I thought this movie was so wretched, I had been ripped off at having paid $0.00 to watch it. I felt I should have been compensated for my time. I had to join two internet forums to complain about it just to get on with my life.
MMT really took 'predictable' to the next level, in that it followed a Bad Monster Movie Horror Formula to the level, apparantly without having any idea why. "There's no compelling reason for the character to do this, but this is how it's happened in other monster movies, so I guess that'll just happen."
Movies have been around for over a century so the predictability argument never worked for me. Everything is a ripoff of something, even unintentional. It's always about the execution of the idea now and days.
With that in mind, the movie was just boring and badly paced. It took one hour and 14 minutes before the movie got a bit interesting. That was also when I correctly predicted the ending.
Clive Barker movies are lot like Stephen King movies: ludicrous and tedious. But now we have a director I don't care for either (Ryuhei Kitamura) whose Versus I found to be badly paced and over-rated. Alive was an alright flick.
Brooke Shields was great in MMT though. I never had a problem with her.
I find your statement about predictability too vague to dispute. ¬_¬
I'm glad you mentioned pacing. I am continually amazed by directors who can have great vast swatches where nothing happens and still call their movie a "thriller." It's a good thing I was doing laundry during MMT, or I would have fallen asleep.
I also really liked Brooke Shields' character, and was INCREDIBLY disappointed in how the final disposition of the film totally invalidated her performance. She was able to sell a with-it, artistic, passionate woman who truly has her finger on the pulse of the city...but by creating this gigantic stupid conspiracy about "how things REALLY" are, her character loses all credibility. When Brooke knows less than the dumb cop from the last scene, she becomes just another idiot civilian. It was a shitty thing to do to the only vivid, compelling character in the movie.
Why does it need to be disputed? And if it's vague, why don't you point out what exactly you'd like for me to elaborate on?
And regarding the pacing, I've never been a fan of Ryuhei Kitamura and I've seen a few of his films. He's only good with action scenes. Any drama scenes he just tends to fail.
See, I actually liked it quite a bit, and that it has been one of the better horror movies I've seen in a few years, but that's just me. It's also probably one of the best short stories from The Books of Blood by Clive in the early 80's. Basically, I've noticed a lot of people either loving this film, or absolutely hating it, and they're entitled to their opinion. I thought the film was beautiful shot, I loved the characters, and Vinnie Jones kicks serious fuckin' ass in the film.
So, at least watch the film and make your own opinion. Who knows, you might actually like it quite a bit.
The characters? The only valid motivation someone in the movie had for doing something was him shooting the model, to get into the art show. Everything else was akin to investigating a strange noise in the woods. Oh, and WHY haven't we just butchered these things yet? Nobody in New York has any respect for human life? Okay, that's 100% believeable.
Sadly, I agree that the last decent horror movie to come out was The Ring. "The Mist" would have been okay, if it had ended any other way at all. You might like it. :P
I gave it three stars because it wasn't a completely terrible film. The cinematography was excellent as was the editing. Some of the death scenes had interesting cuts and pans, particularly the second female victim in the film.
And apparently Saw's gameplay is going to be somehow related to the old Tecmo game Deception, which I never played but heard nice things. I'd give it a try.
House of the Dead was a fucking terrible movie too but I'd give it 3 out of 5 stars. Terrible movies to me are films that are not what they make themselves to be.
MMT was not 1) Scary 2) Frightening 3) Intriguing (except for the brooke shields parts) 4) Interesting
MMT was 1) Boring 2) Slow 3) Implausible 4) Unintentionally amusing 5) A misuse of Vinnie Jones
Kudos to Lion Gate for not wasting money with a theatrical release.
on the other hand it gave Gabe a reason to call me at midnight for weeks asking if i wanted to ride the midnight meat train.... which was pretty amusing/anoying. *hehe*
Comments 16
Reply
Reply
I thought this movie was so wretched, I had been ripped off at having paid $0.00 to watch it. I felt I should have been compensated for my time. I had to join two internet forums to complain about it just to get on with my life.
MMT really took 'predictable' to the next level, in that it followed a Bad Monster Movie Horror Formula to the level, apparantly without having any idea why. "There's no compelling reason for the character to do this, but this is how it's happened in other monster movies, so I guess that'll just happen."
Pure crap.
Reply
With that in mind, the movie was just boring and badly paced. It took one hour and 14 minutes before the movie got a bit interesting. That was also when I correctly predicted the ending.
Clive Barker movies are lot like Stephen King movies: ludicrous and tedious. But now we have a director I don't care for either (Ryuhei Kitamura) whose Versus I found to be badly paced and over-rated. Alive was an alright flick.
Brooke Shields was great in MMT though. I never had a problem with her.
Reply
I'm glad you mentioned pacing. I am continually amazed by directors who can have great vast swatches where nothing happens and still call their movie a "thriller." It's a good thing I was doing laundry during MMT, or I would have fallen asleep.
I also really liked Brooke Shields' character, and was INCREDIBLY disappointed in how the final disposition of the film totally invalidated her performance. She was able to sell a with-it, artistic, passionate woman who truly has her finger on the pulse of the city...but by creating this gigantic stupid conspiracy about "how things REALLY" are, her character loses all credibility. When Brooke knows less than the dumb cop from the last scene, she becomes just another idiot civilian. It was a shitty thing to do to the only vivid, compelling character in the movie.
Reply
And regarding the pacing, I've never been a fan of Ryuhei Kitamura and I've seen a few of his films. He's only good with action scenes. Any drama scenes he just tends to fail.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
So, at least watch the film and make your own opinion. Who knows, you might actually like it quite a bit.
Reply
Sadly, I agree that the last decent horror movie to come out was The Ring. "The Mist" would have been okay, if it had ended any other way at all. You might like it. :P
Reply
Going to purchase the Saw videogame? :-P
Reply
And apparently Saw's gameplay is going to be somehow related to the old Tecmo game Deception, which I never played but heard nice things. I'd give it a try.
Reply
Wow, glad I got that figured out. :O
*tickles*
Reply
MMT was not
1) Scary
2) Frightening
3) Intriguing (except for the brooke shields parts)
4) Interesting
MMT was
1) Boring
2) Slow
3) Implausible
4) Unintentionally amusing
5) A misuse of Vinnie Jones
Kudos to Lion Gate for not wasting money with a theatrical release.
Reply
on the other hand it gave Gabe a reason to call me at midnight for weeks asking if i wanted to ride the midnight meat train.... which was pretty amusing/anoying. *hehe*
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment