Inferno

[rashad]

I can't wait for this one!

 

[Filmfan93]

This is coming out in 2 days here in the UK and I don't see ANY hype, TV spots, discussions, anything.

Still excited about it, though. Seeing it on Saturday.

 

[TheVileOne]

They really should've just quit while they were ahead after the last movie came out and did disappointing business. Moving forward with this one seems insane.

 

[Filmfan93]

Just came back from it.

As expected, I liked it. It was a non-pretentious thriller and had very tense moments (especially near the end).

But wow, the editing was simply atrocious. In the first 30 minutes of the film, scenes were randomly jumping one after another and the music that was accompanying them simply got cut (without any culmination) and another track would simply begin for the next scene.

Also, the aspect ratio made the film look a bit cheap. I know they were trying to cut costs, but come on.

 

[kguillou]

I have no interest in this movie but I'm listening to the soundtrack and WOW, Hans Zimmer sounds re-energized on this. This movie has a GREAT score. I might just have to watch it just to hear it in context.

 

[Octoberist]

Just came back from it.

As expected, I liked it. It was a non-pretentious thriller and had very tense moments (especially near the end).

But wow, the editing was simply atrocious. In the first 30 minutes of the film, scenes were randomly jumping one after another and the music that was accompanying them simply got cut (without any culmination) and another track would simply begin for the next scene.

Also, the aspect ratio made the film look a bit cheap. I know they were trying to cut costs, but come on.

Was it filmed like first Avengers, at 1.85:1?

 

[The Chris]

Sure looks like it from the trailer. Now i don't have a problem really with the flat look but when you're a sequel to two films shot in scope it's a little weird. Like when A Good Day to Die Hard was flat after following 4 films in scope. That was the first thing that put me off.

 

[Filmfan93]

Was it filmed like first Avengers, at 1.85:1?

Yep, I think it was. I understand why they did it with Inferno, but I will never understand why they shot Avengers like that. A big film like that should be shot on wide screen as it helps for the cinematic feeling. Yet, Avengers looked like a TV show at times. I still really loved it, though.

 

[Octoberist]

Yep, I think it was. I understand why they did it with Inferno, but I will never understand why they shot Avengers like that. A big film like that should be shot on wide screen as it helps for the cinematic feeling. Yet, Avengers looked like a TV show at times. I still really loved it, though.

Joss Whedon was on The Nerdist Podcast and he mentioned he was onlu used to directing TV, (90's/2000's Network Style) so he didn't feel comfortable shooting with a wider aspect ratio, even with a talented DOP.

By the time he made Avengers 2, he was more confident with using anamorphic lenses and the like.

 

[The Chris]

That's interesting considering his first film Serenity was 2:35.1

 

[Octoberist]

That's interesting considering his first film Serenity was 2:35.1

Well I think with the Avengers, it's a much bigger property with higher expectations. Plus, he doesn't have ownership so I think he didn't want to risk it.

So psychologically he wanted to play it safe with the shots.

 

[Wildcard]

They really should've just quit while they were ahead after the last movie came out and did disappointing business. Moving forward with this one seems insane.

A $50 million international start isn't bad at all so I think this has a chance to have a solid run & attain good numbers.

Hopefully it starts out strong in N.A too.

 

[Mysteryman]

A $50 million international start isn't bad at all so I think this has a chance to have a solid run & attain good numbers.

Hopefully it starts out strong in N.A too.

Last I heard, Inferno is tracking for an estimated 30 million opening.
We shall see.

 

[TheVileOne]

I saw it tonight. Not terrible, but thought it was pretty mediocre. Riddled with plot holes and predictable plot twists. I know there is some controversy over the change for the ending. I'm not a big fan of the Dan Brown novels, so it's not a big deal to me. A bunch of subplots are presented that are never resolved.

That aside, I thought the movie's depiction of the World Health Organization was hilarious. The WHO is apparently a clandestine paramilitary organization with the resources of fictional spy agencies like MI6 and soldiers who are armed to the teeth. It's hilarious because they are the major organization involved with the threat in the film. No CIA or anything. I get it's a movie and not everything is realistic. Liberties are taken. But to call this the World Health Organization IMHO is laughable. They in no way resemble the WHO.

 

[terry78]

It's from the man that wrote the story about the Mona Lisa having an ancient writ underneath it, so yeah.

 

[Bats123]

Saw this last week, i completely forgot about it, thought it was boring and the big twist was so dumb, it just came out of nowhere, i was laughing so hard in the theater, just so you know i thought Angels and Demons and Da Vinci Code were ok, but this one felt lazy and rushed, as if the studio said "**** it lets shoot this one quick and make a small profit out of it"

 

[Octoberist]

So who is it to blame: Dan Brown, Ron Howard, or David Koepp, or a little bit from each column. I know that the book itself was just okay. Ron Howard and Koepp have proven to be inconsistent. So what can improve on the story, do you guys think this series only works in book form, due to the amount of exposition, etc?

 

[TheVileOne]

I read the explanation of what was changed, and I understand why they changed the ending. However, what I read about the ending of the original novel seems to make the whole book basically pointless, and it renders the search in both stories basically pointless. I guess you can argue it's more intellectually challenging and more ambiguous.

To me it's one thing to present ideas of hidden history and secret clues hidden in plain sight in famous paintings or objects. National Treasure did that too.

However, to suddenly and quickly have this silly imagined version of the WHO was just something I couldn't rectify. I can understand the other stuff because what if there are parts of history we never knew about or were exaggerated? I mean none of us were really there, so how could we know?

But to suddenly just have the WHO as the major organization pushing a lot of the action forward and have them be depicted like this without sort of establishing what WHO has become is bad writing and storytelling IMHO. Like they have fully decked out black vans. They have paramilitary soldiers who are armed to the teeth with all sorts of fancy tech. Sorry, but that's not the WHO.

 

[Roose Bolton]

So who is it to blame: Dan Brown, Ron Howard, or David Koepp, or a little bit from each column. I know that the book itself was just okay. Ron Howard and Koepp have proven to be inconsistent. So what can improve on the story, do you guys think this series only works in book form, due to the amount of exposition, etc?

This is all on Dan Brown. Basically the story had a good key idea, dealing with the issue of overpopulation, but it was pretty off the wall in a lot of ways and the movie had the problem of having to tone it all down. Hell, they didn't even bother to adapt his 3rd novel because of how unfit it was for cinema.

I didn't think this movie was a massive step down from the previous two films in terms of quality. They're all perfectly watchable, (unless you're a member of the World Heath Organization like VileOne is) but otherwise they never rise above that basic standard.

 

[TheVileOne]

I'm not a member of WHO, but depicting them in this way, basically as Sweden's MI6 or IMF is absolutely laughable.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I...really don't care about the WHO, or how they're depicted.

 

[TheVileOne]

I don't either, but it just leaves you scratching your head, when you see WHO mobilizing paramilitary disease hunters.

"Stick up your nucleus virus cells! Put your amoeba orifices on the ground or I will shoot!"

 

[Roose Bolton]

Well, off the top of my head [blackout] They were basically working with the florentine police force during the majority of the first act, and then with whatever the hell the Provost was running [/blackout] so it was basically a nonissue for me.

 

[TheVileOne]

Except the movie gives them an actual subtitle saying they are the WHO mobile carrier unit or some such. They weren't all Florentine police.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I don't recall that, but I don't really care either. It's the same franchise that had an antimatter bomb blow up over the Vatican and had Audrey Tautou as the direct descendant of Jesus Christ.