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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 07-11-2008 12:52 PM                     In Real D 3D! I can't believe nobody has hit this one yet. Maybe it is just a bigger deal for me, since my company decided it needed to have a 2k DLP running in time to show this in 3D, and I want to rip my hair out. That is another thread, though. This movie is terrible. The acting is terrible. The writing is terrible. The special effects are pretty much terrible. I can't believe it is only an hour and a half. It felt like closer to three. I recommend not seeing it at a public showing, because, if you are like me, you will be completely unable to stop yourself from yelling at the screen a dozen times. And it isn't the screen I'm mad at, because I just got a nice new silver screen. It is this movie, which is terrible. 0 out of it doesn't matter, because 0 divided by anything is the same thing. Infinite terribleness. Now, here is my Real D mini review. Real D is cool. It is a cool technology, and it could be used to do some really cool things. Flashlights falling at your face and birds coming right at you are not, however, among them. There are a few parts where the 3D adds real depth and object separation. This was awesome. It probably is not feasible, considering people's fickleness, but 3D really could be a great film making tool. Real D gets a 4 out of 5, because those glasses were uncomfortable, and it has issues at the far front and far back of the auditorium.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 07-11-2008 01:14 PM                     The 3D makes this movie almost interesting enough to watch. The scenes shot on practical sets work really well. The scenes in virtual sets don't. The 3D was used effectively. I just wish they did a better job lighting. I agree with Galen that the technology could be used to do some really cool things, and I think that it will on 12/18/09.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-13-2008 06:09 PM                     I agree..l. this is a film that you go to for the 3-D stuff and nothing else. Its equally as good in Dolby or Real-D 3-D. Heck, even as a kid I found the original movie boring and drawn out... the only thing it really had going for it was Arlene Dahl! It didn't have a very good script either. Mark  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Weigel Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1062 From: Edmond, OK, USA Registered: Mar 2007 posted 07-13-2008 08:54 PM                     quote: Mike Schindler I agree with Galen that the technology could be used to do some really cool things, and I think that it will on 12/18/09. And what comes out 12/18/09?  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 07-13-2008 09:25 PM                     James Cameron's AVATAR! Woo Hoo!  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Goeldner Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1360 From: Washington, District of Columbia Registered: Jun 2008 posted 07-14-2008 12:30 PM                     AMC Tysons Corner Auditorium #6 REAL-D While the story is an inventive take on the Jules Verne book of the same name, the only thing I had fault with was the inconsistent use of the 3D filming - there at times when the effect is used in effective over the top ways, and others that are just lost and seem like a cop-out to the filmmakers. But... it's fun and the audience I saw it with had a blast.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-14-2008 02:32 PM                        quote: James Cameron's AVATAR! Woo Hoo! This will be so long-awaited and the hype on it will be so massive that it's practically guaranteed to suck. "Titanic" lightning isn't likely to strike twice, unfortunately. I hope I'm wrong though.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 07-14-2008 02:57 PM                     First off, anticipation doesn't impact the quality of a movie. It change the way a movie is initially perceived, but that has little to do with how good it is, or how history looks back on it. Second, TITANIC isn't a case of lightning striking. James Cameron movies being masterpieces are more like the sun rising in the east and setting in the west.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-14-2008 03:06 PM                        quote: Mike Schindler First off, anticipation doesn't impact the quality of a movie. It change the way a movie is initially perceived, but that has little to do with how good it is, or how history looks back on it. I'm not sure about that. Look at Waterworld. At the time it was The Most Expensive Movie Ever Made, and it was over budget and delayed, and the problems on the set were legendary. The media ran with that and the result was everyone hated the movie before it was even released. If none of that had happened, it might have been regarded as just what it was: A fairly good Kevin Costner movie. Anytime somebody waits forever between related projects, it causes a problem with the hype machine. The same thing happened with the new Indiana Jones, just not to as big an extent. People will expect Avatar to be the best movie of the 21st Century, and when it comes out and is "just" a very good movie, disappointment will run rampant.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 07-14-2008 04:05 PM                     Maybe hype can impact history's view on a movie. I haven't seen WATERWORLD, but you seem to have liked it. Does the media's spin on the movie make you like it less? And as someone who hasn't seen the movie, if I were to watch it now, I wouldn't have all that baggage, and I would be able to see it for what it is, which is all that really matters. But (to get this thread back on topic) one thing's for sure. JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH 3D has, and always will suck, regardless of the hype.  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-14-2008 05:47 PM                     James Cameron directed movies since 1984... The Terminator Aliens The Abyss Terminator 2 True Lies Titanic He's got a good track record, don't you think? Yes, he has a lot to live up to to follow Titanic...but I'm prepared to give him my confidence he can pull it off. Let's hope. At least there's no way EVEN if it sucks that it will suck anywhere near as much as that last excuse of an Indiana Jones movie. That film has set a new benchmark in suckyness.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 07-14-2008 07:23 PM                     There's a good example of what I'm talking about. Like Mike said, INDY IV didn't live up to expectations, so people like John hated it. But ten years from now, some kid will see it for the first time from an unbiased perspective, and realize that it's just as good as the other three.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 07-14-2008 10:29 PM                     Indy 4 was decent, but not great. Regarding James Cameron and Avatar, I just hope it's a good movie. I couldn't be made to give a rat's ass if it doesn't surpass the box office success of Titanic. Some of the folks in the press will certainly be spinning everything as hard as they can to make it seem like Cameron will have failed if Avatar doesn't gross over $600 million in the United States. And those press folks deserve to be called idiots if they wish to judge the movie that way. It's a flat out unreasonable expectation.  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 07-14-2008 10:49 PM                     quote: But ten years from now, some kid will see it for the first time from an unbiased perspective, and realize that it's just as good as the other three. [Smile] Then again, maybe they won't.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 07-15-2008 09:19 PM                     quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren This movie is terrible. The acting is terrible. The writing is terrible. Whadda expect for a Canadian made TV movie?  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.