|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: League of extraordinary gentlemen - crap crap crap posted by Mark B. James on May 17, 2004 at 15:55:11:
Typical Sci-Fi action, special effects junk. What did you expect?I agree that it was disjoined and ended badly, but it was far better than 'Lost in Translation'. That got completely lost.
Follow Ups:
But it wasn't typical - it was incredibly bad with serious story problems. I was expecting something along the lines of X-Men meets Indiana Jones.I still haven't figured out why Sean Connery's character was there in the first place.
Roger Ebert (who gave it a rating of one star): "Just when it seems about to become a real corker of an adventure movie, [the movie] plunges into incomprehensible action, idiotic dialogue, inexplicable motivations, causes without effects, effects without causes, and general lunacy."
==========
A co-worker of mine was brought on towards the end as an additional editor. He said they basically put out an unfinished movie because they ran out of time and money. He said that many of the FX put in were no where near what would normally be their finished form and that story wise, they just never got it together.My question was/is, why bother?
"Where are we going? And what am I doing in this hand basket?"
was a very poetic movie, warm and amusing, about loneliness in a foreign culture. At the time, I enjoyed it, but was not impressed - then it got under my skin for a the next few days and resonated. But, I don't think it's nuances translate well to the small screen (DVD) - you had to see it at a theater. On the other hand, "Gentlemen's" only redeeming quality was Sean Conery. Uh oh, is this going to be moved to Critics Corner now?
Regards,
Mike
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: