MovieChat Forums > Extinction (2015) Discussion > The Beginning

The Beginning

posted 9 years ago by Koosh_King01
6 replies | jump to latest

I'm seven minutes in and already I've found so many stupid things:

1. When the soldiers in Bus #2 lose contact with Bus #1, neither of them thinks to radio the rear guard, a Hummer that was clearly shown driving behind them. They simply continue making fruitless attempts to contact "Alpha 1," and both times it's decided they ought to get off to go investigate, neither of them radios the Hummer to inform them of what they're doing.

2. I hated, hated, hated the bit where the second soldier decides to go out. Someone says it isn't a good idea, considering the first guy still hasn't returned, and without a word, the soldier opens the door then turns to the guy who told him not to go and makes this petulant frowny face like he's a spoiled six year old kid saying "You're not the boss of me!" Not only is he behaving stupidly, but he's being really unprofessional about it.

3. As an addendum to the above, what I thought was going to happen when the second soldier heads up to the front was that he was going to tell the driver to just go around the stopped bus and continue on. I would've thought such an apocalyptic scenario as the one this movie presents would necessitate some brutal pragmatism - i.e., that they'd just have to write off everyone aboard the first bus and the soldier who got off to check. Instead, he didn't do this, he basically just repeats his friend's mistake.

4. The same guy who told that soldier that getting off wasn't a good idea becomes the third person in the sequence to do so. I know it was to get the gun, but still, it seemed dumb that he'd do the very thing he told someone else not to do.

5. I'm still unclear as to what exactly happened in Bus #1. The vehicle simply stops dead. There's one single burst of gunfire inside of it, but besides this, nothing. No indications of attack or violence. This is in direct contrast to what happens when Bus #2 gets invaded. Shrieking, yelling, pandemonium. Considering the amount of utter insanity and noise that occurs aboard the second vehicle... how could the first one be taken so quietly? What, did every single person except whoever fired the one shot turn all at the same time? Did they just sit placidly in their seats and get eaten?

6. What happened to the rear guard...? We see the headlights at the back of the bus in several scenes looking down the aisle and in a few shots after everyone (finally) makes it out the rear exit, but besides this, the vehicle and whoever may be inside of it are simply forgotten about. Don't they wonder why they've stopped?

7. Do the emergency rear doors on school buses really not open from the inside? This seems to negate the purpose of them being emergency doors. If they can only be opened from the outside, why

I mean, really, how many times will you look under Jabba's manboobs?

[–] Tyler-A-Arse 9 years ago

5. I'm still unclear as to what exactly happened in Bus #1. The vehicle simply stops dead. There's one single burst of gunfire inside of it, but besides this, nothing. No indications of attack or violence. This is in direct contrast to what happens when Bus #2 gets invaded. Shrieking, yelling, pandemonium. Considering the amount of utter insanity and noise that occurs aboard the second vehicle... how could the first one be taken so quietly?

That's a good question.....and I sure wondered about it, too. The monsters/zombies/vampires gave no indication later on that they were capable of any type of stealth take-over. I'm sure it was done for suspense, but it didn't work in the movie very well.

Do the emergency rear doors on school buses really not open from the inside? This seems to negate the purpose of them being emergency doors. If they can only be opened from the outside, why

IKR? That made no sense.

There were other things wrong with this movie:

1. Lu was a pain in the ssA. She first sees a monster outside. It scare her so bad that she decides to spend the night under the bed. But after she sees one in real action, (trying to kill Patrick), she then doesn't worry about them and wants to go outside and get flowers for her mom. But then later on, she's back to being scared.

2. When Patrick and Dog barely escaped from the store, the monster dented that metal door up pretty good, indicating it had incredible physical strength. But later on, Jack, Matt, and The Woman are able to press on doors to keep them from coming through. Patrick was even able to fight one off his back.

[–] tkell31 9 years ago

Yeah, it's pretty badly executed. Even after the first two soldiers are killed, the one guy goes out to get the weapons...huh?

These things wipe out humanity, but when our trio is discovered the infected cant even invade a house effectively so how did this work again?

