|
Post by tjfbryant on Mar 6, 2006 8:03:34 GMT -5
I didn't see where the watermelons to the blck guys face was racial in nature. But then again I really don't pay too much attention in movies unless its a blatent remark or gesture.
I have great friends of all races at my work, so its tough to distinguish a white boy (like myself) from one of my other buddies. Anywho...
Back to the topic at hand... I love Milla. She was great in Fifth Element, Dummy, and RE. Not too impressed with RE2 but regardless. I saw and Enjoyed UV because of a few things, and none of it was because of Milla. She did the best acting in UV hands down but,... The way UV was presented opening credits, and CGi thru out the movie. It really put me in a Sci Fi comic book. Every scene of action and dialogue appeared to be stripped right from a comic. This is what I enjoyed. Granted, Comics are not all so choppy in transitions from scene to scene like UV seemed to be. For the most part this is what I experienced, a comic that was OVER edited.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode on Mar 6, 2006 10:33:42 GMT -5
i dunno...i thought it was pretty blatent....
......theres a black guy......there must be a water-melon around...ill use it as a weapon on him.....its his only weakness.....
......im half suprised frank didnt throw a bucket of kfc and a 40 once at him.....
.....but yea i loved this movie...and i think the CGI helped disconnect me from THIS world.....and be all the way into violets world.....
....where beating up hundreds of soilders in one day is possible......to "our hero" anyway....
.....and i was fine with it.....because the CGI world....helped me realize.....ok...this isnt my world...this is violets world....
|
|
|
Post by SF on Mar 6, 2006 12:05:07 GMT -5
I understand what you're saying jackmode about creating the world and it letting you be apart of it. The problem is that it wasnt developed very well for everyone else in the world that doesnt know the story. The dialogue was being so forced to tell anything about what was going on that it didnt come out smoothly. Like kill bill was very well developed. You CARE about her situation, you WANT her to live, and you know she is ganna kick ass. It wasnt forced like UV. Like she kept telling everyone she was going to kill them, that was weird. And Im talking about how she said it. And I understand creating another world that you arent too familiar with and loving everything that happens in it. But this world was too roughly put together. The cgi didnt not make it easy to be believable. when she did that gravity control, OMG the transition was so horrible. ive seen a lot of Japanese movies were the cgi was weak but because the stories are fun enough to enjoy or the action is just to much fun to care. I think Wimmer should hook up with Robert Rodriguez, so he can get a little help on the low budget action flicks. Look at Sin City, Better low budget Comic book movie.
|
|
|
Post by Flesh Parade on Mar 6, 2006 14:03:44 GMT -5
Here was my problem with the movie: I heard that Wimmer lost control of the film and was worried, but I still had to see the film.
I noticed the story was missing pieces and had lots of holes. I enjoyed the action, but that sometimes had parts missing too which ruined it. But my biggest dissappointment was how much this movie mirrored Equilibrium. If I wanted to see EQ I would have stayed home. Too many scenes with "T" logos, gun kata although used differently was enough. We didn't need to see the "T" logos. The way Violet get engaged by the enemies almost is the same way Preston gets attacked. The weapon coming out of the wrist, different, but almost the same idea. The idea of there being this dictator is there. And the fight at the end with the dictator revealing he is a "Hemo" all too reminiscent of EQ and Dupont feeling.
I dug the movie, but I really want to see a "Wimmer" cut. And by the way, Did any of you have to fill out a questionare about the movie?
|
|
|
Post by tjfbryant on Mar 6, 2006 14:10:44 GMT -5
questionaire??... No but I would have liked too. Did you? If so what kinda questions were there?
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 6, 2006 14:29:30 GMT -5
No we did not get a questionaire and I saw it twice on friday. What is interesing though is that most of the audience accourding to some reports were over 21...there goes all the idiotic reasons for cutting it to a PG-13. Ultraviolet stars Milla Jovovich who flexed considerable muscle with the Resident Evil films, but failed to attract a paying crowd this time around. Young guys were the primary audience as expected. Studio research showed that 60% of the crowd was male and 72% was over the age of 21. www.boxofficeguru.com/weekend.htm
|
|
|
Post by tjfbryant on Mar 6, 2006 15:58:29 GMT -5
Another studio flop... I hate when studios dictate the audience demographic, just for ticket sales, Then (in all their stupidity), change and edit scenes from a movie just for the money.
Its ridiculous, and uncalled for. I bet Spielberg wouldn't have let the studio edit for a Pg-13 rating for Munich or Saving Private Ryan. WHy?? Cause its Spielberg....not Wimmer.
Personally I hope Screen Gems or whoever they are... drop off the face of the earth.
|
|
|
Post by soundtrack on Mar 6, 2006 18:17:20 GMT -5
Jackmode... STOP WRITING LIKE THAT!
I'm myself a french person trying to write in english and I think i'm less annoying than... your way...
to... express... yourself.
Except that, I have nothing agaisnt you.
About UV, I have one question. In some sequence, Violet kills guards by broking their arm. Is that because of the editing or was it supposed to be that way?
|
|
|
Post by FleshParade on Mar 6, 2006 18:52:12 GMT -5
questionaire??... No but I would have liked too. Did you? If so what kinda questions were there? Yes, my friend and I did. It basically asked if you thought the movie was lame, good, great. Age, sex, race. It asked about how you liked the story, effects, acting. Just about everything they screwed up. I asked the person handing them out what it was for and they said," We're sending them directly to the producers". There was a section you fill out before the movie that asked what brought you there and the other part you filled out after the movie and answered the above mentioned topics.
|
|
|
Post by FleshParade on Mar 6, 2006 18:58:53 GMT -5
No we did not get a questionaire and I saw it twice on friday. What is interesing though is that most of the audience accourding to some reports were over 21...there goes all the idiotic reasons for cutting it to a PG-13. Ultraviolet stars Milla Jovovich who flexed considerable muscle with the Resident Evil films, but failed to attract a paying crowd this time around. Young guys were the primary audience as expected. Studio research showed that 60% of the crowd was male and 72% was over the age of 21. www.boxofficeguru.com/weekend.htmAt the 7:00pm show on Friday there were hardly any people. We had the biggest screen available at AMC and there were probably 20 people, maybe 30. No one showed any reaction to the action or the movie and everyone was definitely old enough for an R rated movie. I'm getting more pissed about this, the more I read and talk about it. I had my expectations pretty high from the first moment I learned Wimmer was making another movie. This can't be his vision, but a very skewed and altered one at best. BRING ON THE D.C. DVD!!!!
|
|
|
Post by -mark- on Mar 6, 2006 19:38:26 GMT -5
Jackmode... STOP WRITING LIKE THAT! I'm myself a french person trying to write in english and I think i'm less annoying than... your way... to... express... yourself. Except that, I have nothing agaisnt you. About UV, I have one question. In some sequence, Violet kills guards by broking their arm. Is that because of the editing or was it supposed to be that way? Yeah deciphering what Jackmode is writing has become a task in itself the last few days And I have a feling it was the edits that caused the broke arm take downs.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode on Mar 6, 2006 19:46:22 GMT -5
"I understand what you're saying jackmode about creating the world and it letting you be apart of it. The problem is that it wasnt developed very well for everyone else in the world that doesnt know the story. "
yea...and its a shame....but i can enjoy this movie 100 percent...and its sad other cant because the story was cut so much....
"The dialogue was being so forced to tell anything about what was going on that it didnt come out smoothly. Like kill bill was very well developed. You CARE about her situation, you WANT her to live, and you know she is ganna kick ass. It wasnt forced like UV. "
i felt for violet more than i felt for the bride......the brides child is alive.....violets child is dead.....
.....true....the bride lost a lot of time off her life.......but violet only had 24-36 hours left to live at the beggining of the movie......
"Like she kept telling everyone she was going to kill them, that was weird. And Im talking about how she said it. "
i loved it.....it was MY "not without incident" for this movie.......they WERE going to die...and there was not a DAMN THING they could do about it......
|
|
|
Post by SF on Mar 6, 2006 23:03:49 GMT -5
But you didnt know she was alive until the end of the first one. And we didnt know she was ganna die in 24 hours because it wasnt in the movie so you cant use that, I dont care if you knew about it before it. They didnt follow up on any of the themes, or they didnt put enough time on any ideas they had. No if all the holes in this movie were filled correctly and the cgi was bumped up a lot and the dialogue was replaced. This would be an ok movie. i want to read the book and see what it should have been.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode on Mar 6, 2006 23:23:09 GMT -5
"And we didnt know she was ganna die in 24 hours because it wasnt in the movie so you cant use that"
YOU didnt know that....i already did.....so even tho it wasent in the movie....its STILL part of the STORY....
I MYSELF CAN USE THAT......i cant say that if im speaking for other people...but i already knew she only had 24 hours to live......
......i read reviews from the screenings....i had read just about everything before the film came out....
.....so the stuff that was lacking....i already knew...so it didnt bother me.....IT BOTHERED OTHER PEOPLE....
....not me....i could relate to violet more than everyone else i guess because of this....
|
|
|
Post by SF on Mar 7, 2006 0:24:34 GMT -5
Actually you are not rating it correctly. you rate a movie for it for what it is not for what isnt in there but you added it in with your head. Kill Bill had 3 scenes cut from the movie (I read the original script), I cant go around saying the movie was even better and then use those scenes as one of my reasons why if it wasnt in the movie.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode on Mar 7, 2006 0:48:14 GMT -5
"Actually you are not rating it correctly. you rate a movie for it for what it is not for what isnt in there but you added it in with your head."
people interpret movies diffrently....
