I don't think I've seen them anywhere but the corner before. Maybe in some other film formats they put them elsewhere, but in our prints they have them in the corner because that's where we're looking for them at.
I haven't seen a 3D movie since Spy Kids 3D, and that was years ago, before any of this RealD polarized glasses stuff went popular. Just the red/blue glasses. And I watched it without 'em out of protest.
Thinking of seeing How to Train Your Dragon in 3D, but haven't gotten around to it yet; been working or busy every day since it's been out.
Ok, finally starting this movie. There's a trailer for The Expendables on it, which is the first I've heard of it. There's a movie that has Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Jason Statham, Mickey Rourke, and Steve Austin?
SabreMau on
0
Options
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
It's 20 minutes into the movie when Hades says "Release the Kraken", but it takes an hour after that until Zeus yells it. The Kraken itself is big and all, but most of that sequence is taken up flying a Pegasus around. Killing it didn't take very much time at all.
Credits are rolling now, and music's by Ramin Djawadi, same guy who did Iron Man's music. And Alexander Siddig (Dr. Bashir) was Hermes. Didn't recognize him in the few seconds he was on screen.
I never saw the original movie, but this wasn't too bad. Better than the 39% rating RT gave it. Then again, I had to watch Why Did I Get Married Too twice in a row right beforehand, so that may be skewing things. At least Clash was actioney and entertaining, instead of being drama and depressing, so this morning, I approve of it.
I'm hoping they are filthy lying geese though, because this movie has a KRAKEN in it and it gets RELEASED.
if you could release a Kraken no one would fuck with you, not the post office, nobody. You're giving me a parking ticket? Ok but...I'll RELEASE THE KRAKEN. Well, as long as they live near or in the water or fly over the water at any point you could threaten them with that thing.
Or I dunno use the thread title as various sexual innuendos
"I released the Kraken on your mom last night."
How did anything other than Liam Neeson and maybe the Kraken look even remotely appealing about this film in the first place?
I mean, Avatar was filmed with 3D in mind, but would it have been even worse if I had seen it in 2D? No.
Conclusion: it adds nothing but it costs more.
Actually, the 3D in Avatar made the whole thing much more visually appealing than simple 2D. 3D can certainly add something to a film. Don't talk about things you don't know anything about.
I mean, Avatar was filmed with 3D in mind, but would it have been even worse if I had seen it in 2D? No.
Conclusion: it adds nothing but it costs more.
Actually, the 3D in Avatar made the whole thing much more visually appealing than simple 2D. 3D can certainly add something to a film. Don't talk about things you don't know anything about.
Huh? I saw the film, so I know exactly what I'm talking about. I saw it in 2D, it was horrible. Then I saw it in 3D and it was still horrible.
3D doesn't make anything 'visually more appealing'. It makes it 'visually more gimmicky'.
edit: also please tell my why you are allowed to talk about 3D and I am not.
I mean, Avatar was filmed with 3D in mind, but would it have been even worse if I had seen it in 2D? No.
Conclusion: it adds nothing but it costs more.
Actually, the 3D in Avatar made the whole thing much more visually appealing than simple 2D. 3D can certainly add something to a film. Don't talk about things you don't know anything about.
Huh? I saw the film, so I know exactly what I'm talking about. I saw it in 2D, it was horrible. Then I saw it in 3D and it was still horrible.
3D doesn't make anything 'visually more appealing'. It makes it 'visually more gimmicky'.
How visually appealing a movie is is entirely a matter of viwer's opinion and not something you can declare like holy writ
I think a lot of people would disagree with your assertion that 3D adds nothing to a film's visuals
I mean, Avatar was filmed with 3D in mind, but would it have been even worse if I had seen it in 2D? No.
Conclusion: it adds nothing but it costs more.
Actually, the 3D in Avatar made the whole thing much more visually appealing than simple 2D. 3D can certainly add something to a film. Don't talk about things you don't know anything about.
Huh? I saw the film, so I know exactly what I'm talking about. I saw it in 2D, it was horrible. Then I saw it in 3D and it was still horrible.
3D doesn't make anything 'visually more appealing'. It makes it 'visually more gimmicky'.
How visually appealing a movie is is entirely a matter of viwer's opinion and not something you can declare like holy writ
I think a lot of people would disagree with your assertion that 3D adds nothing to a film's visuals
Also you're being rather abrasive about this
Actually, this review sums it up best:
“Avatar tells the story of Dances with Wolves in space, in order to advance a director’s already-vast ego, and to advance movie technology further in the wrong direction.”
“Avatar tells the story of Dances with Wolves in space, in order to advance a director’s already-vast ego, and to advance movie technology further in the wrong direction.”
If I had to sum up Clash of the Titans in one word, that word would simply be “wow.” Because while it may not be the perfect movie, its the perfect blend of action, adventure and yes, even romance. It’s destined to be a mega-blockbuster, and it deserves every dollar it earns. Warner Brothers has done exactly what should be done with a reimagining — take everything that was good about the so-so original, and make it bigger and better.
