Posted by Something-Like-37 at spider-wk052.proxy.aol.com on March 30, 2002 at 23:45:26:
In Reply to: My beef on new flicks... posted by BlackStar on March 30, 2002 at 19:59:25:
: Blade 2 was a disapointment, not becuase it was unrealistic, but because of the quality. In the original Blade, they actually showed Snipes doing all the action sequences, in the new one, they just keep cutting to a new view so you never know what the hell is going on. The love story is worthless and it just weakens the movie. I mean come on, he knows her for a day and he has all these feelings for her? Come on. The CG could have been much better. I realize Snipes is getting old, but christ, that was awful compared to what we saw in most films using CG. I mean, it doesn't have to be perfect, but it shouldn't be that damn obvious. If my opinion, that $6 could have been spent in better places.
Blade 2 rocked hardcore. There's nothing you can really say that wasn't good about it. There was a lot of differences between the first and second Blade -- that's why the called it Blade 2 and not Blade The Remake.
: Panic Room was also a huge disappointment. The story was okay, but not great. The dialog was simply awful, and listening to it made me cringe. The CG, though it looked good, was over used. When Finch did Fight Club, all the CG used was used to tell the story and had an important part in telling the story. In Panic Room, there were many sequences which added nothing to the movie except let the audience know how much they spent making it. The ending was complete shit and left the audience (atleast the one I was seeing the movie with) yelling at the screen. I would rather spent this $6 elsewhere as well.
I loved Panic Room. The story was great, the Fincher did a great job directing. I also got a little bothered by the CG crap. It was used very well for some parts, but it was used when it wasn't needed (like when it went in the key whole).
That's my two cents (that no one really gives a shit about, I'm sure)
O.L.