Originally posted by: PSYCHO_DAYV
I LIKED IT BECAUSE IT WAS VISUALLY STUNNING, AND THE MUSIC WAS SUPERB.
Alright, I'll give you that the music was great. But wasn't, like, 90% of it just rehashed from the game? I don't remember many original tracks in it, but I could be wrong.
Everescent - Yeah, let's just agree to disagree.
But there are a few quick points I want to bring up.
This at least has an explanation. Cloud is PUMPED FULL of Mako. Mako increases his strength. But it does it to a believable extent. It doesn't give him the power to jump HUNDREDS OF FEET and to take SWORDS AND GUNS directly to the face all the time. It makes him He-Man, not Superman.
As for your edit: If I took the time to list EVERY SINGLE THING in the movie that broke the suspension of disbelief, my post obviously would have been MUCH LONGER. I only pointed out a few things because I didn't want to take the time to LIST EVERYTHING and ANALYZE it, but I still wanted to get my point across.
And there you have it. Some people can appreciate a good thing, even if it was preceeded by and associated with an even better thing.
I LIKED IT BECAUSE IT WAS VISUALLY STUNNING, AND THE MUSIC WAS SUPERB.
Alright, I'll give you that the music was great. But wasn't, like, 90% of it just rehashed from the game? I don't remember many original tracks in it, but I could be wrong.
Everescent - Yeah, let's just agree to disagree.
But there are a few quick points I want to bring up.
You know what would have really sucked? If for all the fight scenes, everyone lined up on their respective sides of the battlefield, ran at one another and whacked each other with their weapon or shot or whatever, then went back to their side.
People always try bringing up this argument, but I just don't see how it works. There is an obvious middle between DBZ style action (the kind in the film) and RPG style action (the kind in the game). I don't see how people fail to see the OBVIOUS middle between the two. That's what I was expecting the movie to have, the middle kind. The action just got WAY to over the top and corny, and in the end, just ruined a lot of scenes. The ONLY fight scene which I think was GOOD and ACCURATE to the game was the Tifa fight in the Church. If you watch the movie, you can tell there's a huge difference between that fight, and almost all the others.
First off, action films and sci-fi films CAN have realism. There's no reason to "find a different genre" just because I'm looking for some BELIEVEABILITY. But to be honest, I'm NOT a big action film fan.
Let me put it this way. There are two types of movies: Brain on movies, and brain off movies. Sure we all love the occasional brain off movie. But I was expecting a sequel to FF7 to be a VERY big brain on movie. Instead, it was a brain off.
What the hell do you want from Cloud, who is wielding a weapon of his size in the first place?
People always try bringing up this argument, but I just don't see how it works. There is an obvious middle between DBZ style action (the kind in the film) and RPG style action (the kind in the game). I don't see how people fail to see the OBVIOUS middle between the two. That's what I was expecting the movie to have, the middle kind. The action just got WAY to over the top and corny, and in the end, just ruined a lot of scenes. The ONLY fight scene which I think was GOOD and ACCURATE to the game was the Tifa fight in the Church. If you watch the movie, you can tell there's a huge difference between that fight, and almost all the others.
You want realism? Go find a different genre.
First off, action films and sci-fi films CAN have realism. There's no reason to "find a different genre" just because I'm looking for some BELIEVEABILITY. But to be honest, I'm NOT a big action film fan.
Let me put it this way. There are two types of movies: Brain on movies, and brain off movies. Sure we all love the occasional brain off movie. But I was expecting a sequel to FF7 to be a VERY big brain on movie. Instead, it was a brain off.
What the hell do you want from Cloud, who is wielding a weapon of his size in the first place?
This at least has an explanation. Cloud is PUMPED FULL of Mako. Mako increases his strength. But it does it to a believable extent. It doesn't give him the power to jump HUNDREDS OF FEET and to take SWORDS AND GUNS directly to the face all the time. It makes him He-Man, not Superman.
As for your edit: If I took the time to list EVERY SINGLE THING in the movie that broke the suspension of disbelief, my post obviously would have been MUCH LONGER. I only pointed out a few things because I didn't want to take the time to LIST EVERYTHING and ANALYZE it, but I still wanted to get my point across.
And there you have it. Some people can appreciate a good thing, even if it was preceeded by and associated with an even better thing.
C'mon. GOOD CGI and GOOD MUSIC does not automatically make a movie GOOD. I mean, honestly, are you listening to what you're saying? Since when has "it looked pretty" been a valid reason to call a movie GOOD. Seeing as how you're at OT.com, I'd assume you'd all realize that GOOD SCORE and GOOD CGI do NOT make a good movie. Ugh! TPM had a great score, and at the time, beautiful CGI. But it strongly lacked in story. Most of you hated it. How is it any different than AC?
The prequels were all preceeded and associated with a greater thing, and most of you DIDN'T appreciate them. So I don't see how you have any room to talk about AC as if it was some AMAZING MASTERPIECE.
I admit that AC's CG and music were AMAZING. But did you guys actually pay attention to the rest? You admitted, Everescent, that the story isn't good. But how can you like a movie which is suppose to be STORY DRIVEN when it doesn't have a good story?! I just don't understand it. Please, explain to me WHAT IS SO AMAZING ABOUT THIS MOVIE, and don't use "looks" and "sounds" as an example. I don't want to hear about the surface of the movie, tell me what it was about the core. The SUBSTANCE. I bet you can't, because there WAS NO CORE. It was an empty shell.
Maybe a beautiful shell, but still an empty one. And I just don't understand how people can find an empty shell so amazing. I don't understand how you can like something ONLY for it's looks, and completely ignore the fact that it has no substance to it.
Like you said, I guess we just have fundamental differences in opinion. So we're really not gonna get anywhere in this debate. I guess I brought up more than just a "few quick points." Sorry!