ElfTheHunter
-
Posts
2.546 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ElfTheHunter
-
-
“You traveled the world... Now you must journey inwards... to what you really fear... it's inside you... there is no turning back. Your parents' death was not your fault. Your training is nothing. The will is everything. If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely. Are you ready to begin?”
-Henri Ducard
Batman Begins
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Michael Caine…
Rated PG-13 for intense action violence, disturbing images and some thematic elements.
This movie gets it right. It is no secret that making movies based on comic characters is nothing new to Hollywood, but there is a new fever for comic book movies and amid all the Elektras and Daredevils there are a precious few who get it right, it began I guess with X-men. However it was Spiderman that shined first, in whose footsteps followed X2: The Threat and now Batman Begins.
Watch Ability – 8
Batman was great. A lot of fun, and not shallow fun. Yes, it was a bit heavy and slow at times, but any movie that takes it self seriously will have build-up which makes the movie overall better. But it does hurt this category. However, the action scenes were great. And the characters would have dialogue that helps the entire film feel lighter.
Genre Quality – 9
It may not be Spiderman 2 quality, but Batman definitely does not look cheap (and it wasn’t, with a $150 million budget). Gotham City looked amazing, no longer was it simply some fictional comic town, but neither was a real city. It had a very futuristic-look to a realistic city. And it is very appreciated to not see much CGI in a film. CGI has a way of making amazing sights look less amazing, when you are conscious and try to avoid CGI it gives the film more credibility and something you would consider normal for a CGI full movie now looks like it should look. However, at times it felt the quality was reaching a glimpse of the old Batmans like the train fight scene where it looks like something too unbelievable and doesn’t fit with the rest.
Originality – 8
Batman was brilliant. It did everything right, but somehow I never truly felt like it was making history (other than being the first great DC comic book movie of the new generation). Simple things like Batman telling Rachel who he was (while appreciated) didn’t have the effect it did in Spiderman 2, or the very rich character development (which I agree is better than Spiderman 1) but it was already done to some degree. I definitely think Batman Begins improves more than it invents, but I will not ignore the very big original realistic layer. Batman makes its characters and environment seem real, so when the extraordinary strikes it really hits home more than it does in any other comic book movie. Simple fact is how the usual super-powered villains of the comic books are created by simply the use of a mask and some very powerful hallucigens (sp?).
Acting – 8
Liam Neeson always manages to do a good job. And create awesome dialogue. I respect Christian Bale so much, but I must be honest that I was a bit disappointed with him in this movie. It’s not that he did bad, just that he didn’t amaze me as I expected. Maybe it’s not his fault, but Bale just didn’t seem to give Bruce as much life as Maguire gave to Peter. Maybe it’s just me. However both Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman were fantastical. I wasn’t per say disappointed with Katie Holmes (never had that high opinion of her) but she didn’t impress me.
Plot/Story – 9
Wow, I was blown away by the story. Batman never got a more deserving script.
The plot sets you up by telling the story of Bruce Wayne, and his soul-searching which takes him across the world. Into crime, into jail and finally to Henri Ducard who offers him the skills and knowledge to combat criminals and become a vigilante. From there Bruce returns to Gotham and the creation of Batman slowly begins. If you truly feel like you are seeing the beginning of Batman. And you begin to wonder if it will end after explaining the creation of Batman, I should say you start to worry. But it doesn’t, it shows you the first villain, the scarecrow. However, as it shows Batman dealing with his first villain the script begins to spin a twist and curve in your direction, and while I wondered what was happening I quickly was pulled back into the movie and didn’t think about it.
When I realized how the beginning of the film catches up with the end and provides a very well done twist, I knew I was seeing the best story in a comic book movie ever.Music/Sounds – 8
While the music was fine in its own right, it did disappoint me a little. You see, it does a fine job of moving scenes and adding background but it fails to provide Batman Begins what I consider comic book movies should have. A powerful title theme, it simply is not there. Spiderman had a strong orchestral theme with powerful choir. Batman never really defines a theme, or if it does it fails to show us that. But I won’t say the music was bad, just didn’t live up to the rest of the movie.
