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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » Armageddon (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Armageddon Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 12-05-2010 02:53 AM                    Ok, I have not seen this movie since it was release way back in 1998. I still remember where I saw it, the Silver City Mississauga 10...the a Famous Players. Anyways, I was always curious as to why Criterion would make a Criterion Collection version. I didn't think it was that good when I saw it then. Well, 12 years later, I purchased the Criterion Collection of the movie and I was surprised at how much I liked this movie now that time has passed. The thing that amazed me what the sheer complexity of this movie. Every scene looks like it has millions of dollars spent on it. Then the editing, sound and production design all are pretty impressive. Then add in all the visuals, you have one extremely complicated movie. Now the story is whatever, I liked the characters and actors who played them. Liv Tyler was horrible, but I guess she played a 20 year old correctly. I was shocked to learn there was a 70mm blow up of this film. Also received 4 Oscars noms. Overall an impressive movie IMO deserves the Criterion treatment simply because of the size of the picture involved. ***1/2 DVD Sound: 5.1 Dolby Digital  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Smith Expert Film Handler Posts: 201 From: Youngstown, OH Registered: Jan 2010 posted 12-05-2010 10:43 AM                     I always joke that "Armageddon" got the extra half star (1-1/2 out of 4) because of the soundtrack. Cinematography it was beautifully photographed, but you have heard the story about polishing a turd. . .  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-05-2010 08:38 PM                        I hated that movie with a passion. I didn't even like how it looked. It'll take more than that to get my attention. ALL of the characters are horrible and they ALL deserve to die within the first 3 minutes of the movie.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-05-2010 09:41 PM                     To me, Armageddon played more like a 2+ hour long movie trailer rather than an actual movie. Style over substance run amok.  |  IP: Logged Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 12-06-2010 04:42 AM                    quote: Bobby Henderson 2+ hour long movie trailer That was a popular thing back then. Not sure if Bruckheimer can get away with it anymore.  |  IP: Logged Sam Graham AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues. Posts: 1431 From: Waukee, IA Registered: Dec 2004 posted 12-06-2010 10:22 AM                        Really? Criterion saw fit to take on Armageddon? Armageddon would near the top of my 'worst movies ever' list if I kept such a thing. That was just painful to watch...even at a drive-in.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 12-06-2010 11:33 AM                        quote: Tom Petrov That was a popular thing back then. No it wasn't. Despite my youthful appearance, I was actually alive back when this movie came out. It did well for the first two weeks and then tapered off quickly once people saw how craptastic it was. I don't remember any other 2+ hour long trailers. Oh, and it's a crappy trailer, too!  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-06-2010 12:04 PM                        It was a colossal waste of estar stock when it was released, and now it's an even colossaler waste of shiny disc stuff. The Criterion guys must have been smoking that funny weed when they decided to get the rights to release this one.  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Smith Expert Film Handler Posts: 201 From: Youngstown, OH Registered: Jan 2010 posted 12-06-2010 12:27 PM                     Frank, you can at least rest comfortably knowing that said estar stock was efficiently turned into confetti after the movie quickly died. Weren't movies still fluctuating between acetate and polyester until the early 2000s though? I forget when 2383 came out (Kodak Vision Print stock) but the EXR print stock it replaced (forget the numerical designation) still had the option of a 5- (acetate) base. According to the Skeptical Internet Knowledge Database, it was shot at least in part on EXR negative, so it could've been either one. . . 35 mm (Eastman EXR 100T 5248, Kodak Vision 500T 5279, EXR 200T 5293)  |  IP: Logged Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 12-06-2010 01:26 PM                    quote: Sam Graham Really? Criterion saw fit to take on Armageddon? Armageddon was the very last Criterion laserdisc released. It retailed for $99. The Rock also got the Criterion treatment. I think it did deserve the Criterion treatment, looking back it wasn't as bad a movie as I first thought. Also, the complexity of the whole picture is why I say it deserves it.  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Smith Expert Film Handler Posts: 201 From: Youngstown, OH Registered: Jan 2010 posted 12-06-2010 02:32 PM                     quote: Joe Redifer Despite my youthful appearance, I was actually alive back when this movie came out. Is there anyone on here that, WASN'T alive in 1998??? Maybe there are a few 12-year-old projectionists from Malaysia on here, but they technically wouldn't be allowed to post until they are 13, right?.  |  IP: Logged Martin McCaffery Film God Posts: 2481 From: Montgomery, AL Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-06-2010 02:53 PM                        Armageddon is one of my favorite guilty pleasure movies. I've seen the whole thing several times, but have never, and could never, sit through the whole thing. It was made to be seen on commercial television, the commercial breaks make it tolerable. As for the soundtrack, jeez, you could watch the movie with your eyes closed and know exactly how you are supposed to respond every second. It never shuts up. But whenever Liv Tyler comes on [sigh]. You can practically hear the director: "Ok Liv, look beautiful and happy." "Ok Live, look beautiful and unhappy." "Ok Live, look beautiful and confused." "No, no, Liv, Don't Talk!"  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Smith Expert Film Handler Posts: 201 From: Youngstown, OH Registered: Jan 2010 posted 12-06-2010 04:33 PM                     I saw a great thread once about "Michael Bay" director stereotypes, basically in the form of script notes.. One of them was. . . "Beautiful female scientist enters the room. She wears glasses because she is intelligent." I often wonder how visual cliches about good guys being pretty and bad guys being ugly affects the minds of young children (The whole cowboy wears white and rides a white horse if the good guy, bad guy rides a black horse and has a scraggly beard.)  |  IP: Logged Joe Tommassello Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 547 From: Coatesville, PA, USA Registered: Jan 2008 posted 12-28-2010 10:56 AM                  You guys can piss all over this movie all you want...but if I am flipping channels and see it (which seems to be quite often) I am invariably going to watch it through to the end. At least that's how it was before the blu-ray came out.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-28-2010 01:35 PM                     If a certain movie is broadcast numerous times on cable TV that somehow qualifies it as "good?" Every broadcast network shows a lot of suck-tastic movies repeatedly, some which are so laughably bad Armageddon can stand above them on the sheer basis of its visuals. A couple mornings ago I turned on the TV to find Ghost Dad playing on one of the HBO channels. My reaction was "WTF?" That 1990 movie, starring Bill Cosby, was a flop. Just terrible. Maybe HBO was just trying to fill some space on the programming grid. Lots of bad movies get played on cable all the time. Why Hackers gets any cable airplay at all is totally beyond me; Angelina Jolie looked better (and even got naked) in other movies. Anyone who knows anything about computers could easily conclude the folks behind Hackers didn't know squat about computers at all. "SyFy" plays quite a few straight to cable movies so bad the audience members should be ashamed of themselves for wasting 2 hours of their lives watching such shit. The dramatic quality of these movies is often on par with "soft core" cable porn, except you don't get the loads of nudity and simulated sex scenes. The thought which horrifies me is we'll see a LOT more of those kinds of movies made for TV (and far less of the better quality, big budget kind) if commercial movie theaters are eliminated. Of course, there is a significant market for grade F quality movies. My brother is one of those customers. I always get a good laugh out of his natural ability to rent lots of gawd awful straight to DVD movies. He doesn't realize those movies were never released in theaters but he manages to pick them off the shelves anyway. It's uncanny.  |  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.