Pacific Rim - Part 4

Rate the Movie

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1

  • 10

  • 9

  • 8

  • 7

  • 6

  • 5

  • 4

  • 3

  • 2

  • 1


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
i could spit JJ in the face. PR is proof that Del Toro deserved to direct Hobbit and he would deserve to get SW. he is a 100 times better director than JJ. JJ is trying to copy Spielberg. del Toro is unique IMO. :up::hoboj::up:

Del Toro quit The Hobbit.
 
Del Toro quit The Hobbit.
yeah i know. didnt they have some problems with New Zeland? i remember Jackson being on tv and complaiining that they can not do the movie.

in an alternative world where Del Toro is hired and finishes the movie. i would get an unique Hobbit movie with del Toro's vision.
 
I'm not surprised this movie only placed 4th down here, there's been zero advertising for this film in any form.

Isn't there an Aussie jaeger mech in the movie? I thought their moviegoers would've ate it up. Anyway, I'd love to see the movie but it's hard to make time for movies when you have small children. Might have to wait until DVD is released.
 
Sucks guys, but moviegoers would just rather see Grown-Ups 2 than Pacific Rim.
 
i could spit JJ in the face. PR is proof that Del Toro deserved to direct Hobbit and he would deserve to get SW. he is a 100 times better director than JJ. JJ is trying to copy Spielberg. del Toro is unique IMO. :up::hoboj::up:

JJ Abrams has proven he can take on SW.
 
Considering the type of movie PR is it has a low theater count. I mean Grown Ups 2 has more.
 
Glad GDT didn't take hobbit. He saved him self from an unfair comparison.

I'd rather the original filmmaker be exposed for what they are(for better or worse) than the obligatory fanboy: "If only Lucas got to direct the prequels, they would have been as good as the originals...if only Ridley was directing the new aliens movie, if only Peter Jackson was still helming the LOTR films..."

Glad Del Toro didn't have to end up dealing with that crap.
 
this movie is on steroids and 500mg adrenaline. its super mega fast. 2 hours of awesome IMO. :yay:

Yeah I'm going to.completely disagree with that. It's not fast, i found it to drag hardcore all throughout the second act. The pacing was not good and it was about 30 minutes of awesome and a hour and half of eh
 
Yeah I'm going to.completely disagree with that. It's not fast, i found it to drag hardcore all throughout the second act. The pacing was not good and it was about 30 minutes of awesome and a hour and half of eh

That was by far my biggest problem with the movie. In total it was only about 40 minutes of action and and hour +20 minutes of sloooow booooring baaaaad caricature garbage. That's not what they were selling.

I would have had little issue with one-note characters and bad acting if the action were the majority of the movie. But it's not. by a long shot.
 
yeah i know. didnt they have some problems with New Zeland? i remember Jackson being on tv and complaiining that they can not do the movie.

in an alternative world where Del Toro is hired and finishes the movie. i would get an unique Hobbit movie with del Toro's vision.

Studio had a problem with the ideas that DT was coming up with for his take and told him no thanks so he walked.
 
I thought this was ok. All the fights at night and in the rain bothered me though. I saw people talking about that before and didn't think it would bother me but it did. And all the reviews were saying the fights were clear in seeing what happens, but to me they weren't most of the time. Maybe that was just me though, or the 3D. I still thought the movie was fun and the lead and Charlie day didn't bother me like some people are saying. I want the movie to do well but my theater was half full. Hopefully that's not a sign.
 
when movies like grown-ups 2 before #1 in the box-office. it is just a sign of the beginning of the end. of western civilization.

I bet 1/3 of the people coming to cinemas this weekend don't even know what Pacific Rim is. That's how bad the marketing has been.
 
I thought this was ok. All the fights at night and in the rain bothered me though. I saw people talking about that before and didn't think it would bother me but it did. And all the reviews were saying the fights were clear in seeing what happens, but to me they weren't most of the time. Maybe that was just me though, or the 3D. I still thought the movie was fun and the lead and Charlie day didn't bother me like some people are saying. I want the movie to do well but my theater was half full. Hopefully that's not a sign.