Trailer – 7
The trailer did a good job of keeping the plot hidden and deceive the audience into thinking the movie was more about Bruce Wayne than Batman, or at least it deceived me. However, it failed to really capture people. I was never excited by the trailer, only interested in the movie. Yes, it did a fine job of promoting the movie but didn’t put in me a fever for the movie.
Overall – 8.4
+: Character Development
+: Awesome Script
+: Original
- : Pale soundtrack
I know I promised two today, but you have to settle for one (hopefully I made the right choice, since more people seem interested in Batman than Smith). Anyway, my overall opinion of Batman is definitely positive, not as amazed as I was of Spiderman, but more of respect and honor. While Spiderman blew my mind, it felt like it was a lot of work to do so. Batman feels like it earned my respect with not as much work, but more thought and planning.
P.S. I will add the new rating system to my original Spiderman reviews so you can compare them (the flesh writing will remain the same, just different numbers).
-
Oh yes, very worthy of the M rating. More so than any GTA, there is nudity in it (for good or for worse
) -
So, on my Alienware laptop it only handles the low settings (thus looking like crap) but dunno what that crash was about, never happened again.
On my desktop I can turn everything to highest settings without lag, and not that beefy a system (2.4Ghz no HT, ATI Radeon 9700, Gig of Ram) but like others have stated, it still doesn't look good. Basically, this beta makes me worry for the actual game. Just very weird if you ask me... maybe they shouldn't release it just yet. And granted I only played single player (creating an account took 3 minutes and then i got tired of waiting) but its not that much fun either.
I thought the DS2 beta was dissapointing, this is worse... I have to try out F.E.A.R.
-
Heh, it doesn't even feel like Source had that much of a ruling era...
But while the graphics of Unreal 3 definently look amazing, I wonder how the overall package is, if it has realisitc physics, material sounds, lip-sync, bullet tracking, hidden loading, vehicle system, etc...
-
I agree, to some degree... I don't think they should have added to the length, but there are definently cuts they could have done in order to fit them in.
-
-
This was the best PS2 game I've played, and if it stands on its own even against big guys like HL2 and Halo 2!!! The graphics are great, the gameplay brilliant. Think of it as a better version of the PoP: Sands of Time. Good puzzles, Great cinematics, Great visuals, Awesome story, good voice work, the list goes on. Really, I would be hard pressed to find any real faults.
I had thought God of War was going to turn out to be a hype-driven game, basically a game Sony would hype into sales (sort of like Xbox's Fable and Brute Force) but it really is a very good game. And not that short either, I beat it in 3 days on easy (because it's rented, so I needed to get it done ASAP).
-
“I killed them. I killed them all. They're dead, every single one of them. And not just the men, but the women and the children, too. They're like animals, and I slaughtered them like animals. I HATE THEM..”
-Anakin
Star Wars: Episode II: Attack of the Clones
Directed by George Lucas
Hayden Christensen, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman…
Rated PG for sustained sequences of sci-fi action/violence.
No question, Clones is a big improvement over Menance. However, it is still far from the original Star Wars. It’s still very superficial, and feels like a well-done spin-off (which it kinda is). Basically, it begins to gain confidence in itself and almost becomes a movie of its own, but in the end it feels like it leans on the original Star Wars too much, and isn’t there to tell its own story but the story of another film.
Watch Ability – 7
It has its ups and its downs. The actions is good for most of the time, the visuals are great but it simply is not enough to carry you through. And as time begins to show on the CGI it will get even tougher to sit through it. The original Star Wars had great special effects, but after that faded there was still a cool story and idea behind them, I do not believe the same holds true to the new movies.
