|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Unbreakable
|
Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover
Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 12-06-2010 07:23 AM
***
If there is a movie by M. Night Shyamalan that deserves The Criterion Treatment, than this is it. I don't remember a film with so my camera shots that start in different rooms, pan up/down back/forth side/side....also there are so many long shots. Distracting or not, it deserves some mention.
Bruce Willis is good. So is Jackson and Penn. According to IMDB, the budget of this movie was 75million, not sure where they spent it. Oh I know where, Willis, Shyamalan, Wright Penn and Jackson were paid a combined $39.5 million for this movie. That leaves just over $35 million for production.
I didn't like the last few minutes all that much. It would of been better if they remained friends and Willis never knew.
Also, the beginning of the credits with the a M. Night Shyamalan kinds of spoiled the mood, I now know why there so many long, long, long takes that start in different rooms an such..
Sound was solid.
THX DVD
DTS Sound (the more I watch movies with DTS, the more I like it over DD)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover
Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 12-29-2010 10:05 PM
quote: Chris Slycord
I know I need new glasses and all, but I saw him say that Armageddon was better than he remembered and rated it higher than this movie, giving it 3 1/2 (out of 4 I assume) stars.
I said Unbreakable should possible be a Criterion Movie simply for the way it was made. There are so many long shots that do not cut. Yes there is editing but there also long extended scenes where camera is one continuous shot. If you are a film student, then watch this movie for simply the way it was filmed. Then you have whole budget thing, $40m to four key principles and $35m to production. Abosolutely out of this world budgeting.
And the fact that Unbreakable is somewhat of comic book movie that came out before the wave of comic books movies.
I just didnt like the ending.
In contrast to Armageddon. Armageddon looks like it has a million dollars spent on every since minute of production. Add its the size and scope of the movie, and the most rediculous plot, and Billboard Chart Soundtrack, incredible sound and you have a film that is important somewhat. Yes it is a long music video, but there isn't much like this out there.
A movie that according to New Scientist: "NASA shows the film as part of its management training program. Prospective managers are asked to find as many inaccuracies in the movie as they can. At least 168 impossible things have been found during these screenings of the film."
Add in 4 Oscar Noms,
Add in 1/2 Billion dollars in worldwide sales
NASA screening the movie
The sheer size and scope of the movie
A 70mm blow up
Also, it should be mentioned that Armageddon opened with a $36 million opening on its way to a $200m domestic gross. The film had some legs.
Yes, Armageddon is trash, but it is trash that people paid to see. Getting people to go see your movie is the hardest thing about movie making.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kurt Zupin
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 989
From: Maricopa, Arizona
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 12-29-2010 10:16 PM
quote:
I said Unbreakable should possible be a Criterion Movie simply for the way it was made. There are so many long shots that do not cut. Yes there is editing but there also long extended scenes where camera is one continuous shot. If you are a film student, then watch this movie for simply the way it was filmed. Then you have whole budget thing, $40m to four key principles and $35m to production. Abosolutely out of this world budgeting.
And the fact that Unbreakable is somewhat of comic book movie that came out before the wave of comic books movies.
I just didnt like the ending.
In contrast to Armageddon. Armageddon looks like it has a million dollars spent on every since minute of production. Add its the size and scope of the movie, and the most rediculous plot, and Billboard Chart Soundtrack, incredible sound and you have a film that is important somewhat.
A movie that according to New Scientist: "NASA shows the film as part of its management training program. Prospective managers are asked to find as many inaccuracies in the movie as they can. At least 168 impossible things have been found during these screenings of the film."
Add in 4 Oscar Noms,
Add in 1/2 Billion dollars in worldwide sales
NASA screening the movie
The sheer size and scope of the movie
A 70mm blow up
Also, it should be mentioned that Armageddon opened with a $36 million opening on its way to a $200m domestic gross. The film had some legs.
Sometimes I wonder if you just "talk" to hear yourself "talk" Your just rambling on and on.
Unbreakable and Signs were M. Nights last ok movies, not great but not horrible. He is a horrible director, great writer sure but not a great director. He killed himself for me with Lady in the water where he gave himeself a full on role. I liked his cameo's and was fine with that, but when he gave himself one of the main characters I was done.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic