What could be more awesome than a Shakespearean romeo and juliet re-enactment with werewolves and vampires?
Depends on the script, acting, cgi, well basically everything.
What could be more awesome than a Shakespearean romeo and juliet re-enactment with werewolves and vampires?
Depends on the script, acting, cgi, well basically everything.
You people have no idea of what makes a truly great movie.
The director's use of visuals ,recurring themes and symbolism united to make a film that both a brilliant take on modern consumerism and a panegyric to past vampire flicks.
If you are in the least bit interested in better understanding what is going on I suggest you check out Chad Silverman's brilliant review here.
http://www.chss.montclair.edu/~pererat/9970.jpg
i really like the costumes and the horse scene when she's trying to get back to the castle. it was nothing special, but the way it was shot i liked it.
i'm thinking the other 2 ppl that vote this was a shit movie only like the underdog films that get zero to little publicity with catchy 1 liners. sure, i like those too, but i also dug this film as well. it's a shame.
Just seen it...it's a good movie...could have been better thou....worth watching if you've got nothing better to do
Being one of the ppl that thought Underworld was shit, I thought I'd respond to the charge of elitism.
Disliking this film had nothing to do with douchebag snobbery and everything to do the magic that can inhabit a movie.
I loved both The Dark Knight and Iron Man- neither of which were underpublicised or particularly full of catchy quotes- but both brimmed with the excitement and wonder of realizing a story that could only be brought to life on the screen.
Rise of the Lycans was not only a technically inferior product but at no time did I wish I was there, living in that fantasy.
Furthermore, there is little to no character development- we're told at the beginning who the main actors are but never learn why they act as they do.
This is particularly galling in light of the fact that both Michael Sheen and Bill Nighy are very capable actors and could have brought nuance and depth to characters that in the end are just cardboard cutouts.
For example, why is Viktor such an intransigent asshole and how did he manage to remain in power given his demonstrated lack of ability?
Anyway, I did enjoy the first of the series but, much like the Matrix trilogy, think that the original vision was only watered down and ultimately parodied by the final installments.
And none of this has anything to do with the fact that I liked Juno.
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
i concur with sum of the things u've said in ur past 2 posts, but just becuz it's a prequel doesn't mean u shouldn't already know the characters and where they stand from teh previous two. the story filled in a "little" bit of the story line, but imo it was enough for u to understand where it was going. not coming from mind u, but going.
what i got from the film is that the vampires are in hiding and for sum reason not told it seemed as if they were kinda starting over and now with the lycans as their guardians and to use them to possibly start an army. these vampires aren't going out and terrorizing shit simply becuz they have their own problems atm.
truth be told it was missing sum story, entertainment and/or excitement, but i stand by what i've said in my previous post and i like the film.
I can't get over the feeling that I'm somehow on ignore.
Bookmarks