......the plot points wernt IN the movie...but were still RELEVANT to the story.....
bill killing a black guy easily didnt add much...it wasent really relevent to the story......
but if you want to play THAT game......then i loved the story of ultraviolet.......is that better SF ...
....since your so intent on ruining the film for me?
|
|
|
Post by Vespertilio on Mar 8, 2006 0:51:04 GMT -5
Finally saw it Monday evening, it was in one of the smallest theatres in the multiplex, but still the theatre was pretty full by showtime.
All the audience members were well over the age of 13.
I liked it well enough for what it was, but it looked like whatever studio drone edited it together decided that in order for it to be successful it should *look* like EQ. If that makes any sense. I kept noticing all the sequences that mirrored EQ, but with none of the tightness of story and character development. It didn't have the flow and smoothness that I would expect from Wimmer.
Hmmm....best comparison I can think of-- it's like watching the "edited for Television" version of American Psycho. It's still basically coherant and entertaining, but you know big chunks of it are missing and it feels unsatisfying in the end.
If Kurt Wimmer is truly disavowing himself from this film, I don't know if I'll buy this version of the film on DVD-- I really want to see the film he wanted to make. Director's Cut or Bust!!!
That said, most of the "flaws" sighted-- the soft focus, obvious CGI, or "cheesy" dialogue didn't bother me.
I'm not really that fussy when it comes to films-- I just want to be entertained, which this film, good or bad, did.
Now I'll have to pick up the novelization to see what the film was supposed to be.
As for Sony "Screen Gems"? I didn't think it was possible to reverse engineer a diamond into a lump of coal.
|
|
|
Post by billykid on Mar 8, 2006 21:45:32 GMT -5
"Or the dreadlocks...bahahah!!! If you thought most of this stuff was serious you are missing a lot of the film. It is very, very much in the vein of Flash Gordon..."
I couldn't disagree more. Just because the movie has moments of humor does not mean the ENTIRE movie is camp.
It says to me that a lot of this trash talk on the film has influenced even the fans of it some to say it was supposed to be cheesy but I totally disagree.
I saw the cut version and unlike what I a lot of people are saying here, it seems to me that Kurt was aiming for a tone similar to Equilibrium. I didn't see any traces of purposely making things "cheesy" like people are describing.
We NEED whatever Kurt's final cut of the film is on DVD. The current version shows promise, especially in Kurt's unique visual voice, but obviously the film has been butchered and the result is something that can easily be considered cheesy since so much of the back story and character development is gone.
|
|
CGenro
Resistance Member
Posts: 53
|
Post by CGenro on Mar 9, 2006 1:21:04 GMT -5
If we go by the novel I would totally agree as the novel isn`t played for laughs at all.
The problem with the film though is the fact the actors delivering the lines definately aren`t the greatest actors and it comes off humorous. I must admit thought the dialouge is really cheesy so I doubt any actor could actually say "It is on!" or "are you mental??" without me cracking a smile.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode211 on Mar 9, 2006 2:50:45 GMT -5
"I didn't see any traces of purposely making things "cheesy" like people are describing."
"were as strong as you...were as fast as you....."
"yea...but are you one tenth as pissed off as i am?"
i dunno...seems campy on purpose....i also think think about kurts cameo.....
.....there was no way that was saposed to be a serious scene.....campy...on purpose.....
plus the colors and visiuals show a bright kinda future...remindecent of the fifth element....
.....obviously going for the comic book style.....plus the comic books at the beggining of the movie....
....so i really dont think it was going for the same atmosphere as EQ......its defenitly much lighter in tone than EQ....
|
|
|
Post by tjfbryant on Mar 9, 2006 8:28:59 GMT -5
when you read the book...you get a serious sci fi "dramatic" feel for the story. The movie just doesn't portray the same feelings or tone.
|
|
|
Post by billykid on Mar 9, 2006 9:03:14 GMT -5
".....there was no way that was saposed to be a serious scene.....campy...on purpose....."
It could very well been the fault of those actors who delivered the lines. I believe it was mentioned that Kurt himself mentioned some of the crummy acting from the minor players which he didn't expect when he went to film the movie.
".....obviously going for the comic book style.....plus the comic books at the beggining of the movie...."
This "it's going for a comic book" comments are misleading because it implies that ALL comic books are camp and are cheesy. It's very inaccurate. Not all comic books are camp and cheesy. Yes, they may have over the top designs and characters but much of the time, and I am specifically speaking of the modern comics, treat themselves seriously.
