I rented it and decided I had to see it twice because I was blown away the first time. It is so good I am getting off of the fence and buying a new BluRay player along with it, and Terminator Salvation. I also thought Pandorum was pretty good, although it started kind of slow.
We viewed the first half of Gamer last night… I can’t stand the shaky cam films. Get a freakin tripod. I thought Hollywood got a clue from Cloverfield reviews, guess not. If they think we are so riddled with ADD that we can’t hold our attention on a scene longer than 200 ms I’m just not interested. I can do without the 2 hours of a high motion montage. Pandorum on the other hand was decent, like a mid budget alien flick.
Probably because it was rated so low by critics. It was marketed as a mindless action flick and sold like one.
I would like to see Pandorum. Reviews say it’s similar to Alien.
I was very disappointed to see Micheal Hall in such a shit ass movie - it was pathetic.
Haven’t seen it yet. Let’s examine that.
One, the posters up at Mart show another guy carrying a weapon. That’s it. The title is “Gamer.” Both imply it’s a video game set in the real world. That automatically make the plot suspect for adults over thirty, because the clear presentation is that it’s a fantasy based action flick with unrealistic effects.
What, again? Bummer.
Now I read about shaky camera effects. I had my fill of that with District 9, which could have done better drawing me in if it wasn’t so full of artsy fartsy camera effects, like the fake documentary opening, etc.
What, another? Bummer.
Having just read an interview with Stephen Hunter, who wrote the book “Shooter” was based on, I’d rather rent that again and see how the gun class the cast and crew attended made things more accurate. I’ve seen it and remember I didn’t nit pick inexcusable technicals - it was the plot.
Since “Gamer” is obviously geared to a youthful audience with every indication of being a visually difficult movie to watch and most likely filled with impossible stunts and life threatening weapons handling, I’ll probably wait until it’s 1) Free 2) My laptop is broken.
Hollywood in it’s vast ignorance sells flops. Sometimes the public sees it coming.
I watched it the other day.
I think my IQ dropped a few points from it. Very bad film… I forced myself to finish watching it
I guess I like movies that are a little different. The fact that the movie was shot with a RED camera wasn’t lost on me. Even with just a regular DVD player the movie looked amazingly clear with vibrant colors. The shaky camera does take away from the film, but the story was pretty damn good.
I like to think that there is no box, so maybe that’s why I liked it.
On another note, I think the RED camera is the wave of the future.
wow crazy concept :eek:
It did poorly because it had a goofy plot, and one thats not all that original, just a remake of running man with a new twist.
Not to mention pretty graphic just too be graphic, most of the movie had zero relevance and was just added because with out it the film would have been over in 30 minutes.
I give it 3 out of 5.
Well, the whole “live video game” premise might work with the Nintendo generation but holds no appeal for anyone else.
Pretty sure “the Nintendo generation” is 30+ at this point.
…I agree that the movie looks ridiculous.
PS4 Generation?
Meh…I’d go with “Xbox generation” if it were me.
(It’s PS3)
Prepubescent video game playing punks, no mater what console they use.