Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: BloodEagle on September 17, 2009, 02:20:06 pm

Title: 9, Redux
Post by: BloodEagle on September 17, 2009, 02:20:06 pm
Well that (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472033/) was disappointing.  :doubt:
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 17, 2009, 02:38:41 pm
Quote from: BloodEagle on September 17, 2009, 02:20:06 pm
Well that (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472033/) was disappointing.  :doubt:

Ah yes, my friend's review was roughly "I just saw a pre-screening of 9 and I can tell you that it's a mother****ing horrible-ass movie"
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: iamzack on September 17, 2009, 02:51:43 pm
Why all the hype? It didn't look great from the beginning to me.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Blue Lion on September 17, 2009, 02:53:12 pm
Quote from: iamzack on September 17, 2009, 02:51:43 pm
Why all the hype?

Tim Burton
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 17, 2009, 02:54:45 pm
Tim Burton's not even director they just put his name on there.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Mongoose on September 17, 2009, 02:59:58 pm
Quote from: iamzack on September 17, 2009, 02:51:43 pm
Why all the hype? It didn't look great from the beginning to me.
Because it was a PG-13 animated movie, a huge rarity in this country, and because the post-apocalyptic setting looked really cool.  Oh, and because the protagonist looked like he stepped straight out of Little Big Planet.  I've heard that the movie didn't wind up living up to the hype, but I still wouldn't mind seeing it anyway.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: General Battuta on September 17, 2009, 03:05:51 pm
The YouTube short it was based on was really cool, thus the hype.

Predates LittleBigPlanet too.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: BloodEagle on September 17, 2009, 03:08:03 pm
They should have just shown the damned short.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: MR_T3D on September 17, 2009, 03:42:21 pm
Tim Burton has yet to create/slap his name on anything that would entertain me.
not suprised, at all.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Mongoose on September 17, 2009, 03:58:30 pm
Quote from: MR_T3D on September 17, 2009, 03:42:21 pm
Tim Burton has yet to create/slap his name on anything that would entertain me.
not suprised, at all.
If you didn't like The Nightmare Before Christmas, you have no soul.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Rian on September 17, 2009, 04:22:07 pm
This is the original short, for those who are interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IQcMeNh7Hc

I had two reactions to the movie. The first was that it was absolutely gorgeous. The environments were beautifully detailed and atmospheric, the animation was great, and the monsters were truly menacing. Barring a minor, technical objection to the character designs (which I suspect nobody else cares about in the slightest), the movie's visuals were a genuine treat.

That said, the writing was piss awful. It was clumsy. The dialogue was trite, the plot was nonsensical and arbitrary, and the big reveal at the end had no bearing whatsoever on the rest of the story. In terms of storytelling, the original ten-minute short (with no dialogue) was far more effective.

If you're a fan of rich apocalyptic environments and spooky garbage robot monsters, then by all means go and see it. Just don't expect any kind of literary genius.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: iamzack on September 17, 2009, 05:37:41 pm
I liked the short.

But I can't imagine it as a full-length movie. The characters are all so cutesy.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: NGTM-1R on September 17, 2009, 06:32:58 pm
Quote from: MR_T3D on September 17, 2009, 03:42:21 pm
Tim Burton has yet to create/slap his name on anything that would entertain me.
not suprised, at all.

You didn't watch both of the original Batman movies, before Joel Schumaker got ahold of the franchise, did you?
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Akalabeth Angel on September 17, 2009, 09:24:26 pm
Quote from: NGTM-1R on September 17, 2009, 06:32:58 pm
Quote from: MR_T3D on September 17, 2009, 03:42:21 pm
Tim Burton has yet to create/slap his name on anything that would entertain me.
not suprised, at all.

You didn't watch both of the original Batman movies, before Joel Schumaker got ahold of the franchise, did you?

Sleepy Hollow was great too.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: darkone on September 17, 2009, 10:25:40 pm
Guess this will just be a rental with all the negative feedback its getting. I watched a trailer to it when watching some ComicCon coverage on G4 and thought it looked good.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: BloodEagle on September 17, 2009, 10:30:36 pm
The trailer was freaking incredible. It also contained 30% of all the dialogue (if you can call it that) and 80% of all the character development (if you can call it that) in the movie. :/

::EDITED... FOR SCIENCE::
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Bobboau on September 18, 2009, 12:51:12 am
great movie. horrible dialog.

if you take every talking scene out of this movie, it would be a masterpiece, the atmosphere, the style, the animation, the action, character design, are all perfect, the 'basic' plot is good (the whole humanity wiped out, inventor of the machine that did it trying to leave something to live on after) and the voice acting if you ignore the actual words being said is well delivered. however, the script, the pacing, the story (i.e. the actual events in the movie) all that sucked. BUT I think the good outweighed the bad ever so slightly.

I was however very disappointed.

if you go wanting to see a movie about a race of sentient toys trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic nightmare realm relentlessly hunted by knife faced murderbots built from the bones of a dead world and fueled by the soles of the damned and the nightmares of children. you WILL get that, and you WILL be satisfied. if you go hoping to get a well written story with good dialog, interesting characters and a solid plot, you will leave early, crying.

I was hoping for both but only got half what I wanted.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Colonol Dekker on September 18, 2009, 12:59:06 am
Quote from: Mongoose on September 17, 2009, 03:58:30 pm
Quote from: MR_T3D on September 17, 2009, 03:42:21 pm
Tim Burton has yet to create/slap his name on anything that would entertain me.
not suprised, at all.
If you didn't like The Nightmare Before Christmas, you have no soul.

 
The 89 Batman for **** sake. . . . . Beats begins with a lead pipe.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Mongoose on September 18, 2009, 02:07:15 pm
Quote from: Colonol Dekker on September 18, 2009, 12:59:06 am
The 89 Batman for **** sake. . . . . Beats begins with a lead pipe.
I'd vehemently disagree, but at the very least, it was no *shudder* Shumacher movie.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Nuke on September 19, 2009, 12:34:15 am
my opinion of this movie is if you did the road warrior with hello kitty characters, this would be what you get. seeing that i like post apocalyptic movies (some of them less than b side), i will probibly go see it just for the hell of it.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Mefustae on September 21, 2009, 07:13:08 am
*Kicks dirt*

Goddamn it. I was looking forward to seeing this.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Mr. Vega on September 21, 2009, 05:09:15 pm
Burton made two good movies in his entire career, Batman Returns and Big Fish. That's it.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: TrashMan on September 21, 2009, 05:24:53 pm
Does the move ever explain how the sack/toy people and the evil machine came to be in the first place?
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Rian on September 21, 2009, 05:47:53 pm
Yes, a scientist made them.

Spoiler:
And he put his soul into the rag dolls, but not the machine. That's why the machine turned evil.
Did I mention that the plot was stupid? I think I did.
Title: Re: 9, Redux
Post by: Bobboau on September 22, 2009, 01:05:01 am
Quote from: Mefustae on September 21, 2009, 07:13:08 am
*Kicks dirt*

Goddamn it. I was looking forward to seeing this.

still go see it, just try to find it in a foreign language.