CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › Chaos Walking (2021)

Chaos Walking (2021)

Started by mistyotter35 · · 👁 4 views · 27 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants mistyotter35Amanda Kim2mellowskipperSusan Ramirez2Daniel Kelly57Jack Cook7neonfox65Nancy Howard4coastalsailor2Richard Wilson4Mark Gray3rustywalker1redotter5Mark White11steelmaker35Justin Rogers5Hannah Green2analogseal86
mistyotter35 mistyotter35 Active MemberOP
113 messages
joined Mar 2013
#1 ·
Chaos Walking (2021)

image

I suppose in some sort of near future, Todd Hewitt happens upon Viola Davis,
this mysterious girl who crashes onto his planet—a place where women have completely vanished and men are plagued by "The Noise," which I guess is this force that makes all their thoughts audible. In this rather dangerous landscape, Viola Davis's life is certainly at risk, and while Todd vows to protect her, he'll probably have to discover his own inner strength and uncover the dark secrets hidden within the planet itself.

Directed by: Doug Liman
Starring: Tom Holland, Daisy Ridley, Mads Mikkelsen...

IMDb

Trailer

The movie is out in theaters now, so...
Amanda Kim2 Amanda Kim2 Member
36 messages
joined Apr 2023
#2 ·
Original story, pretty solid movie
mellowskipper mellowskipper Regular
704 messages
joined Jan 2023
#3 ·
I caught it yesterday. For a "pandemic movie," it was actually pretty decent—nothing earth-shattering, I suppose, but I’d still recommend it.

Sent from my PRA-LX1 via Tapatalk
mistyotter35 mistyotter35 Active MemberOP
113 messages
joined Mar 2013
#4 ·
It’s decent enough, I suppose, though it somehow maintains this low-budget aesthetic despite having a $125 million price tag, and it isn't exactly breaking any records at the box office, barely scraping together about $20 million.
Susan Ramirez2 Susan Ramirez2 Newcomer
9 messages
joined Jun 2020
#5 ·
Can someone please explain how this is considered a good movie? Given the premise, I don't get how none of the younger generation knows the truth about it. Seriously, how? 😵
mistyotter35 mistyotter35 Active MemberOP
113 messages
joined Mar 2013
#6 ·
🙂 I suppose the older generation probably learned how to suppress their memories and thoughts regarding this whole "problem."
That is why I would say it is merely decent, rather than actually good. 6/10.
Daniel Kelly57 Daniel Kelly57 Active Member
228 messages
joined Sep 2016
#7 ·
That’s pretty much how I’d describe it too. A solid attempt, but nothing more than that. Interesting story though. 🍿
mellowskipper mellowskipper Regular
704 messages
joined Jan 2023
#8 ·
Well, isn't it obvious? It’s basically like the mayor has this sort of mental grip over them—though I suppose it’s a bit harder to pull that off with the locals who were actually born there. And honestly, maybe that's why he was so desperate to get rid of her; she was just too much for him to handle or control.
Jack Cook7 Jack Cook7 Regular
376 messages
joined Aug 2017
#9 ·
$125 million just for props, CGI, and pure woke propaganda?
If you haven't caught on yet, this whole movie is ultra-woke. Basically, the guys couldn't handle female supremacy, so they gave in to their primal impulses and literally wiped out all the women—as dumb as that sounds. But hey, woke ideology rules supreme, right?

They didn't drop five million on the cast and sets. Just imagine where the other 120 million went.
mellowskipper mellowskipper Regular
704 messages
joined Jan 2023
#10 ·
Jack Cook7 said:$125 million just for props, CGI, and woke propaganda?

If you haven't caught on yet—and apparently some people haven't—the whole movie is ultra woke. It’s basically a story where men, unable to handle female supremacy, just gave in to their primal impulses and literally wiped out women... as nonsensical as that sounds. But hey, I guess woke ideology reigns supreme now.

The production didn't spend five million on the cast and sets. Just imagine where the other 120 million actually went.

