|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 23, 2003 19:45:11 GMT -5
(Moved thread - Feb. 11)
I was just reading some of the new viewer reviews of EQ from Moviefone and am again baffled by the polarity of the critics vir the public. In almost every viewer ratings forum (Amazon, IMDb...) the results are opposite of the critics. So why did we see something different in EQ then most of them? What grasped our hearts and imagination and how did they miss it? What do you think? |
|
zazu
Sense Offender
Sense Offender
Posts: 7
|
Post by zazu on Mar 23, 2003 19:46:01 GMT -5
I think we actually paid attention to what was on the screen.
I could tell that many of the critics didn't watch too closely. I remember reading somewhere that it was jazz music Preston was listening to when he first heard music. How can you possibly mistake Beethoven for jazz, if you're paying attention. And there were several critics that complained that Brandt and Dupont were inconsistent and showed too much emotion. I won't spoil things here, but for those of you who have seen it, you know very well that that is all clearly explained. Did those critics even stay for the whole movie? or complaining about the lack of high budget effects, well, duh! It is known that EQ is a low budget movie and should be appreciated for how much was so effectively done with such a small budget. It was worthy of praise for that, not dissing. I could go on and on, but I better quit. I'm getting riled up.
Also, since the studio was clearly dumping it, I bet most critics assumed the worst and put minimal effort into it. At least there were a couple that paid attention, so there can be a few quotes on the DVD cover.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 23, 2003 19:46:46 GMT -5
Sometimes I wonder how many critics review films they don't even see and base their comments on either trailers or clips?
|
|
|
|
Post by Outpost on Mar 23, 2003 19:47:39 GMT -5
There are many possibilites for the "polarity".
1. Perhaps film critics out there hate the acting job of Taye Diggs more than some of us do. (I for one thought it wasn't very good. An opportunity for a great sub-villain wasted.)
2. Some critics like to cross-compare films to topic related books. In this case: "1984", "Brave New World", etc. They MIGHT have thought the film tried to bring to life the emotional themes of these novels, but didn't capture the inevitable truths about humanity, or some crap like that.
3. I've heard some critics are disappointed with the beautiful creation that is Gun Kata. I don't remember who it was, but somebody made the argument that a group of trained men surrounding John Preston (all within arms' reach of him) all stood there like bowling pins while he blasted them away inside of a few seconds, rather than neutralize him with a quick but effective pig pile.
Of course, what this viewer failed to recognize was the lack of REAL combat experience the movie's henchmen had, as well as the speed and skill that put John at the head of his class. I mean, he is THEIR BEST for a reason.
4) Critics are just dumb sometimes. Plain and simple. They were probably thinking the filmmakers wanted to emulate a Matrix style Sci-Fi or something.
Lastly I just wanna say that I love EQUILIBRIUM and I can't wait 'til May when I could gleefully add it to my DVD collection.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 23, 2003 19:49:02 GMT -5
True, I guess there really are endless possibilities. Its just so surprising to me to see such opposing responses to the exact same film. Its quite puzzling??  Here are some of my thoughts... - Lack of understanding of symbolism, allegory, fables or maybe even a dislike for this type of storytelling. Many Sci/fi's have used this form. I remember as a child listening to X-1 (old time radio) or watching Twilight Zone and realizing that most of them were parables. - Nitpicky - I can pick any film to pieces. In fact, I'm sure most of us could. - I used the following quote from Wimmer on my site, "I'm in love with the heroic ideal which is probably kind of corny in an age of advancing cynicism..." I think many of us moviegoers are still attracted to that old fashioned notion of the "heroic ideal" but it seems that it just came off as "corny" to most of the critics. - Action flicks are rarely given consideration by critics as serious films. I'm sure I have some more stuff rolling around in my head but I just can't seem to access it... |
|
Feline
Resistance Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by Feline on Mar 25, 2003 4:34:19 GMT -5
Anyone here read "The Giver" by Lois Lowry? She depicts a world not far from what we see in Equilibrium, though without the police state thing.
No emotions, everybody's calm and cool, no colors, no art and so on. One person gets to know it all and take responsibility for it.
Very interesting teen-novel. I read it many years back and Eq triggered it in my memory.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 25, 2003 8:58:00 GMT -5
Here is a major one the critics missed.
After seeing A Clockwork Orange last night for the first time (caught it by pure chance on IFC) EQ has some definite tie-ins to it. In fact they are much stronger then many of the ones used by them to condemn the film. The most obvious of which is the use of Beethoven's Ninth as well as the exploration of emotional suppression.
|
|
Feline
Resistance Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by Feline on Mar 25, 2003 12:03:55 GMT -5
I don't think using Bethoven is enough to justify tie-ins.
