Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How the RE films get made...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • As long as what he's doing sells, he has no reason to stop or change.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Darkmoon View Post
      As long as what he's doing sells, he has no reason to stop or change.
      Anderson is our Michael Bay.

      Michael doesn't care about the art. Or his movies looking really, really dated in a few years due to excessive cgi work. Or having a good script (see Transformers 2). Or giving work to crap actors Megan Fox (who said she could act?). And have you notice that Shia LaBeouf screams all his lines?

      Yet he makes money. And he'll do it again with Transformers 3.

      So why would Anderson change? if what he does also brings in the cash?
      Last edited by Pikminister; 06-10-2011, 12:16 PM.
      Stuff to remember: Avoid forums if you're having a bad day.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Trent View Post
        It's like doing something half hearted and getting well paid for it.
        That's because he's a 'Copy and Paste' director dude.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by KylieDog View Post
          Being with them for love is good and all but hypothetically I'm not gonna move into a mud hut because that is where the love of my life can afford to live.
          Yup, there is nothing wrong with this either.

          I don't believe in soulmates, I don't think there is one key person out there for everyone. That's just a little too unrealistic for me, I think there's so many people that can connect and love. So no, it's not insane to want someone you get along with, but also can afford to actually live somewhere decent.

          As for Mila, well there's gotta be something she likes about Paul aside from money...cause she easily makes enough for herself, right?

          Also the comparison to Michael Bay is just perfect xD

          Comment


          • For all you people slagging off Paul W.S. Anderson, this is my response:



            That is all, sir.
            See you in hell.

            Comment


            • That's not really a good defense case for Anderson. Should have used Event Horizon.

              Comment


              • But everyone's used Event Horizon already. I felt like providing some support fire.
                See you in hell.

                Comment


                • For those you attempting to defend Anderson...



                  Clone Army.

                  Comment


                  • That's true, but he did kill all of them off as quickly as he'd introduced them.

                    Comment


                    • ...in other words, 'Oh God, what do I do now, I've added a army of clones for no reason and killed all the plants so everyone is going to die because there's no oxygen? I know! I'll blow all the clones up 15 minutes into the next film without even a crappy, 'Is she the real Alice?' subplot to justify there existence and completely ignore the fact the world was a desert in the film before. No one will ever notice my crappy writing now!'

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mr. Spencer View Post
                        But everyone's used Event Horizon already. I felt like providing some support fire.
                        You're right, but you kind of see how weak our defense is, right?

                        Comment


                        • To be honest yeah, but I like a challenge. Defending Paul W.S. Anderson is like fighting on the side of the Texans at the Battle of the Alamo.
                          Last edited by Mr. Spencer; 06-12-2011, 10:28 AM.
                          See you in hell.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Pikminister View Post
                            Anderson is our Michael Bay.

                            Michael doesn't care about the art. Or his movies looking really, really dated in a few years due to excessive cgi work. Or having a good script (see Transformers 2). Or giving work to crap actors Megan Fox (who said she could act?). And have you notice that Shia LaBeouf screams all his lines?

                            Yet he makes money. And he'll do it again with Transformers 3.

                            So why would Anderson change? if what he does also brings in the cash?
                            I dunno I quite like Shia Lebeouf (always thought that was a funny name) in eagle eye, that was a decent film. As for Michael Bay... hes good at making his massive action epics but your right, he will most likely never make a thought provoking, artistic film, luckily theres other directors for that they just dont get the spotlight I feel they deserve.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mr. Spencer View Post
                              To be honest yeah, but I like a challenge. Defending Paul W.S. Anderson is like fighting on the side of the Texans at the Battle of the Alamo.
                              The Texans didn't have Alexia on their side though

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mr. Spencer View Post
                                For all you people slagging off Paul W.S. Anderson, this is my response:



                                That is all, sir.
                                Pre-empted that one with my response. Written on 05 - 28 - 2011

                                Originally posted by Rombie
                                You also haven't seen a really shit Anderson film until you've seen Soldier with Kurt Russell. Now that is a steaming pile.
                                :p
                                Last edited by Rombie; 06-13-2011, 07:08 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X