Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Seeking A Lobotomy After Watching Sucker Punch

i am scared now,really really scared ,not for sucker punch but for Superman:The man of steel...........................

superman-dead.jpg
 
oh in case some of u dont know Zack Snyder's next directorial venture is superman the man of steel produced by the great christopher nolan.
 
The following criticism is directed at fans of the camerawork featured in the Bourne Trilogy and every other Paul Greengrass film. This applies to both the whole of Battle LA and portions of Sucker Punch:

When will the seizure-cam die? This film made me physically ill. Half the time, I could not tell what was happening on screen with the camera flailing around like Daryl Hannah premortem. I am really fed up with this queasy-cam trend and so is the audience. It does not look epic or gritty, it pisses people off and drives them away in droves. When will Hollywood learn that clarity is king?

There should be a warning that accompanies this film: "Warning, this film contains a significant number of action sequences that are at times, unwatchable due to the poorly done shoulder mounted camera work. If you want to be able to watch the film you just payed money for, we suggest you look elsewhere. If you like your blockbusters to look like home movies, this bud is for you. We apologize for making fun of home movies. Some of them show more technical mastery than this film."
 
Last edited:
I sometimes wonder what a REDUser-created action movie would look like given how hand-held and portable the camera systems are now.
 
There is no better way of spending one's evening than watching a story about a race of extraterrestrial interstellar-traveling beings with tentacles and Wok protective helmets attacking humans while pushing mini tractors, race evolved enough to cross a galaxy and powerful enough to wipe out LA within one day, but dumb enough to forget protecting their main base against a couple of folks with guns.

"Cam-op-hanging-from-a-tree-all-about-CU" look enhanced already entertainment-rich story and my night became complete with additional flag waving, making me want to enroll in army and blast off anyone wanting to endanger our way of living on the other continent.
 
A.Fetchko said:
Oh wow.... and Battle LA was "rip a hole in the universe" bad so I can only imagine your pain and suffering. I'd lament on and on... but Ebert does a pretty good job already. The reviews conclusion is quite choice.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110309/REVIEWS/110309992
Click to expand...

When I think of the elegant construction of something like "Gunfight at the OK Corral," I want to rend the hair from my head and weep bitter tears of despair. Generations of filmmakers devoted their lives to perfecting techniques that a director like Jonathan Liebesman is either ignorant of, or indifferent to. Yet he is given millions of dollars to produce this assault on the attention span of a generation.

Young men: If you attend this crap with friends who admire it, tactfully inform them they are idiots. Young women: If your date likes this movie, tell him you've been thinking it over, and you think you should consider spending some time apart.
Click to expand...


 
Andrew Rieger said:
The following criticism is directed at fans of the camerawork featured in the Bourne Trilogy and every other Paul Greengrass film. This applies to both the whole of Battle LA and portions of Sucker Punch:

When will the seizure-cam die? This film made me physically ill. Half the time, I could not tell what was happening on screen with the camera flailing around like Daryl Hannah premortem. I am really fed up with this queasy-cam trend and so is the audience. It does not look epic or gritty, it pisses people off and drives them away in droves. When will Hollywood learn that clarity is king?

There should be a warning that accompanies this film: "Warning, this film contains a significant number of action sequences that are at times, unwatchable due to the poorly done shoulder mounted camera work. If you want to be able to watch the film you just payed money for, we suggest you look elsewhere. If you like your blockbusters to look like home movies, this bud is for you. We apologize for making fun of home movies. Some of them show more technical mastery than this film."
Click to expand...

I'm totally with you Andrew but, like so many things, it's the idiots who jump on the wagon with no ideas to back them up that ruin it. Look at Star Trek - in there it works and it works for a reason. The director has talent!

Someone needs to sit these schmuck directors down and explain to them that the secret of frenetic editing is to reveal decisive information within those 12 frames. Show the gun as it fires, catch that look at exactly the right moment, whip onto the jaw at precisely the moment the fist connects. That's film making. Anything else is painting by numbers and pretending you're too cool for school.
 
Andrew Rieger said:
The following criticism is directed at fans of the camerawork featured in the Bourne Trilogy and every other Paul Greengrass film. This applies to both the whole of Battle LA and portions of Sucker Punch:

When will the seizure-cam die? This film made me physically ill. Half the time, I could not tell what was happening on screen with the camera flailing around like Daryl Hannah premortem. I am really fed up with this queasy-cam trend and so is the audience. It does not look epic or gritty, it pisses people off and drives them away in droves. When will Hollywood learn that clarity is king?