Bethoven is a "trigger" in both movies, true enough. But in C.O. the trigger works to invoke a conditioned respons. In Eq it works to fasilitate an unlearnt response to novel stimuli.
C.O. is a movie about behaviorism and operant conditioning of emotions in humans. How to program a human into a "click - whirr" robot that responds to a particular stimulus (in this case violence) with a desired behavior (in this case nausea).
Taking away emotions doesn't program a human.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 25, 2003 13:32:38 GMT -5
Since I read somewhere that Wimmer's favorite film is Clockwork, I'm 100% certain of the tie ins. Most may be abstract and not literal but they are there. I'm sure there are a few literal ones as well though such as the use of Beethoven's 9th.
In fact one of the speeches from Clockwork about emotions reminded me of the speech that Father gives in EQ.
|
|
|
|
Post by BMaloney on Mar 25, 2003 16:53:05 GMT -5
I've read the Giver.. My insightful friend compared EQ to the Giver by calling EQ the "Giver on testosterone". A rather vivid description.. There are very large similarities.. On another note, I just bought 1984 and Brave New World so I'll get back to you when I'm finished reading them.
|
|
Feline
Resistance Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by Feline on Mar 26, 2003 1:55:05 GMT -5
About tie-ins: Well. If they are there, they're really subtle. Like in the speeches. The concepts of the two movies differ too much. And about the Giver: Haha. On testosterone. Good one! But I know what you mean.  |
|
|
|
Post by Waylander on Jul 8, 2003 3:44:05 GMT -5
somebody made the argument that a group of trained men surrounding John Preston (all within arms' reach of him) all stood there like bowling pins while he blasted them away inside of a few seconds, rather than neutralize him with a quick but effective pig pile.
Critics are to stupid or to dense to realize that when someone shoots you, you dont think about falling on them, you think "Oh F@#*!!!!! Ive just been SHOT!" As for them not reacting in timeto him, he is and always will be the ultimate badass.
|
|
|
|
Post by Waylander on Jul 8, 2003 3:45:43 GMT -5
that first part was from outpost. Dont know how to get it in that boxy thing. My bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by StarDancer on Jul 8, 2003 4:59:16 GMT -5
that first part was from outpost. Dont know how to get it in that boxy thing. My bad. Hi, Waylander. Just click on 'quote' when you want to quote someone's post. Then it goes into the box. It's obvious some of the critics didn't watch the film and get it. I also think personal preferences play a part. As for A Clockwork Orange, that's Wimmer's favorite? It's a great movie. The only part in Equilibrium I felt was really like ACO, was at the very end when everyone went on a killing spree. It reminded me of Alex getting his violence mojo back. |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 8, 2003 9:45:45 GMT -5
It's obvious some of the critics didn't watch the film ... Oh, lets not even get me started on that one!!!...  |
|
|
|
Post by Waylander on Jul 8, 2003 12:59:39 GMT -5
Ok. Thanks StarDancer.
|
|
|
|
Post by DDRcleric on Jul 24, 2003 23:41:13 GMT -5
They were probably too busy trying to look for mistakes and comparing to other films/books and didnt pay attention to the movie
|
|
|
|
Post by Cruis.In on Jul 25, 2003 7:37:30 GMT -5
what do you mean dont get you started Jen?
I have never seen Clockwork Orange do you recommend it? is it as good or near as good as EQ? I think i gotta watch Gattica too...or whatever you call it.
anyway, reviewers...how can they enjoy films when they go to work and not to enjoy....they are just plain terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 25, 2003 9:20:52 GMT -5
what do you mean dont get you started Jen? I have never seen Clockwork Orange do you recommend it? is it as good or near as good as EQ? I think i gotta watch Gattica too...or whatever you call it. anyway, reviewers...how can they enjoy films when they go to work and not to enjoy....they are just plain terrible. I could rant for hours about the critics but I won't. I use to review films myself for a website and I found that it drained my love of films all together. I had to see flicks that I normally wouldn't choose to see. How can a person really be objective under those conditions?? Now that I only see what I want the passion has returned. About Clockwork...its a difficult one to recommend. I really think that a person needs to be ready and in the right frame of mind to see it but I'm not sure what that standard would be. If I had seen it in my younger years I'm sure I would not have gotten as much out of it as now. In fact, I would have been quite repulsed...come to think of it I was even now but I was willing to allow myself to be. There was much that I could identify with on a variety of levels. Interestingly, Clockwork help me to understand my long time frustrating relationship that I have with my two sisters and have been struggling to fix. It is an extremely violent film (sexually and other). Not an easy one to watch by any means but it does emotionally grab you and throw you about quite a bit. Don't go into it thinking you'll be watching a "happy Hollywood" film. Its anything but that yet it will leave you thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by Imylover on Jul 25, 2003 10:24:48 GMT -5
Sometimes I wonder how many critics review films they don't even see and base their comments on either trailers or clips? I agree! I have another example from no other but the first Terminator film! I was watching a documentary about Arnold Schwarzenegger & his career up until 1990 (which was when this thing was sent). They talked to some critics & one of them, who hated Schwarzenegger to the worst degree had this to say about The Terminator: Arnold is a robot from outer space who has come to kill Sarah Connor." Hello? Pay attention! There is no other space in the Terminator films! They never even mention the words! I think he never even saw the film at all. You can't miss all the talk about the future, unless you slept through the film. When I read the reviews of EQ I was reminded of this. And The Terminator, even if it was a lot more sucessful than what EQ ever will be, it is now also a cult classic, something I believe that EQ can be some day too, at least in some circles. Critcs, what the hell do they know!? Some can't even do their job right. |
|
|
|
Post by ClericRyan on Jul 25, 2003 10:35:52 GMT -5
I was talking to some friends about the movie, and just about every person I have recommended see the film has really enjoyed it. In fact most of my male friends are starting to consider it one of the best action films ever made.
So in discussing the movie we came to the fact that it was not really even in the box office for very long and of course, that crtics hated it. First of all, I dont remember any marketing. In fact the first thing I had ever heard about the movie was that it was banned in the U.S. for the portrayal of destruction of the famous artwork, and the controversial idea that emotion is the source of our inhumanity. Of course the movie was not banned as far as I can tell, and i was unable to actully find any info on that.
A couple other things came to mind when trying to determine the lack of popularity. The scene is which you hear dogs being shot, must be really hard for anyone who owns a dog or any animal lovers in general. It was hard for me to watch, but it served a very important purpose and was symbolic of what the movie was all about. When Brandt fights Preston at the end and his face is cut off after a quick sword fight. I am sure many people felt a bit squeamish watching that, but that sort of violence is to be expected in a good action film.
Or is it just that the masses do not like intelligent and original work anymore. (if they ever did) Sometimes I think that if you are not fitting the cookie cutter, that you might as well just not make something if it is going to be different. It will most likely not be appreciated for its originality and artistic value. And that is why I think EQ was not an acclaimed movie, as it should have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cruis.In on Jul 25, 2003 19:55:02 GMT -5
being a dog lover, cat lover, and doer of good to all animals...well except snakes.... i agree.
while i wouldnt describe it as hard for me to watch, maybe it would have been years ago, but the things ive seen now make it not so hard. i would say i felt a bit of repulse when I knew where the scene would lead, when they came over to the kennel. Exterminate them of course was the obvious answer.
But as quoted above, it was a great scene, to see how Preston felt...when he picked up that Puppy...and it licked him, i said NO NO you can't let them shoot it now heh...it was when I realised this movie really had me, and I was sorry it had to end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Waylander on Jul 31, 2003 1:29:19 GMT -5
Equilibrium
By Christy Lemire
The Associated Press
Emotions are prohibited in the futuristic society of "Equilibrium."
Apparently, creativity, wit and finesse are, too.
Writer-director Kurt Wimmer bandies about ideas of freedom of thought and expression, and the production notes insist that he based the film "on his own original vision of a sci-fi world."
But he's simply crossed "Fahrenheit 451" with "The Matrix," then stripped away the substance of the former and the style of the latter. What's left is loud and crude, but occasionally laugh-out-loud funny, merely for its sheer ridiculousness.
It's remarkable, however, in its ability to render the gorgeous, charismatic Taye Diggs completely boring.
Diggs and Christian Bale co-star as "clerics" - ubercops in the nation of Libria, where there are no wars because its inhabitants take daily doses of Prozium, a drug that prevents them from experiencing emotion.
Brandt (Diggs) and Preston (Bale) seek out and destroy "sense offenders" - people who enjoy art, books, music, or anything else that evokes a human response.
This includes puppy dogs, which the heavily armed sensory police shoot to death, simply because they have no idea what else to do with them. (As a dog person, I found this so brutal, I almost walked out at this point.)
