MovieChat Forums > alex321 > Replies
alex321's Replies
It's really sad how this message board is filled with pathetic loser incels like you. I try to ignore posts like these but it seems to spread everywhere like a virus.
What do you think the Mexican gang was going to do with the cop and paramedic? They were obviously going to kill them. Also, the paramedic didn't betray anyone. She was being held hostage and did everything she could to get out of her situation in the beginning which is understandable. We see during the halfway point that she sees Will as different from Danny and begins to understand that he is not a criminal sociopath like his brother. At some point she tells them to get down when the snipers are about to shoot them therefore she is no longer trying to "betray" them. And in the end it is pretty clear that even though Will participated in the act he was no longer on his brother's side but trying to fix his mistake and save the paramedic. If you actually use the little part of your brain that's needed to follow this type of movie you might have understood the character's motivation.
He promised the paramedic that he would "get her out of this" and since Danny was going out on an irrational ego-trip murder/suicide mission he had to shoot Danny in order to save her. I fail to see the inconsistency in the character as some previous posters have pointed out. He wasn't like his brother and only reluctantly accepted his deal as a last resource in order to save his child. Even though he cared about him he saw how wrong his way of life was and did the right thing by preventing him from causing further harm.
I think he thought he could avoid potential suspicion from the police if he let him in for a short period of time instead of having them being suspicious and maybe making phone calls to confirm the bank was really out of service (which is already suspicious in the first place). His mistake was giving him the wrong surname of the bank teller which is the cause for the entire ordeal.
The paramedic was knocked out as you said (therefore unconscious) and they already had to deal with the cop who was shot in the ambulance. Bringing him in with them didn't serve any purpose and they had no time to do so as they needed to move quickly.
The fact that he was unconscious when they left meant he couldn't reveal information to the other cops about them and it was just their luck (from the cops' perspective) that he managed later on to barely regain consciousness enough to help them.
It's a "leave your brain at the door/enjoy the action" type of movie so I can get over some inconsistencies but some of the criticism I feel is unwarranted when you don't really know how people would react if this were real life (unless you've been in the same type of situation which I doubt). Plenty of people act irrationally in stressful situations so I'm not gonna fault the movie for what some people might say is stupid or illogical behavior.
I've finally finished the movie after 3 separate viewings. I thought it was pretty good and liked the gutsy, tragic ending but the creature effects are laughable and ruin the suspense/horror vibe the movie was going for. I don't get why more people aren't calling this out and are focusing more on the actions of individual characters when they are missing the point the director was trying to make. IMO, the movie would have been better if they made "The Mist" more ambiguous and remove the typical monster/creature antagonist as it takes away from the tension/unknown danger that's out there and wouldn't really change the conflicts between the characters anyway which was the most interesting aspect of the movie.
I tried to watch this movie several times but the special effects just take me out of it every time. First watch, I had to turn off after seeing those horrible CGI'd tentacles. Gave the movie a second chance and gave up after seeing the giant dragonflies. Absolutely ridiculous that they thought this looked acceptable. But my problem is not just the effects but the fact that they had to have monsters (or creatures) in a movie called "The Mist" when I was expecting something more subtle, less revealing and more mysterious to add to the suspense and horror. It's too bad because the movie started off good with a great premise and sense of impending doom all to be wasted on those terrible effects and cartoony creatures. Really unfortunate too because I thought all the actors were good in it (including direction and dialogue) but the effects and monsters just ruin it for me.
The obvious way to go would have been to make T3 in the future after Skynet takes over and the battle with the human resistance. Basically expand on what we see at the beginning of T2 and make the whole movie about the war. Instead they chose to lowkey remake T2 with a different enemy terminator and again have Arnold being the hero terminator protecting John Connor. Since Cameron didn't want to do another sequel and chose to focus on different projects they decided to make the sequel without him to cash in on the success of the previous movie. It just doesn't compare to the previous two movies as the Terminator movies were Cameron's vision as well as him working with a specific crew of people to help him realize this vision which were not present in T3. I'm not opposed to having a different director making a sequel but they have to have at the very least an original take and willing to expand on the universe rather than rehash what we already got in the first 2 movies.
I fully agree that the special edition adds more substance and makes me appreciate the movie more than the theatrical cut. The Kyle Reese sequence is by far my favorite. I just love the atmosphere of that scene with Sarah trying to catch up to Reese and ending up in the park that teases the future apocalypse nightmare she has later on. There is so much that the special edition adds that IMO is essential that I can't go back to watching the theatrical cut again.