The movie shoots along at a quick pace, but it’s still manages to be smart enough to make you think about it. Its PG-13 rating is just about right — it’s a little too intense for the kiddies, but parents will love it, and the older teen crowds will be clapping their hands with delight (I was tempted to do so myself). The short version, for those who haven’t figured out the plot, is that there’s conflict between the ancient Greeks and the petty Gods that they worship. The people are mad because the Gods take and take and give nothing back, and the Gods are mad at their upstart ways. One man, Perseus (Sam Worthington), stands against them, and teams up with a team of renegades to fight back, as well as save the life of his beloved Andromeda (Alexa Davalos).
It’s rollicking good fun. Worthington continues his trend of being an A+ action star — building on his deep, impressive performance in Avatar, he’s everything a hero should be — noble, tough, and handsome as all get-out. Similarly, Davalos is beautiful and suitably sexy as Andromeda, and provides some extra eye candy to accompany all the action. Of course, the action is, unsurprisingly, the best part. Full of eye-popping special effects, Clash of the Titans makes for a far more enjoyable viewing experience than the 1981 original. Sure, it was fun Saturday viewing when we were kids, but the original has aged pretty terribly, and the claymation effects are sort of silly when you look back at it — not believable at all. Plus, great as Lawrence Olivier was way back when, Liam Neeson, looking resplendant and appropriately god-like, really blows him away.
The special effects, mixed with hard-hitting action, make for an enjoyable spectacle. The gods, also featuring Ralph Fiennes, are amazingly portrayed, and Perseus and his gritty band of comrades are excellent. Like I said, it just took everything from the original and made it better — including the very-smart decision to omit the silly mechanical bird from the 1981 version, a dorky addition that would have been even more out of place here. Clash of the Titans is smarter than that — it’s a thinking man’s action movie, with little room for silliness. But its also just plain fun — from beginning to end. And the end! By now, you’ve seen the trailers, so you know about the new, redesigned Kraken monster. This one is no clunky, rubbery-looking Godzilla wannabe, like the original one. It’s a great big scary force of nature, and that final battle is breathtaking!
It’s surprising that Warner Brothers didn’t use it as a summer tentpole flick, but if anything else, that makes us wonder what other greats they have in the hopper to amaze us with this year. While not a perfect flick, this one is still good enough for four out of five !’s.
Trust me!
Aretè on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
edited April 2010
Olympus and the Gods looked like they were in an 80's rock video.
If I had to sum up Clash of the Titans in one word, that word would simply be “wow.” Because while it may not be the perfect movie, its the perfect blend of action, adventure and yes, even romance. It’s destined to be a mega-blockbuster, and it deserves every dollar it earns. Warner Brothers has done exactly what should be done with a reimagining — take everything that was good about the so-so original, and make it bigger and better.
The movie shoots along at a quick pace, but it’s still manages to be smart enough to make you think about it. Its PG-13 rating is just about right — it’s a little too intense for the kiddies, but parents will love it, and the older teen crowds will be clapping their hands with delight (I was tempted to do so myself). The short version, for those who haven’t figured out the plot, is that there’s conflict between the ancient Greeks and the petty Gods that they worship. The people are mad because the Gods take and take and give nothing back, and the Gods are mad at their upstart ways. One man, Perseus (Sam Worthington), stands against them, and teams up with a team of renegades to fight back, as well as save the life of his beloved Andromeda (Alexa Davalos).
It’s rollicking good fun. Worthington continues his trend of being an A+ action star — building on his deep, impressive performance in Avatar, he’s everything a hero should be — noble, tough, and handsome as all get-out. Similarly, Davalos is beautiful and suitably sexy as Andromeda, and provides some extra eye candy to accompany all the action. Of course, the action is, unsurprisingly, the best part. Full of eye-popping special effects, Clash of the Titans makes for a far more enjoyable viewing experience than the 1981 original. Sure, it was fun Saturday viewing when we were kids, but the original has aged pretty terribly, and the claymation effects are sort of silly when you look back at it — not believable at all. Plus, great as Lawrence Olivier was way back when, Liam Neeson, looking resplendant and appropriately god-like, really blows him away.
The special effects, mixed with hard-hitting action, make for an enjoyable spectacle. The gods, also featuring Ralph Fiennes, are amazingly portrayed, and Perseus and his gritty band of comrades are excellent. Like I said, it just took everything from the original and made it better — including the very-smart decision to omit the silly mechanical bird from the 1981 version, a dorky addition that would have been even more out of place here. Clash of the Titans is smarter than that — it’s a thinking man’s action movie, with little room for silliness. But its also just plain fun — from beginning to end. And the end! By now, you’ve seen the trailers, so you know about the new, redesigned Kraken monster. This one is no clunky, rubbery-looking Godzilla wannabe, like the original one. It’s a great big scary force of nature, and that final battle is breathtaking!
It’s surprising that Warner Brothers didn’t use it as a summer tentpole flick, but if anything else, that makes us wonder what other greats they have in the hopper to amaze us with this year. While not a perfect flick, this one is still good enough for four out of five !’s.
mostly I enjoyed how it adapted Perseus' myth into a movie
but yeah the movie was pretty bad in the first half hour when you were being RUSHED through the premise
once the action scenes started it was a pretty cool ride
how they slay the big baddie Hades in the end was one hell of a letdown, though
Indeed.
It's the Kraken!
Oh noes, Perseus dropped Medusa's head! Fly around for five minutes chasing it!
Ok, got it back. Kraken zap! Kraken krumbles. But here comes Hades!
"You cannot kill me!"
*fling*
"Oh. Ok, bye then."
Yeah, that fight could have been fleshed out a bit more. And throughout the entire thing I kept getting reminded of Percy Jackson instead. Which is odd, because Percy in that movie is Poseidon's son, while this Perseus (and the mythological version) is Zeus's.
SabreMau on
0
Options
GreasyKidsStuffMOMMM!ROAST BEEF WANTS TO KISS GIRLS ON THE TITTIES!Registered Userregular
edited April 2010
I'll see this in 2D I think. Really it's Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes that are making me want to see it.
GreasyKidsStuff on
0
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
edited April 2010
I kept wondering what would happen if Perseus reached into that bag and yanked the head out facing the wrong way
Posts
I made a TD for iphone and windows phone!
I made a TD for iphone and windows phone!
Not in 3D though
I made a TD for iphone and windows phone!
Thinking of seeing How to Train Your Dragon in 3D, but haven't gotten around to it yet; been working or busy every day since it's been out.
Is he really in there???
TLB's thread should give you all necessary info.
*fart*
I switched theaters I see movies at. The last place, a 3d movie was 15.50. Which is just fucking stupid.
The new place I go to is an awesome renovated vintage thinger. 3d movies are 8 bucks for a matinee.
Especially when it is added in post-production.
I mean, Avatar was filmed with 3D in mind, but would it have been even worse if I had seen it in 2D? No.
Conclusion: it adds nothing but it costs more.
Anyway, almost through watching it now, in 2D.
Credits are rolling now, and music's by Ramin Djawadi, same guy who did Iron Man's music. And Alexander Siddig (Dr. Bashir) was Hermes. Didn't recognize him in the few seconds he was on screen.
I never saw the original movie, but this wasn't too bad. Better than the 39% rating RT gave it. Then again, I had to watch Why Did I Get Married Too twice in a row right beforehand, so that may be skewing things. At least Clash was actioney and entertaining, instead of being drama and depressing, so this morning, I approve of it.
How did anything other than Liam Neeson and maybe the Kraken look even remotely appealing about this film in the first place?
Actually, the 3D in Avatar made the whole thing much more visually appealing than simple 2D. 3D can certainly add something to a film. Don't talk about things you don't know anything about.
Huh? I saw the film, so I know exactly what I'm talking about. I saw it in 2D, it was horrible. Then I saw it in 3D and it was still horrible.
3D doesn't make anything 'visually more appealing'. It makes it 'visually more gimmicky'.
edit: also please tell my why you are allowed to talk about 3D and I am not.
I think a lot of people would disagree with your assertion that 3D adds nothing to a film's visuals
Also you're being rather abrasive about this
And I don't feel completely ripped off.
Satans..... hints.....
All the endorsement I need
I will see this sometime
PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
Actually, this review sums it up best:
“Avatar tells the story of Dances with Wolves in space, in order to advance a director’s already-vast ego, and to advance movie technology further in the wrong direction.”
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJarz7BYnHA&feature=player_embedded)
3d doesn't make me want to see a movie any more.
By the end of Avatar my eyes started to hurt.
3d didn't lend anything to Alice in Wonderland. I liked it, but wish I hadn't seen it in an iMax.
How to Train Your Dragon was fucking great, but I think it would have been just as great in 2d.
This is a totally fresh opinion
Satans..... hints.....
It really wasn't that good.
Satans..... hints.....
Yes this.
I figured this is par for all white gods
it was not terrible
mostly I enjoyed how it adapted Perseus' myth into a movie
but yeah the movie was pretty bad in the first half hour when you were being RUSHED through the premise
once the action scenes started it was a pretty cool ride
Indeed.
Oh noes, Perseus dropped Medusa's head! Fly around for five minutes chasing it!
Ok, got it back. Kraken zap! Kraken krumbles. But here comes Hades!
"You cannot kill me!"
*fling*
"Oh. Ok, bye then."
Yeah, that fight could have been fleshed out a bit more. And throughout the entire thing I kept getting reminded of Percy Jackson instead. Which is odd, because Percy in that movie is Poseidon's son, while this Perseus (and the mythological version) is Zeus's.