Preston catches his partner, Partridge (Sean Bean), reading a collection of Yeats poems and promptly shoots him in the head. Then he accidentally misses a dose of Prozium, and starts feeling his own internal stirrings.
He wakes up every morning and stashes away his doses behind the medicine cabinet in a minimalist apartment that looks like the same place Bale's "American Psycho" character lived. (These people may not be able to feel anything, but they like cool furniture.)
Preston becomes vulnerable just as he arrests Mary O'Brien (Emily Watson), a rebel who lives in a shabby-chic underground hideout, and has beautiful blue eyes, and smells good.
He promises Dupont (Angus MacFayden), the smarmy mouthpiece for the nation's leader, Father, that he's diligently ridding Libria of people like Mary. But Preston's new partner, the ambitious Brandt, suspects that he's weakening and tries to sabotage his career.
(If you stop to think about it, though, wouldn't Brandt have to feel something to be ambitious? Jealousy, for example, or desire? Diggs flashes only a tiny part of his megawatt smile, but it's enough to indicate that his character is enjoying watching Preston struggle.)
Anyway, this sets up a bunch of over-the-top, slow-motion shootouts in which Preston takes out 20 guys at once, all of whom stand there and wait for him to shoot them, even though they're decked out in head-to-toe riot gear.
Twisting and somersaulting through the air like a Cirque du Soleil understudy, he's Keanu Reeves, with slightly more talent. And dressed in a black overcoat, it looks like he also raided Reeves' "Matrix" wardrobe.
Ok. Read this review today and just had to share it. I dont think this chick was awake for most of the movie. Maybe it was just me but I dont remember any slow-motion shootouts. I remember a slow-motion beat-down, but no shoot out. And since when does wearing a black overcoat make you a Matrix look-like? Plenty of movies had people with black overcoats and guns in them before surfer boy whent slow-motion. Iwish I could find a way to contact this chick and tell her to watch the movie again, and this time to not sleep through it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coolhand on Jul 31, 2003 3:50:34 GMT -5
It's the factual innacuracies that really tick me off about that review
"This includes puppy dogs, which the heavily armed sensory police shoot to death, simply because they have no idea what else to do with them. (As a dog person, I found this so brutal, I almost walked out at this point.)" -Hmm. So shooting people is ok, but to kill a dog-well damn those film makers for thier sick twisted minds! The point of that scene is to illustate the cold brutality of the Tetragrammaton! It's emotional, shocking and SUPPOSED to disturb. It's like saying "Ooh, the D-Day sequence in Saving Private Ryan was just gratuatous carnage. How dare they!"
"(If you stop to think about it, though, wouldn't Brandt have to feel something to be ambitious? Jealousy, for example, or desire? Diggs flashes only a tiny part of his megawatt smile, but it's enough to indicate that his character is enjoying watching Preston struggle.)" -Duh, yeah? That's kind of like saying of the Terminator movies "Makes no sense, Arnie would have to be some kind of robot to stand up to all that punishment!" Branht IS feeling, that's the whole point!
"Anyway, this sets up a bunch of over-the-top, slow-motion shootouts" -No slow-mo shootouts. This is the one critisism I've heard time and time again, and is utterly invalid as all the Gun-kata takes place in real time, apart from one or two shots. Not paying attention, I feel.
"in which Preston takes out 20 guys at once, all of whom stand there and wait for him to shoot them, even though they're decked out in head-to-toe riot gear."
-not a valid comment either. In the the first main Gun-Kata scene after the bike flip, Preston has hit all of the
guards within a second of engaging them, and the rest of the shots just re-tred the terretory to make sure they're going down. They had no time to react. The Sweeper thought processes probably went along the lines of "Ooh, quick, run out of the van. Hey, what's that summersalting thing? Oh crap." And the rest is just silence. In the hallway shootout, there IS return fire going on, but Preston is killing people so fast that most don't get the time to get a shot off. That's the point of gun-kata and the point about Preston. He's so fast that you die before you can react.
"Twisting and somersaulting through the air like a Cirque du Soleil understudy, he's Keanu Reeves, with slightly more talent " -That's a bad thing?
"And dressed in a black overcoat, it looks like he also raided Reeves' "Matrix" wardrobe." - Actualy, the Cleric overcoat looks nothing like Neo's duster. It's only knee length, and looks more like a (well, duh) Priests frock. And he doesn't wear it during the two main gun-kata scenes. It's either a black suit with a manderin coller or a white suit.
