering if they'll actually dare to make a third one using the same formula, because that would be a bit much.
Oh yeah, I was reading through the previous posts, and what bothered me most was Zach Galifianakis, which surprised me since I know he's a great comedian. See, in the first film he plays a fool, and his overacting is definitely excessive; I don't remember him being like that in the first one. Then in the second one, he becomes Superman—smart, knows everything, gets it... Just be a little consistent. Is his wedding coming up in the third one?
nimblemarlin6 said:Honestly, whenever a movie markets itself as 3D, it just loses all credibility. Take a flick like Monterey, for instance. It totally works in 3D because it's pure trash where sharks and boobs are constantly popping out at you. That's the whole point of 3D—it's just a cheap gimmick for kids and teens.
feralorca4 said:I heard Avatar had amazing 3D too, though I only saw it in 2D.
Honestly, I think people expect way too much from this tech. It isn't quite that advanced yet. 🙂 The depth effect works fine for me, and it's fun when something pops out at you occasionally. Seems like Hubble 3D is built that way, so I'm thinking about catching that.
Agreed. Technically speaking, Hubble is definitely top-tier. But honestly, the best part is those IMAX intro scenes—that countdown. It’s impressive. I bet 3D keeps moving in that direction until they start working on holographic projections.
bluebison8 said:I clearly remember a ton of people complaining that the 3D in Avatar wasn't all that great and that they expected more depth. The issue is that 3D should make characters feel like they're right in front of us, inside us, and beside us, but all they ever do is hide them behind stuff in the foreground.
That's interesting. I haven't heard anyone say that, even after talking to plenty of people.
bluebison8 said:I've been dodging 3D movies for a while now whenever possible. If I really want to see something, I'll just wait until it hits theaters in 2D instead of sitting through the gimmick. I think I've skipped about ten movies this way already. The only time I actually went for 3D was for Thor, mainly because I wanted to experience an IMAX theater.
In my opinion, only IMAX documentaries are worth the 3D price tag, plus maybe a few select films here and there (Avatar 3D was honestly just exhausting and annoying for me)
You're definitely in the minority there, especially regarding Avatar. Nothing else has quite hit that level of 3D tech yet. I caught Kung Fu Panda 2 yesterday. It isn't on the same level as Avatar 3D, but it's still worth paying the extra premium for.