There should be a warning that accompanies this film: "Warning, this film contains a significant number of action sequences that are at times, unwatchable due to the poorly done shoulder mounted camera work. If you want to be able to watch the film you just payed money for, we suggest you look elsewhere. If you like your blockbusters to look like home movies, this bud is for you. We apologize for making fun of home movies. Some of them show more technical mastery than this film."
Click to expand...

I kind of disagree. Battle La seemed to only have a 150mm lens for the entire show, but whatever. I like that quick action style shooting. I much prefer that to a few wide shots. The only other style of action shooting I really like is a single long take with zooms and such, such as the animated work done by Monty Oum.

Also...the jab at Sucker Punch by saying that home movies are more technically masterful, though I get the attempt at humor, I'm gonna be a bitch and say that when people shoot digital, it will look like a home movie, especially DSLR's....
 
I disagree that shaky cam has no place, but it can definitely be overdone. Compare the first Bourne (directed by Doug Liman, not Greengrass - where the camerawork was fine) to the others in the franchise where it was often really too much and became a distraction at times. It's OK on a smaller TV screen though.

There's also a trend to thinking that shaky closeups and fast cutting automatically equals exciting, citing it's like the "fog of war" - but it simply doesn't work if the action is unclear and confusing. The fights in Batman Begins are like that - you just can't follow the action, who's got the upper hand, who just did a clever fight move, etc, and end up not caring. However, those same techniques can work if it's clear what's happening.
 
Andrew Rieger said:
Dear Sucker Punch,

Just when I thought that blockbusters could not get any worse, you had to walk into my life. It was a wild, sickening ride and unfortunately, there is no way that I can get back the two hours I wasted this evening watching you. Your company was about as pleasant as a sucker punch to the balls. I will be honest babydoll, you make Battle LA look like a masterpiece. At this point, I'm pretty sure that only a lobotomy could rid my mind of your awfulness. I'm considering it, I really am. I am currently punching myself for spending $10 on my ticket but Warner Brothers are the real losers for spending $100 million on you. Anyways darling, I wish you a slow and painful death at the box office.

Love,
A film fanatic who is now considering taking up competitive knitting in lieu of weekend trips to the theater.
Click to expand...


Andrew, I really don't undrestand why you complain. At first you must been strongly warned by that crazy insane trailer which looks like the mix of all bad cliché things on the steroids and secondly you can always run out of the theatre when it gets over you!
You evidently missed both... :biggrinjester:

Personaly I have very same feeling after watching ANY of the last superhero or fantasy flicks like Spiderman, Transformes etc. They are hilarious, but hey it's not cinema it's just entertainment :biggrin:
 
Just watched it last night, and IMO, there are only three conditions that really make SuckerPunch justifiable...

1. If it was all an executives/investors sick joke and make Synder and team pull random nouns out of a hat and then gave them a maximum of 20 lines of dialog to connect them.

2. If this was Zach Synder's first time trying marijuana.

3. It was all actually supposed to be the intro for the next 30 Seconds to Mars video, but at the last minute the band backed out and they decided to try and release the footage as a movie anyways.
 
Bryce O said:
Just watched it last night, and IMO, there are only three conditions that really make SuckerPunch justifiable...

1. If it was all an executives/investors sick joke and make Synder and team pull random nouns out of a hat and then gave them a maximum of 20 lines of dialog to connect them.

2. If this was Zach Synder's first time trying marijuana.

3. It was all actually supposed to be the intro for the next 30 Seconds to Mars video, but at the last minute the band backed out and they decided to try and release the footage as a movie anyways.
Click to expand...



LOL I vote for #3 :smilielol5:
 
Joe G. said:
That's how I felt about Scott Pilgrim after my daughter dragged me to see it.

Utter garbage. That seems to be what the world craves.
Click to expand...

I liked Scott Pilgrim. Especially the first band practice scene with Knives and the recurring theme of "six evil ex-boyfriends" vs. "six evil ex's". The movie was made for teenie bops but took me back.

Was it really as bad as Sucker Punch appears to be?
 
Scott Pilgrim? Oh no. No no no. Not even comparable.
 
No, Scott Pilgrim had a point. I'm as old as the hills but I loved it. I haven't seen Sucker Punch but what I'm hearing matches pretty well with what I thought from the trailer. One of the problems Hollywood has is that, as it attempts to make wank movies for 14 year old boys, they keep having to censor the sexiness to please the religious right. So you get something with short skirts and gatling guns. WTF?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top