Genre Quality – 8
The movie is of higher quality than Menance, with some nice amazing shots and effects. But there are also some that fall a bit short such as the stormy water or several of the painted backgrounds. However, character design was super, with some awesome use of colors and lighting which may have surpassed the originals.
Originality – 6
Episode Two feels like they began getting ready to make films… the visuals surpass the Episode One in imagination and having characters go to places for a real reason, compared to Episode One’s ‘visiting’ feel is definitely a step in the right direction. But in the end, it all feels a bit too familiar…
Acting – 7
I believe that Christensen was the best thing to happen to this movie, he seems to be the only able brake through the script (or work with it) and make Anakin into a more developed character. His relationship with Obi-Wan gets more unique, although Padme doesn’t really hold her ground. I do not blame any of the actors, I blame George Lucas and his script…
Plot/Story – 6
While Episode Two is still plagued with the “Explain the Original” syndrome, it does do a better job of it. By throwing surprises and interests like the Clone Army and hinting at a old mystery around the Jedi’s and the Republic and the hints at the Sith plan are all nice additions. But in the end, it’s an explanation not a story.
Music/Sounds – 10
What can I say, John Williams is a god. And he proved it for the new Star Wars, providing music that is as memorable and powerful as the original trilogy received. Rich, deep and characterized the music practically spells out Star Wars. There is no question that the best thing Episode One had to offer was its soundtrack.
(copy/pasted from Episode One menance)
Trailer – 6
For Episode Two I definitely noticed an improvement from the Menace trailer, it still uses the Star Wars name assuming that’ll sell itself (which it did, but not enough of an excuse). But it did feel like I was seeing a preview to a movie with a plot, not just a bunch of random shots of cool looking Star War-sy places.
Overall – 7.3
+: Amazing FX
+: Great Music
- : A few visual flaws
- : Only improvements
I know I promised this a long time ago, but that’s me, I promise a lot of hot air. So here’s another one, expect Batman Begins and Mr. and Mrs. Smith tomorrow. Man, it’s just the actual flesh writing, I rate them within seconds. But yea, I’m quite interested in my Sith review… I myself am not sure if I liked it better than Clones, but we’ll find out.
-
Yes, Batman was awesome... I wouldn't put it above Spider-Man 2, and would not necesserily put it up ABOVE Spiderman 1 or X-men... but it is definently nice to see Bruce Wayne get as much attention, if not more, than Peter Parker. I really loved the realistic layer they added, with Scarecrow... However, I thought that further into the movie it got further and further from realistic and more original Batman... not enough to really hurt the movie, but enough to make me worry about the sequel. However, there is no question it is one of the best comic movies and the best DC comic movie!
I love that comic book characters are finally beng built on-screen, with Peter Parker getting a lot of build-up before Spiderman and Bruce Wayne even more before he became Batman. And, even after he became Batman he never made the transition to superhero but remained Bruce Wayne in a costume, not something Spiderman was able to do.
-
What's the realese date (2006 or 2007)?
-
Clint Mansell - Summer Overture
-
*yawns*
j/k
but seriously, where do you get this stuff... do you copy/paste from a secret encyclopedia, that's the most precise definition of Anime I've read...
-
Well, first you are assuming Bungie will allow anyone other than the real MC to voice the movie MC. I find it more likely they'll get a stunt double to play MC and have dialogue added later, hopefully...
I would hate it if we find out MC will be played by Tom Cruise, and for most of the film they have him without his helmet since they want to show Tom's face. And Cortana is played by Hale Berry... man, I'm getting the feeling this movie is not a good idea.
-
Eminem - White America
-
Well, finally got it installed (downloaded yesteday but had to work overnight).
It ran fine, no slow down... until the computer crashed (yep, the machine shut down, not simply the game). And it looked horrible, but granted I'm running it on my laptop. I'll try to up the quality and stop the crashes tomorrow, and try it on my desktop.
My specs:
Alienware
Windows XP P
3.0 Ghz w/HT
1 Gig DDR RAM (2 sticks)
nVidia Geforce FX Go5700
60 GB HD (5GB free)
We'll see how it runs on a real graphics card when I try it on my desktop. (by real I mean equivilant to this, but not a mobile one).
*dreams of a GT6800*
-
You mean the Red vs Blue guys?
-
Not Spirited Away, it's more similar to regular Disney cartoons like Lion King... I myself don't think of this movie as Anime in the usual sense of the word.
-
Well, have you ever seen one playing? Thus my conclusion.
-
Well, its true the little videogame to movie record is a bad record, but you have to consider that a good 70% of that is all one guy by the name of Uwe Boll. And at one point there was a very skeptical of comic movies, now we have Xmen and Spiderman and they are still coming strong. Basically, I'm saying that usually some pathetic attempts are required for people with talent and skills to do the great adaptations... I just hope that Halo will be the first such one.
I actually do not feel safe about this whole deal, it feels too much like MS is trying to rush it and I'm a bit afraid. To me a Halo movie has more pressure on it than the games, the games if they fail to be the greatest we forgive... but the movie will be first time impressions to millions, and they will always remember the first, like we remember the first Halo...
-
Sanghelli, try out for MC!!!
This is cool, I learned of the rumours on Wednesday from gamespy, but to they linked to a Variety article which I do not have a subscription to. And at the time it wasn't really that done of a deal... Thanks for the heads up.
-
Hehe, reading the list of features, sounds like features we plan in TLA (not all) and obviously different setting.
Ok, here's some advice:
Start looking for people who like the idea. Programmers, Artists, Game Designers... Actually, better yet, put some weight on your name by working on mods and scenarios over at Heavegames or other modding communities. Once you've proved that you got some skill or talent, and people know you and like you, get a few people who like the idea and are willing to help. Once you have a team, it will be easier (not easy) to get programmers, artists, musicians, voice actors, game designers, scripters, modelers, writers and all those people you need to pull this off.
You are deffinently welcome to try to learn programming and begin the engine, but a project has a bigger chance of success if there is a group of people attached to it (even if someone quits, others will still be there). I don't want to scare you away (though to be honest, I think you'll eventually give up) but game development like 0ad and TLA WILL take years on years, 0ad has been in development in one way or another since late 2001(?) and is still far from complete, TLA is even further behind... And this is once you start development, and assuming you are as lucky as we were. But if you are still determined to do this, by all means, get to work
-
Well, by then the aliens will have invaded and we all know they don't play video games.
But seriously, if we are talking about advanced technology like that then any form of speculation has little more value then now, it would be like a roman speculating about what technology we use... just simply beyond comprehension.
-
I know, Exize Hosting had a 3 day maintenance... It's back up now though.
-
I myself have the feeling that the console will grow, there's no reason to think that it would stop growing at its current rate, and if simply put, at its current rate it's overtaking PCs. A few years back it would be unheard of for a game like Halo to come out for a console and stay on a console for a year, now it's hard to keep PC games on PC for long.... HL2 is already being ported, the Doom 3 port is receiving a nicer acceptance even though it essentially is the same game. Blizzard is releasing their first console game ever... And I don't label RTS off the console path yet, the truth is that there is true competition in the console wars... MS, Sony and Ninento will keep trying to outdo the other one, leaving the pure power of PCs seeming like not enough. Already the Unreal 3 Engine seems to be predominatly a console gaming engine, what titles using that engine have been announced for PC?
However, I believe eventually ATI, Nvidia and others will have to start doing something to move the gaming industry back to PC. And developing for consoles is hard, expensive and not very approachable so newcomers will continue to develop for PCs.
And I believe it's a myth that eventually graphics will reach a peak, someone 10 years ago would have thought we had seen the peak. Heck, many people though Source was the peak, but already it's being overdone by Unreal 3. And within the next three years we'll hear of a new engine overdoing Unreal. The fact is, perfect realism does not exist in virtual graphics... And will never exist (imo). People will continue to want that extra layer, that extra hairline, that extra animation... and as hardware and tools develop, the cost to develop those will decrease.
When John Camrack was developing Doom, do you think he could even imagined he would some day program Doom 3? I believe 10 years from now, he'll be developing Doom 5 and it will be just such a jump in graphics, and Doom 7 as well. Now of course, maybe our very idea of computer graphics and game rendering will no longer apply by then, but there will be something to replace it. It might rely more on creativity and gameplay, but it will never be the sole concern of the gaming industry.
And btw, the Genie engine was leased to create Galactic Battleground, I'm sure AoEIII engine will be leased (it is by far the most advanced engine for an RTS).
I need some water
NewEth Review #19 – Batman Begins (8.4)
in Arts and Entertainment
Posted
That is true Mythos (and thanks King
) but Mythos, is reality really better. What defines something being real as being better, I mean, Star Wars is not really more realistic than most movies, yet (I'm talking of the originals) they are still great movies.
I know what you're saying, that you prefer a realistic superhero. But pay close attention to both my ratings:
Watchability:
Batman - 8, Spiderman 2 - 10
Now granted, all my ratings are ovbiously opinionated, but I find Spiderman 2 more fun. The action is more frequent, it simply is lighter and easier to watch. This does not equal by itself a better movie, as Titanic might not be very watchable, but it still is top dog in the movie list. And Fellowship of the Ring might not be as watchable as the Two Towers, but I still believe it's better. Simple fact is, Batman did a great job but it was a heavier load, more of a serious film.
Quality:
Batman - 9, Spiderman 2 - 10
Ok ok, you'll claim that good CGI is not substitute to the awesome real effects Batman does. But, no offense, it does. CGI can be a powerful tool if used right, look at the difference between Jar Jar Binks and Gollum. I guess this is debatable, but you gotta admit the scores are quite close.
Originality:
Batman - 8, Spiderman 2 - 7
There, Batman beat spiderman 2. Certain things Spiderman 2 did were amazing, as breaking the decades long tradition of superheroes always keeping their identidy secret against the toughest odds, sure Batman did it... But this is originality, and Spiderman takes the crown for that one. And yes, Batman did a very good character development, but Spiderman 1 did it already for Peter. Now the reason Batman is above Spiderman here is because it does those things (even if not new) and continues by fusing Bruce Wayne and Batman into one character and adding the much appreciated layer of realism.
Acting:
Batman - 8, Spiderman 2 - 8
Spiderman 2 relied on one powerful performance from one actor, Batman relied on several very good performances from several actors. Both achieve an overall acting quality equal to each other, but through different forms.
Story:
Batman - 9, Spiderman 2 - 8
Again, Batman surpasses Spiderman 2. While I loved the story of Spiderman 2, such as him losing his powers as he abandoned his calling or the return of the goblin or the revelation of Spiderman's identidy, Batman simply managed to create one of the most impressive twists and story structure I've seen recently.
Music:
Batman - 8, Spiderman 2 - 10
This is the reason Spiderman 2 got a overal higher score than Batman, it wasn't because of worth but mere technicality. Yes, the music was done by Danny Elfman and the music for Batman Begins was composed by James Howard Newton (who oddly did one of my favorite soundtracks in Signs) but it just didn't give Batman what it needed to beat Spiderman 2.
It doesn't matter if I run faster, I have better shoes, or I jump farther than my opponent, if he gets to the finish line first he still wins. Sure, you can look at my speed and claim I deserved to win (and maybe I did) maybe my opponent started earlier, maybe he got lucky, maybe I fell down... but whatever the reason, he won. That's how I see Batman/Spiderman. Spiderman wins, whether it deserves to or not.
But unfortunently I think all of this will be to not avail, as I'm sure you are as stronly opinionated that Batman is better as I am that Spiderman is better. But one thing is for sure, DC has found its champion to meet Marvel's.