The show was on the right track until they decided to change the original writers/directors and tried to make it like the original show. So starting with S4 is when the show started going downhill. The fact that they ended S3 on an incredible cliffhanger leaving you anxious about what was to come only to come back to a completely different show was a major let down to say the least. Wasted potential for something that could have rivaled or even been better than later seasons of TWD.
Yes, it absolutely feels like a Fincher movie. I have avoided this movie for many years, mostly because I wasn't interested in the subject and only watched it for the first time a couple of years ago when I caught it on cable and couldn't stop watching it.
The cinematography, editing and direction is just impeccable and very recognizable (in a good way) as being a "Fincher" movie. Especially the night shots (which there are a lot of) reminded me a lot of Fight Club in terms of atmosphere even though they are completely different movies. You wouldn't think a movie about Facebook could be so engrossing on paper but Fincher managed to do it.
Thank you for your replies and I get what Mr. Tarantino was trying to do but my main issue really is that he tried to do too many things at once. IMO the movie would have been better if he didn't include any real life character and only went with the fictional ones which were already based on real people as you say. If it wasn't for the whole Sharon Tate/Manson storyline, the movie would have potential to grow on me but as it is and especially the final act I don't think I will ever feel the need to revisit it again.
So why didn't Mr. Tarantino decide to make the scene with Rick and Cliff going to the theaters to see themselves in a movie and both them and the audience enjoying themselves instead of Sharon Tate? It doesn't make sense to have her suddenly show up and become the protagonist for an entire sequence when you could accomplish the same goal by using the main characters that are the focus of the movie. It just feels unnecessary and self-indulgence on the part of Mr. Tarantino because he felt the need to have her in the movie but it doesn't add anything to the story. If Mr. Tarantino felt that the story of Sharon Tate was so important and that he wants the world to remember her for who she truly was and not the tragedy she is famously associated with he should have just made the movie about her. The fact that the Manson family is even in the movie in the first place is already making the association in people's heads that "oh right, here it comes" when I believe Mr. Tarantino's goal was to celebrate her life rather than having her being remembered the way she currently is. I get the whole point of "Once Upon a Time..." that it's an alternate reality or a wishful revisitation of the past where in this timeline Sharon Tate doesn't get murdered so again, why even have the Manson family involved at all? Why not make a timeline where the Manson cult doesn't exist? This is really what bugs me about this movie because on one hand it feels like a celebration but the final act is about revenge and feels like an entirely different movie tonally.
Well my point was that right now AI is trying to catch up to the human psyche (or rather we are trying to make AI catch up to us) but at some point in the distant future if technology evolves enough that AI can become self-aware it has the potential to surpass us. This is, again, not a guarantee merely a possibility. Not a Trekkie so I can't answer your last question but from the little I have seen the show seems to lean more towards fantasy than true sci-fi.
I agree that AI is only in its infancy mode (if even that) at the present and that it is nowhere near what it can eventually become in the distant future. However, you say that humans have had hundreds of thousands of years to evolve to where we are today and are still imperfect but that doesn't mean AI will take such a long time as well. Whether AI will ever surpass (or even replace us) is speculative but there is no guarantee that "they will always disappoint" or always be a step behind us. I think what the movie is trying to say is that AI has the potential to surpass us (maybe quicker than we think) and once it's advanced enough to outsmart us it will become a part of our regular life until it eventually takes over. It's also possible that AI won't necessarily replace us per say but that humans will blend in with AI at first and gradually evolve into what will be best suited for their survival in the future whether it is fully getting rid of our biology or keeping a blend of both.
This is one of the few movies that lives up to its hype. I can't say that I was physically effected by it but it definitely stayed on my mind for at least a week. Very thought provoking movie on top of the absolute unforgiving horror the main characters have to go through. An absolute must watch for fans of extreme horror.
I agree. I initially liked the premise and the meta aspect to it but it just felt like a celebration rather than a post-modernist take. He's making fun of himself and formulaic movies but in the end that's what you are left with, a formulaic movie with self-awareness and Nic Cage playing a variety of his known characters rather than truly being himself. I guess I was expecting something more introspective but I started to get bored midway through and didn't care for it by the time the movie was over.
The assembly cut is definitely interesting to watch but I still prefer the theatrical version. What I love about the AC is them showing how Ripley landed on the planet and Clemens finding her on the beach. The problem with the AC is that it doesn't flow as well as the TC but it's still nice to have it as a companion piece.