MovieChat Forums > Millennium (1989) Discussion > Do they make films worse than this?

Do they make films worse than this?

posted 18 years ago by censorshipsucks06
23 replies | jump to latest

TERRIBLE. That's all that can be said. I'll only bring up one thing - the continuity is HORRIBLE. Each time a scene changes, Kristofferson and Ladd have different styles and lengths of hair. The scene when they have dinner looks like it was shot months after the other scenes and was inserted in. Ladd has a different hair style from the car to the bar, to the hotel, till the next morning (and no she wasn't 'time traveling' during this part of the film. Kristoffersen's hair looks much longer after dinner when they show up in the hotel room. These are filmmaking 101 errors.

I LAUGHED OUT LOUD at the ending - "This isn't the end - this is'nt the beginning - this is the end of the beginning" WTF??????????????

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChrisO_01801 17 years ago

"Millennium" makes "Gigli" look like "Citizen Kane".

[–] hoffmanswaldau 17 years ago

Yes, right. The end was surely not made very clever. But there are lots of films, especially sci-fi films, that are hundredfold worse than this one. I also saw some of those filmmaking 101 errors (very nice description) but they aren't so enormously dramatic as you describe them. I have bought a DVD box with 15 films for 15€ and I must say, this is surely the best one!

[–] ae36 17 years ago

"I LAUGHED OUT LOUD at the ending - "This isn't the end - this is'nt the beginning - this is the end of the beginning" WTF??????????????"

I can't defend the movie in general. However, the quote they borrowed and the one you apparently never heard of is from Winston Churchill.

AE36

[–] Vampenguin 17 years ago

"However, the quote they borrowed and the one you apparently never heard of is from Winston Churchill."

Oh, theres no question that its a great quote - but in the movie, it's just ridiculous.

----------------------------------
Death is but a door, time is but a window...I will be back.

[–] bethpage89 17 years ago

In 50 years, this is one of the three movies that--from boredom--I walked out of.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChrisO_01801 16 years ago

A sad commentary on your taste in movies, my friend.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChrisO_01801 16 years ago

Call me Hitler one more time, buddy, and you get a one-way ticket to MY ignore list. Being autistic doesn't give you a free pass to compare people to a mass-murdering tyrant just because they don't share your misguided affection for that rape of a good story Michael Anderson has the nerve to call a movie. Anderson himself may not be criminal, but what he did to the story on which the movie was based is a capital offense.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChrisO_01801 16 years ago

....because you instantly and permanently lost my respect the first time you compared me to Hitler.

[–] crowhurstt 15 years ago

I have only ever caught the last hour rather than seen it all, but I'd like too. The film is one those that you instinctively know is based on a book or a play. There is a depth to them that often isn't there in straight movies. Whilst I agree it isn't in reality very good IMHO it feels like it could have been.
Unfortuneately if they remake, like they should, they will likely ruin it by putting a big, egotistic, star and relying too much on special effects.

PS The modern trend of DNA testing of the bodies would make it implausable.

[–] gnome-5 15 years ago

"PS The modern trend of DNA testing of the bodies would make it implausable."

They would have to limit themselves to planes that crashed before DNA testing became possible. And there are plenty of those.

[–] psdhart 11 years ago

Call me Hitler one more time, buddy....

so it is true, the law bit that is...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

[–] ChrisO_01801 16 years ago

Again with the Hitler analogies! You must be a lot of fun at parties.

[–] ChrisO_01801 16 years ago

They did make a film worse than this: [u]Def Con IV[/u].

[–] gnome-5 15 years ago

"Each time a scene changes, Kristofferson and Ladd have different styles and lengths of hair."

I just watched these scenes looking for the continuity problems with their hair styles and guess what? they're not there. The only different "hair style" is in the morning, after she'd slept on it and possibly showered.

I'd call this a critic 101 error. You remember seeing something in the movie that isn't even there!

[–] censorshipsucks06 13 years ago

Uhh, you need to look at it again. Your observation skills are failing you.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]