It seems see it in 2D or IMAX 3D. Because just regular 3D could be very dark if the lighting isn't correct.
 
No offense DArk but there is something to be said for show don't tell, and I'm not assuming none of this is shown but if they do fly through that sort of development at that sort of pace I can see how that might lead to some criticism, particularly from the critics that have spent years campaigning against directors not letting a script breath and just flying through plot and exposition without really giving a scene time.

The first 10 mins honestly sound like the best parts to me. I hope the script doesn't move through them to make way for longer set pieces towards the end.


Except the portion Darkb is referring to is a montage that basically does show rather than tell. Monsters showed up, we built giant mechs to fight them, we started winning but then it all falls apart. The montage very quickly and effectively provides context. You could pretty much just replace it with yellow text flying off into space.
 
When I was a kid, things were different. Very very different.

For example, ignoring the fact that the standard of vfx has changed over the past 2 decades and big films have always had a way of looking good for their time(especially in the mid 90's).

Dude's mech monsters in PR(that's power rangers, not pacific rim) were anything but laughable for me. I suppose that's the point, things were different back then especially for kids. As amazing as JP was for me, seeing godzillas foot was just as. Seeing spiderman swing through a city at 60mph was just as even seeing the mufasa die was just as.... Just seems like an obtuse way of looking at 20 years worth of cinema, especially when you take into account the eye and mind of a child.

I'm pretty sure we're the same about the same age, I saw Power Rangers upon its release. Lets face it, while the Power Rangers film was a lot of fun it didn't even really stand up to the standards of 20 years ago. It fits with everything else in the film quite well, but the digital effects with Ooze and the mechs at the end have always been goofy, just that goofiness is not a problem in that context.

Like I said, there was a moment in Pacific Rim that directly took me back to countless times I've seen the Power Rangers movie. Specifically with the scorpion-like Kaiju in the Hong Kong fight. I had a feeling of "Finally". It was like an itch being scratched. Pacific Rim felt like someone finally following through on the promise of many things I've liked throughout my life.
 
Last edited:
I still own mine on VHS somewhere.

Same here. The case however is lost to the ages, or at least the far reaches of my parents basement. I've always meant to get it on DVD.


Side note: Upon reflection I do have to wonder to what extent my appreciation of certain character's arcs has been aided by the additional context provided by the prequel comic, especially when it comes to Pentecost. It certainly helps though I think Pentecost is set up pretty well within the confines of the movie as well.
 
Last edited:
I can't wait to see this tonight. I've always been a fan of these type of films and Del Toro is an impressive filmmaker. I can't imagine walking out disappointed . I despise Charlie Day , but that's the only negative for me heading into it.
 
Yeah I'm going to.completely disagree with that. It's not fast, i found it to drag hardcore all throughout the second act. The pacing was not good and it was about 30 minutes of awesome and a hour and half of eh

That was by far my biggest problem with the movie. In total it was only about 40 minutes of action and and hour +20 minutes of sloooow booooring baaaaad caricature garbage. That's not what they were selling.

I would have had little issue with one-note characters and bad acting if the action were the majority of the movie. But it's not. by a long shot.

It didn't really affect my enjoyment of it, but there is some truth to this. I remember in my showing last night some chick let out this really audible yawn after the Hong Kong battle. Everyone did look a bit fidgety halfway through the film. Someone groaned when Hunnam had the 'Gypsey is analogue' line. I guess I didn't have the audience for it. Woulda loved to have been in a crowded room of B-movie/anime fans.
 
Sucks guys, but moviegoers would just rather see Grown-Ups 2 than Pacific Rim.

mad-at-theinternet.gif
 
Well, if this thing doesn't do as well as want at least we know we're all to blame. Get out there and tell your respective countries to go watch this ****. Me and my girlfriend are gonna go watch this thing on Sunday, and I'm paying full price for the Real D showing, something I rarely do.
 
JJ Abrams has proven he can take on SW

Thats your opinion.

Mine is that the man has never done anything Ive found to be worthwhile.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,079,640
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"