feel-1
Joined Jul 2003
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews8
feel-1's rating
I don't understand anything about this movie, not one bit. Is realism and common sense of so little importance that people buy anything presented to them as long as there is action?
If I was in some kind of combat squad that was attacked by snipers, I would not react by drawing my sword. That much I can guarantee. I'm pretty sure I would not even have a sword in that situation. Or knife for that matter. Why would I?
This is a space war scenario in the future, with extreme range sniper rifles, rocket launchers, helicopters protected with forcefields etc. But the knife/sword is the preferred weapon? It's like opting for a javelin over a bazooka when fighting a tank.
To quote the Chewbacca defense: "that does not make sense!"
I also don't understand why most of the actors only have one or two facial expressions. I know that several of the actors are capable of acting, so I guess it's down to the director telling them not to "act".
What a shame to butcher a good story like this.
If I was in some kind of combat squad that was attacked by snipers, I would not react by drawing my sword. That much I can guarantee. I'm pretty sure I would not even have a sword in that situation. Or knife for that matter. Why would I?
This is a space war scenario in the future, with extreme range sniper rifles, rocket launchers, helicopters protected with forcefields etc. But the knife/sword is the preferred weapon? It's like opting for a javelin over a bazooka when fighting a tank.
To quote the Chewbacca defense: "that does not make sense!"
I also don't understand why most of the actors only have one or two facial expressions. I know that several of the actors are capable of acting, so I guess it's down to the director telling them not to "act".
What a shame to butcher a good story like this.
I just don't get it. You are basing the story on a brilliant classic book (that I just re-read) and you take from it is perhaps 20% and then re-write the rest of it? Why?
You had a great book with critique against a possible future society where people are bread for their expected jobs, including limiting their intelligence for them to be content with their lot. And then. The only one that had the free mind to question the society was someone that came from without it.
And instead you create a story with violence, uprising and a demand for justice Nothing of this was present in the book. Nor did the "savages" have cars, guns or any inclination to change their society. They were poor and caged, but they kept their traditions and lived as best they could, in peace with nature.
Also, the "savages" area was based on a native american reservation. So why are there mostly white trash living in them here? John the savage was an outsider in the reservation because he was not a native indian and didn't share their beliefs, and he suffered a lot for it.
The book presents the society both from an insiders and an outsiders point of view. That's what it's all about. If you are inside the system you can't detect the absurd conditions, because you have been conditioned to accept it. It takes an outsider to judge it impartially. Or, a high enough controller, who's job is to maintain the current status.
Why not stick to the story, it's a lot better than what you came up with.
You had a great book with critique against a possible future society where people are bread for their expected jobs, including limiting their intelligence for them to be content with their lot. And then. The only one that had the free mind to question the society was someone that came from without it.
And instead you create a story with violence, uprising and a demand for justice Nothing of this was present in the book. Nor did the "savages" have cars, guns or any inclination to change their society. They were poor and caged, but they kept their traditions and lived as best they could, in peace with nature.
Also, the "savages" area was based on a native american reservation. So why are there mostly white trash living in them here? John the savage was an outsider in the reservation because he was not a native indian and didn't share their beliefs, and he suffered a lot for it.
The book presents the society both from an insiders and an outsiders point of view. That's what it's all about. If you are inside the system you can't detect the absurd conditions, because you have been conditioned to accept it. It takes an outsider to judge it impartially. Or, a high enough controller, who's job is to maintain the current status.
Why not stick to the story, it's a lot better than what you came up with.
The main characters are so awkwardly played that it just feels embarrassing. Wooden, I would say, sums it up pretty well. I'm happy for you people that can enjoy it, but for me it's a big no.