I really wanted to like it - honest. It was supposedly a more gritty, grown up kind of superhero film with heroes that need painkillers and have scars. Instead it was deeply deeply mediocre.
Yes there were some amusing one-liners "I need a costume!", and plenty of rats (real and CGI) - but it just didn't quite work. The acting was ok - Michael Clarke Duncan worked as the Kingpin (ignoring dire dialogue) but whenever Jennifer Garner smiled I thought there was a risk the lens of the camera would break. Good old Colin Farrell had a real touch of the Oirish about him, and Ben Affleck was ok - but the whole "not looking at people when they're talking and you're blind" thing - I tried that at GD and didn't feel it worked - you still look towards the noise.
I suspect a lot of the "issues" came down to the restriction on the director to deliver a PG-13 in the US, which meant some of the darker elements were only part-explored. But I was genuinely fearful that one bit of "dark" in the film was going to resolve in a happy ending - which thankfully it didn't. Also CGI sfx-actors still look awful to me - worse than blue-screen.
Anyway - from the trailers it looks like a good year for action movies... X2 (looked ok), Matrix 2 and 3 (looked ok also) and Equilibrium (looked like a re-imagining of Farenheit 451 and might be worth a mindless couple of hours). Actually - while I say "Good year for action movies" it might be like "Good year to watch the same wire-fu over and over again".
Spent some time chewing the fat also with Guy - who has given up LRP again. Until the next time I suspect!
All that, and now almost time for 24...
Yes there were some amusing one-liners "I need a costume!", and plenty of rats (real and CGI) - but it just didn't quite work. The acting was ok - Michael Clarke Duncan worked as the Kingpin (ignoring dire dialogue) but whenever Jennifer Garner smiled I thought there was a risk the lens of the camera would break. Good old Colin Farrell had a real touch of the Oirish about him, and Ben Affleck was ok - but the whole "not looking at people when they're talking and you're blind" thing - I tried that at GD and didn't feel it worked - you still look towards the noise.
I suspect a lot of the "issues" came down to the restriction on the director to deliver a PG-13 in the US, which meant some of the darker elements were only part-explored. But I was genuinely fearful that one bit of "dark" in the film was going to resolve in a happy ending - which thankfully it didn't. Also CGI sfx-actors still look awful to me - worse than blue-screen.
Anyway - from the trailers it looks like a good year for action movies... X2 (looked ok), Matrix 2 and 3 (looked ok also) and Equilibrium (looked like a re-imagining of Farenheit 451 and might be worth a mindless couple of hours). Actually - while I say "Good year for action movies" it might be like "Good year to watch the same wire-fu over and over again".
Spent some time chewing the fat also with Guy - who has given up LRP again. Until the next time I suspect!
All that, and now almost time for 24...
no subject
Date: 2003-02-16 03:10 pm (UTC)hmmm not a relevant comment really - but sort of leads on from the original point that yes blind people do turn their head, usually
no subject
Date: 2003-02-16 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-02-16 05:30 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2003-02-16 11:39 pm (UTC)Hang on, why am I sitting here trying to have a vageuly sensible conversation about a superhero. Pah.
no subject
Date: 2003-02-17 07:05 am (UTC)Is it Man or CGI
Date: 2003-02-19 09:31 am (UTC)Anyway I guess this is just a taste for what is going to come as CGI seems to be making it big in films lately.