- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: No Sin City viewings yet?
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:46 pm to abellsujr
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:46 pm to abellsujr
quote:
You know what else looked like the first one? The Spirit. How did that work out?
No idea
Haven't seen either.
Maybe this flick does suck. IDGAF either way.
Just trying to figure out what, based on the previews, made this movie "look stupid".
And really, nobody can answer the question. Which confirms my suspicions that those claims were baseless.
1
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:49 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
I'm going by what people I know have said about it after having watched it. But there was definitely more than one review in early screenings that brought this up. People don't just watch trailers.
I don't know your friends, and was never asking about reviews.
People here were saying it looked bad, and were basing this on the trailers.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:53 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
quote:
Just trying to figure out what, based on the previews, made this movie "look stupid
And really, nobody can answer the question. Which confirms my suspicions that those claims were baseless.
I'll answer you:
The over acting, the stupid camera angles and shots, the on again off again black and whiteness, the complete lack of a story line or anything to tell the viewer what the movie is about.
THey could have made the trailer 30 seconds long with a picture of random black and white photos of famous actors and a voice over which just said "If you liked Sin City 1, then come see Sin City 2. If you havent seen Sin City 1, we dont give a shite what you think because we arent after you as an audience. SO go frick yourself"
This post was edited on 8/23/14 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:53 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
I thought the trailers looked awesome. The reviews are not so good. I will not pay to see it, but I will watch it.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:58 pm to Breesus
I saw a preview that was almost 3 and a half minutes long. That's too long for one thing. It looks exactly like the first, but that doesn't mean the story will be as good. We can only make that judgement after we see it. The reviews say that it's not.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:00 pm to Breesus
quote:
The over acting, the stupid camera angles and shots, the on again off again black and whiteness, the complete lack of a story line or anything to tell the viewer what the movie is about.
They could have made the trailer 30 seconds long with a picture of random black and white photos of famous actors and a voice over which just said "If you liked Sin City 1, then come see Sin City 2. If you havent seen Sin City 1, we dont give a shite what you think because we arent after you as an audience. SO go frick yourself"
This makes sense.
Don't agree with the "over acting" or "stupid camera angles and shots" part, but I definitely get what you're saying.
Thanks for actually answering the question
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:03 pm to abellsujr
quote:
I thought the trailers looked awesome. The reviews are not so good. I will not pay to see it, but I will watch it.
Since the reviews are bad, I'll probably wait as well.
Unless I do hear lots of good shite from here or from friends.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:10 pm to abellsujr
quote:
that doesn't mean the story will be as good.
quote:
We can only make that judgement after we see it.
How do you even know what the story or plot is? It isnt in any trailer I've seen. Every trailer is just smash cuts of random shite.
I haven't seen the first one and these trailers do nothing to make me want to watch it or see this one, so i think it's a shite marketing campaign.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:11 pm to MrFreakinMiyagi
quote:
Thanks for actually answering the question
You're very welcome. I trash movies on this board i don't like, but i always back up my opinion with my reasons.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:15 pm to Breesus
quote:
How do you even know what the story or plot is? It isnt in any trailer I've seen. Every trailer is just smash cuts of random shite.
That's the thing. It was the same with the original, and the original was fricking great.
quote:
I haven't seen the first one and these trailers do nothing to make me want to watch it or see this one, so i think it's a shite marketing campaign.
You really should check out the first one.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:18 pm to Breesus
I don't know what the plot is except that Jessica Alba goes crazy and that Eva Green is "A Dame To Kill For". I don't even know if the story is bad. The reviews are saying it is but that's not set in stone. I enjoyed the visual aspects of the first one and also the way the stories tied together in a Pulp Fiction kind of way. I don't think Tarantino is involved with this one. That would make a huge difference in the final product.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 4:35 pm to abellsujr
Its bombing hard this weekend
It only made $2.6 million on Friday which put it in 6th place.
The original made $11.8 its opening Friday in 2005 and went on to make $29 million in the opening weekend.
This one looks like it might not even make $10 million.
Unless they do killer biz overseas this is going to be the end of Sin City flicks.
Sucks for the VFX house that bet their future on this flick. They are totally going to go bust over this.
LINK
It only made $2.6 million on Friday which put it in 6th place.
The original made $11.8 its opening Friday in 2005 and went on to make $29 million in the opening weekend.
This one looks like it might not even make $10 million.
Unless they do killer biz overseas this is going to be the end of Sin City flicks.
Sucks for the VFX house that bet their future on this flick. They are totally going to go bust over this.
LINK
Posted on 8/23/14 at 7:03 pm to Dr RC
I hope the fx house goes under. Typical indian company that has a flashy US presence only to outsource the actual work to its sweatshop in india.
Posted on 8/31/14 at 11:12 am to lsufanintexas
I saw it yesterday and was surprised considering all of the bad reviews I've read.
I really liked the first one and thought the second one was also good. If you liked the first one, I'm not sure how you could not like this one. The first one was better but this one was still good and had the same feel to it.
Possible spoilers: I think Eva Green was naked most of this movie. She plays evil really well.
I really liked the first one and thought the second one was also good. If you liked the first one, I'm not sure how you could not like this one. The first one was better but this one was still good and had the same feel to it.
Possible spoilers: I think Eva Green was naked most of this movie. She plays evil really well.
Posted on 8/31/14 at 12:32 pm to JasonL79
It wasn't as good as the first one, but it was a watchable summer popcorn flick.
I saw it in Imax/GPX. There were parts I didn't like, and the timeline is confusing as hell. In fact if you try and figure out the order of events from the two movies you will get a headache.
But it wasn't as bad as reviews led me to believe.
I saw it in Imax/GPX. There were parts I didn't like, and the timeline is confusing as hell. In fact if you try and figure out the order of events from the two movies you will get a headache.
But it wasn't as bad as reviews led me to believe.
Posted on 8/31/14 at 2:38 pm to Michael T. Tiger
quote:
I definitely did not enjoy it as much as the first one.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News