It's like it was filmed by amateurs.
neonfox65 neonfox65 Regular
534 messages
joined Jun 2021
#11 ·
This movie just wasn't my thing. The lead actor spends half the time lost in thought and the other half muttering to himself—plus, there's this constant CGI wave effect swirling around his head... distracting as hell. I couldn't get into it and ended up turning it off after lunch. I actually wanted to bail after the first 15 minutes, but that cute blonde actress kept me watching for about 40...
Nancy Howard4 Nancy Howard4 Active Member
75 messages
joined Sep 2022
#12 ·
Honestly, it’s a pretty decent flick
The plot kind of leaves you to figure out who’s doing what and why on your own, which is fine I guess, but man, was it worth killing a few hours of my life just to piece it all together?
The CGI is actually top-tier though
coastalsailor2 coastalsailor2 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Jun 2020
#13 ·
I found it fairly decent... It doesn't strike me as some sort of woke propaganda; rather, it’s more about how much control someone can exert over you just by understanding the mechanics of your own thoughts. And honestly, Viola Davis knows Todd for all of five minutes and she's already got him wrapped around her little finger. Good grief, if he doesn't step up, the whole ship is going to drift aimlessly. Then there's the 64-year-old who basically shows up just to turn around and head home—he's driving that kid around like a wild teenager. The guy spends half the movie obsessing over a simple kiss, only to end up without one at all. I completely see why they decided to settle things with them twenty years ago. 😛
neonfox65 neonfox65 Regular
534 messages
joined Jun 2021
#14 ·
coastalsailor2 said:I thought it was alright... doesn't really feel like woke propaganda to me—more about how much control someone has over you when they can actually read your mind... plus, Viola Davis knows Todd for maybe two hours and she's already got him wrapped around her finger... man, if he doesn't help her, the ship is just gonna drift away... yeah, being 64 years old and moving here just to turn around and head home... he's driving him around like a little kid... the guy spends half the movie dreaming about a simple kiss and then ends up without one too... I totally get why they took care of them all 20 years ago 😛

So there's no slaughter in the movie? Man, what a waste of a film...
Richard Wilson4 Richard Wilson4 Veteran
2K messages
joined Sep 2009
#15 ·
mistyotter35 said:Not bad, though it feels pretty cheap considering they dropped $125 million on it. Plus, it’s totally flopping at the box office—only pulling in about $20 million so far.

Seriously, who blew that much cash?! 🤦
Mark Gray3 Mark Gray3 Newcomer
8 messages
joined Aug 2014
#16 ·
Let’s be real: movie budgets are mostly just smoke and mirrors. Sometimes they're intentionally inflated—streamers pull that stunt all the time enough to make you dizzy.
And even when they aren't fake, looking at one single budget number tells you absolutely nothing about where the money actually went.
But look, we can use The Village as a case study. It’s an older flick from over 16 years ago, and back then, a detailed breakdown actually leaked out.
So, we’re talking a $71 million budget. For 2004, that was some serious cash—a solid mid-budget production.
$7 million went straight to the story rights.
$400k for the script.
$6.5 million for the producer.
Half a mil for the director.
$14 million for the cast.
$4.5 million for stunts, locations, and keeping the big shots fed.

$29 million just for the actual shoot (sets, transport, locations, gear rental, lodging, catering for the crew, etc.).
$8 million for post-production (editing, VFX, sound, subtitles, final print, etc.).

Plus another little bit under a million for insurance, promo stuff, and miscellaneous junk.

Since then, costs have gone totally nuclear. Nowadays, Hollywood considers a $100 million movie to be "mid-budget."
But here’s the kicker: those technical costs handled by the crews? They haven't spiked nearly as much. Maybe just adjusted for inflation. But the cost of rights and the massive paychecks for the A-listers? That has skyrocketed.
So, just because a movie hits the $100 million mark today doesn't mean you're actually going to see anything special on screen.
Take Netflix movies, for example. They love to brag about having $100 million-plus productions. Then you watch something like Bright or 5 Underground and realize probably half that money vanished into the pockets of big names. You look at the actual movie and can't even tell where all that cash went.
neonfox65 neonfox65 Regular
534 messages
joined Jun 2021
#17 ·
Mark Gray3 said:They dropped 7 million just on the story rights.

I’ve actually got some pretty interesting ideas myself... how do I go about getting hired over there?
rustywalker1 rustywalker1 Active Member
89 messages
joined Jun 2011
#18 ·
Mark Gray3 said:Costs have absolutely skyrocketed since then. Nowadays, a $100 million production is considered mid-range by Hollywood standards.
But all those technical elements handled by the crew—those haven't actually increased that much. Maybe just adjusted for inflation. It's the licensing rights and the massive salaries for the big names that have truly exploded.

When you factor in inflation, $100 million today is basically the same as $70 million back in 2004.
So, if they were making The Village today, it would probably sit right around that $100 million mark.
redotter5 redotter5 Member
17 messages
joined Mar 2016
#19 ·
To be honest, I only sat through this because of Mads, but the movie was a total dud. Those little thought bubbles floating around their heads? Just silly, and they get old incredibly fast. And the kid? Besides being stuck with his father's legacy, he can't even read or write...
Mark White11 Mark White11 Active Member
92 messages
joined Jan 2018
#20 ·
What an absolute train wreck of a movie—honestly, just straight up garbage.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads