my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » The Medallion

Author Topic: The Medallion Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 08-22-2003 01:55 AM                        Exceptionally bad.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-22-2003 04:31 AM                     Superbly bad.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-22-2003 04:47 AM                        Amazingly bad.  |  IP: Logged R. Andrew Diercks Expert Film Handler Posts: 232 From: Marion, Iowa (In the middle of everywhere) Registered: May 2003 posted 08-22-2003 11:31 AM                     SUCKED BEYOND ALL BELIEF! I'M WONDERING WHAT TO DO ABOUT CUSTOMERS REQUESTING REFUNDS  |  IP: Logged Mike Olpin Chop Chop! Posts: 1852 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Jan 2002 posted 08-22-2003 05:27 PM                     R. Andrew, you just hit a huge pet-peave of mine. Dont give customers rufunds so easily - It's their respnsability to look up movies and reviews. If it were up to me i'd only refund people who had to leave durring the first half of the film, or if there is a technical issue with the presentation. Never on the basis of "That movie sucked". Yes it did. Next time research your movie before seeing it. (Ducks to avoid the flames)  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 08-22-2003 05:49 PM                        If the presentation was up to snuff and there were no other "issues" aside from the movie's inherent suckiness, then why would anyone deserve a refund?  |  IP: Logged R. Andrew Diercks Expert Film Handler Posts: 232 From: Marion, Iowa (In the middle of everywhere) Registered: May 2003 posted 08-23-2003 12:57 AM                     Mike Olpin: I would never actually give a refund because a movie sucked. I agree that they are only necessary when a technical difficulty occurs. Just not fun to explain that to customers. They think they have to be satisfied. It's hard to explain that we cannot control the quality of our product the way other businesses can. We don't create this . Fortunately, nobody asked for there money back. Maybe because only 35 people came all day long. I already moved it to my smallest auditorium.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 08-24-2003 06:41 PM                        Shockingly bad. I like Jackie Chan, and he does get in a few good stunts in this, but aside from those brief moments, this is unwatchable. Regal Cinema World 8, Eugene, House #3, probably DTS. Attendance: Exactly 7 (in a 480-seat auditorium). Subwoofers were MIA today. The image was jittering laterally quite badly from the first ad through the feature.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 08-25-2003 01:42 AM                        If I remember correctly, the film had an un-spectacular sound mix. I don't remember any LF stuff at all.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 08-27-2003 01:47 PM                     Yeah, there really wasn't too much LFE on this film. It seemed as if this was a pretty low budget film, with sound and editing errors everywhere. I as well felt that this film was a stinker. I usually enjoy Jackie Chan movies but this one just had no substance, no story, and the stunts weren't really there like his other films. Was it me or was there tons of wire-fu? AJG  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 08-28-2003 01:50 AM                        Oh yes -- I now remember, while screening the print, making the comment that the sound mixer and editor probably saw what they had to work with and both got drunk first. I think the cheesy sound effects gave it away.  |  IP: Logged Evans A Criswell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1579 From: Huntsville, AL, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 09-24-2003 10:32 PM                        Attendance: 2003/09/24 19:15, Regal Madison Square 12, Huntsville, AL, Auditorium 11, Scope I enjoyed this. The antics in these Jackie Chan movies always reminds me of Three Stooges antics, just a lot higher caliber with a lot more action. It's not the best movie I've seen, but it's not the worst. I wouldn't call it bad -- maybe medium. This is not the first movie that I've noticed the CAP code in, but this is the first one I've seen where it really stood out and actually was somewhat distracting at times. It was definitely overdone in this movie. The credits have some outtakes. This is a recently converted auditorium from Cobb 1.85:1-only to having vertically adjustable masking. The scope screen size in this 28-foot auditorium is 24 by 10, but I'm amazed at how sharp and bright the image looked. The alignment was off. If the image were moved 1 foot to the right and 1 foot down, it would have looked good for the most part. The nasty aperture plate edges were visible on the right and bottom edges. Also, the bottom couple of feet of the image were darker than the rest. I mentioned these things to the manager guy there on duty on the way out. "Shanghai Nights" was a much better (and funnier) Jackie Chan movie than "The Medallion" in my opinion. "The Medallion" did make me laugh out loud some, even though I was the only person in the theatre (making me laugh in that situation is difficult), but I remember Shanghai Knights being much better. When seeing the little boy in the film, it's bad when all you can think of is "There is no spoon." And when seeing Jackie Chan's partner and not ever remembering his name because I can only think of him as "Tucker" from "There's Something About Mary", that's bad too. With a good movie, the actors should be remembered for their part in that movie, not from another.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.