Just because Kurt was referencing comic books at the beginning could simply mean he wanted the look and feel of a comic book. Not a Flash Gordon for the new generation.
"....so i really dont think it was going for the same atmosphere as EQ......its defenitly much lighter in tone than EQ.... "
Even the cut version I saw was not entirely light. There might be light moments but the entire movie was not a joke or a wink at the audience. It was not played that way.
|
|
|
Post by tjfbryant on Mar 9, 2006 17:31:45 GMT -5
ya see, I don't think all comic books dialogue are cheesey. Some ...yes..are, but most I have read, have very simple precise statements made various characters to get the point across.
This is done to make up for the lack of various visual, and written cues that is used in Novels and Movies.
So is UV a comic style movie with comic dialogue? Absolutely.
BUT...is it campy? No Why? well, depending on your point of view, and how big of a comic reader you are. For a comic book, the dialogue is pretty ordinary. For a movie (comparing it to others)... I suppose most general audience members would find it hard to accept the simple phrases, gestures, and comic style.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode211 on Mar 9, 2006 22:08:30 GMT -5
i dunno...kurts cameo looked pretty campy to me......
|
|
CGenro
Resistance Member
Posts: 53
|
Post by CGenro on Mar 10, 2006 2:04:11 GMT -5
I`m a comic book nut and I hate it when people refer to cheesy movies as having a comic book feel. But I`m guilty of it at times because there`s just that generalization out there in peoples minds.
|
|
|
Post by jackmode211 on Mar 10, 2006 2:10:50 GMT -5
i think the camera angles reflect the comic book feel the most.....
....i expect that when i get this on dvd...i can pause it at almost any frame of the movie....
...and it will look like a comic book shot....
.....my favorite is when violet asks daxus to 3d her.....
....not only do i get a beatiful view of millas behind.....but inbetween her legs you see a clear shot of daxus....
.....that seems like the kind of shot that would be used in a comic book....
....but im not a comic book nut...i just see them now and again....
but i have to agree...the novel refers to the black ball soilders squishing people into puddles of blood.....
.....not a very campy image....
|
|
|
Post by Walldude on Mar 17, 2006 1:29:08 GMT -5
Finally saw it today. First let me say that I liked it. Not as much as EQ but still a good ride. First, I didn't really like the story much, I thought even though he wrote it, it seemed... well.. beneath Wimmers talents. That was about the only thing I was really dissapointed with other than the obvious cuts to achieve a PG13. Now the good stuff. Milla was awesome, I can't even imagine anyone else pulling this off. Perfect casting. The effects were a little cheesy in a few places but due to the style of the film I didn't think it detracted at all. And style is what this movie was all about. Once again Wimmer managed to create an almost hallucinatory experience. The garish color scheme combined with some soft lensing and really great makeup work brought a truly surreal aspect to the movie. It was one of the things that drew me to EQ. That other worldly style he's got. I'm suprised he managed to pull it off in such a comic book setting. The action was pure Wimmer, reduced to a PG13. I didn't think the action scenes were cut as well as they were in EQ, I'm assuming this is where the studio came in. I look foward to a directors cut DVD. The pacing was great. Full tilt out of the gate and never let up. The soundtrack was just incredible. Badelt and Wimmer are a perfect match.
So overall it lost some points for the disjointed, overused story but made up for it with a typical Wimmer flair for pacing and action. I'm telling you, when everything clicks for this guy he's going to make a blockbuster movie. An all time classic. Bet on it.
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Mar 18, 2006 1:03:33 GMT -5
Hey, glad you finally got to see it Walldude. In my hum. op. there are some moments of brilliance in UV like the Blood Chinois sequence. Even with the edits you can make out Wimmer's creativity and imagination. It'll be interesting to see how his future progresses.
|
|
danko
Resistance Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by danko on Mar 18, 2006 7:26:46 GMT -5
But the real point is, will he be given another chance? I rarely witnessed (never before, maybe) such a fierce hatred campaign against a movie. How many people will be able to see beyond it?
UV just passed 16,000,000 at the box office. I'm not sure how much they were expecting to make. It could have been worse, probably..
|
|
stain
Sense Offender
Posts: 5
|
Post by stain on Mar 18, 2006 17:30:24 GMT -5
...when everything clicks for this guy he's going to make a blockbuster movie. An all time classic. Bet on it. I couldn't agree more. Micheal Bay and Wachowskis (who are currently on the top of my list) ain't got nothin' on Wimmer. Wish there was some 'way' to encourage him in his pursuit for un-tarnished perfection. a thought-- maybe this 'experience' w/ the screen gems' bastardization will fuel [wimmer's] creative juices to do something truly great and impactful. talk about vendetta.
|
|