In summery, I can accept people who say that they just didn't like the story. I mean, if a film dont grab you, it don't grab you and nothing anyone can say will change your mind. But to put it down for things WHICH ARE FACTUALY WRONG is unnaceptable for a professional film critic . It's like saying "Man, I can't stand that Ben Afflick as an actor because he deep-fries donkies and eat them with wooden spoons carved from endangered trees whilst dancing on the grave of my mother."
Rant over. Where's my Prozium? Ahhhh, I feel better now....
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 31, 2003 6:54:11 GMT -5
...Plenty of movies had people with black overcoats and guns in them before surfer boy whent slow-motion... Like I said...people really need to see One Man's Justice (1995)... Oh my!! Black trenchcoats and guns were used in that flick...I wonder where Wimmer got the idea to use them AGAIN... |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 31, 2003 6:55:59 GMT -5
It's like saying "Man, I can't stand that Ben Afflick as an actor because he deep-fries donkies and eat them with wooden spoons carved from endangered trees whilst dancing on the grave of my mother."  Bahahahahah!!! I really shouldn't laugh this loud so early in the morning...might wake the dead... |
|
|
|
Post by Coolhand on Jul 31, 2003 7:09:13 GMT -5
Holy cowl! I just looked up One Man's Justice on Amazon.com and it came back with these details: Director: Kurt Wimmer  Encoding: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. This DVD will probably NOT be viewable in other countries. Read more about DVD formats.) Format: Color, Widescreen Rated: Not for sale to persons under age 18. Studio: Artisan Entertainment DVD Release Date: February 20, 2001 DVD Features: Theatrical trailer(s) Widescreen letterbox format ASIN: B00000JLX7 Other Formats: VHS Average Customer Review: Based on 7 reviews. Write a review. Amazon.com Sales Rank (DVD): 18,637 This is a Kurt Wimmer Action Movie? I had no idea! Is there another one out there, or is this an Amazon screw up? Is it any good?Must...purchase...movie.....credit...card....twitching...... |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 31, 2003 7:16:42 GMT -5
Yes, Wimmer filmed half of it and then was fired. Its interesting to try to figure out what is his and what isn't. He also didn't edit or put the film together so none of that is his work (music choice...) I must say...its quite interesting especially that pre-gun kata garage segment. Oh...and the black trench coats with guns... BTW, I did spot two shots from One Man's Justice which are almost identical in EQ...I'll give a virtual "coke" to anyone who can spot them... |
|
|
|
Post by Coolhand on Jul 31, 2003 7:53:28 GMT -5
A DVD copy of the "Half-Wimmer" is now winging it's way to me transatlanticly. Get that virtual coke on stand-by. I prefer mine Diet.  Interestingly enough, I rememeber when The Matrix first came out there were a number of critics in the UK bitching about it nicking the black trenchcoats, guns and shades from John Woo movies (A Better Tomorrow, The Killer, Face/Off and so on). Now that The Matrix has been around for a while, critics seem to have forgotten this and think that the Worchowski brothers thought up guns and long coats. I'm pretty sure it was the Woo-Miester who kickstarted the whole "long-black-coat-twin-handgun gun chic back in the early eighties with A Better Tomorrow, but I could be wrong. Six years from now, I hope to hear the critics use the phrase: "With it's long black coats and acrobatic gunfights, this new movie is just a clear Equilibrium rip-off. Kurt Wimmer should sue." That would be sweeeet.... |
|
|
|
Post by ClericRyan on Jul 31, 2003 9:37:06 GMT -5
A DVD copy of the "Half-Wimmer" is now winging it's way to me transatlanticly. Get that virtual coke on stand-by. I prefer mine Diet. Interestingly enough, I rememeber when The Matrix first came out there were a number of critics in the UK bitching about it nicking the black trenchcoats, guns and shades from John Woo movies (A Better Tomorrow, The Killer, Face/Off and so on). Now that The Matrix has been around for a while, critics seem to have forgotten this and think that the Worchowski brothers thought up guns and long coats. I'm pretty sure it was the Woo-Miester who kickstarted the whole "long-black-coat-twin-handgun gun chic back in the early eighties with A Better Tomorrow, but I could be wrong. Six years from now, I hope to hear the critics use the phrase: "With it's long black coats and acrobatic gunfights, this new movie is just a clear Equilibrium rip-off. Kurt Wimmer should sue." That would be sweeeet.... Actually, I would say that that "look" of the long black trench coat and so on, came from Cyberpunk, I.e. William Gibson's Neuromancer, and other fiction that came storming out of the late 80s. but in film format, you are dead on, It was John Woo who really got that look onto the big screen |
|