Then our four survivors get involved in a love triangle that results in the woman getting killed. Really? Humanity is wiped out and you are acting like the Kardashians? And how is she still so pathetic when the woman they find in the street is the second coming of Rambo. Granted she was down to one arm, but she couldn't use a pistol?

Meh, maybe next time.

[–] TTWoodman 9 years ago

Thought I was the only one! Nice list, the only thing that annoyed me were the two soldiers leaving bus #2.

Attempted twice to watch this, once last month and then today and cut it off after they attempt to retrieve the soldiers weapon. It was simply a badly written movie where ZERO logic were involved in character's critical thinking department. Some might argue "it's just a movie" or "you don't know what you would do if it really happened!", well for one, the opening bus scene would not have played out like that if were on Bus #2 in command.
Bus #1 stops for no reason, gun shot heard. Radio to alpha team for situation update, no response. I would have shined my light through the front window to at least try to see in rear of Bus #1, nothing. Radio alpha team again, no response, drive on to destination. Under no circumstance do you get out, chalk bus #1 as a loss.

If you are seeing yourself standing in another room, you are definitely not fine

[–] blakkdog 9 years ago

So you are ok with the concept of the physiological impossibility of the almost instant transformation of a corpse into a vicious monster but youll spend 30 minutes analyzing the first few minutes of a movie because youve thought of some more believable ways for the action to happen. Get a hold of yourself. Yes its not a very good movie but its A ZOMBIE MOVIE. You dont complain about the actions of people in a horror film and then turn around and ignore the sheer impossibility of the entire premise. If you get this worked up over this thing then I can only imagine that movies like Friday the 13th and Halloween must have inspired you to write an entire thesis. "I WOULD NEVER RUN DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD IF A CAR WAS CHASING ME! HOW ABSURD! I AM UNABLE TO WATCH ANY MORE OF THIS MOVIE BECAUSE THE PROBABILITY OF A FLASHLIGHT SUDDENLY NOT WORKING WHEN A KNIFE WIELDING MANIAC STEPS INTO THE ROOM IS VERY LOW! I MUST RUN TO IMDB AND PRESENT MY 12 PARAGRAPH THEORY ON WHY THE FIRST 7 MINUTES OF THIS INCREDIBLY FICTIONAL MOVIE IS UNLIKELY!"

My advice is dont watch cheesy horror films if you cant handle minor issues in logic making from throw away characters and soldiers acting "unprofessionally" is really a deal breaker for you.

---
http://letterboxd.com/blakkdog/

[–] Koosh_King01 9 years ago

That the monsters are a physiological impossibility is a given. However, they can be accepted within the confines of the story even with their inherently unrealistic nature because they are exactly that - they are inherently unrealistic, with nothing in real life to compare them to. So, no, a movie isn't ruined for me because it has fantastical creatures in it. Instead, the movie falls apart if the world surrounding them rings false.

Which this one did, in my opinion. Nobody in that sequence acted the way most real people would in that situation. With so many contrivances and dumb character decisions right smack dab in the film's opening sequence, it hurt the atmosphere of the film for me going forward.

In short, the central premise being unrealistic itself is not an excuse for the story surrounding it being problematic. The whole point of having monsters in recognizable or realistic settings is to give audiences the feeling of the supernatural or fantastical intruding upon a world they recognize, a world that could very well be their own. And besides, almost none of the problems were directly related to the fantastical central premise; you could replace the creatures with enemy soldiers or terrorists, change nothing else, and the problems of the sequence I described above would still remain.

The movie improved once it skipped ahead several years to after the fall of mankind, showing us a world mostly unrecognizable to me. This world of desolate frozen wastelands and empty streets, a world with only three (later four) people still in it, is leaning more towards the fantastical, and so it and the monsters themselves compliment one another. And because this frozen future world is so foreign to me as a concept, it's easier to accept its inconsistencies and contrivances (whatever they may be) than those of the opening sequence.

I mean, really, how many times will you look under Jabba's manboobs?

[–] petey0707 9 years ago

Yeah, how dare people have standards when watching movies!

A movie doesn't have to be realistic, but if people act irrationally and illogically, then within the context of the setting it can still be badly executed. This movie sounds interesting on paper but the pacing, tone and editing are all over the place.