White House Down

[The Shape]

Judging by how terrible Olympus Has Fallen was, this film will definitely take the prize of being the better White House attack movie this year. I mean, it'd basically have to be 2 hrs of jiberrish to be worse than OHF.

OHF was so over-the-top, cheesy, and fantastical. Hopefully, this one will turn out to be a legitimate thriller with true intensity.

 

[jacobed]

This will be the exact same but it won't have any bad ass Gerard and great brutal action to make it good. So it'll terrible.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Shape, that's your opinion of it. Those leaving the theaters gave it a cine score of A-, this film is going to have a hard time topping that audience rating. And quality wise, from the script, OHF is the better of the two. It's also the smarter and more realistic of the two.

ADDING: While the script is all right, it was definitely a let down in that a white house siege just doesn't seem real unless it's rated R. It's almost like PG-13 superhero level action, which is fun and entertaining, but it just doesn't seem to settle quite right with the subject matter all the time. It's fun and popcorn, while the story is hard and traumatic. Personally, that's what I liked about White House Down - people died, there was a sense of urgency, and it was a substantially darker and more serious film.

 

[The Shape]

Shape, that's your opinion of it. Those leaving the theaters gave it a cine score of A-, this film is going to have a hard time topping that audience rating. And quality wise, from the script, OHF is the better of the two. It's also the smarter and more realistic of the two.

ADDING: While the script is all right, it was definitely a let down in that a white house siege just doesn't seem real unless it's rated R. It's almost like PG-13 superhero level action, which is fun and entertaining, but it just doesn't seem to settle quite right with the subject matter all the time. It's fun and popcorn, while the story is hard and traumatic. Personally, that's what I liked about White House Down - people died, there was a sense of urgency, and it was a substantially darker and more serious film.

Of course that's my opinion of it, but as a student of film, I can recognize a poorly made film when I see one. Olympus Has Fallen was designed to be a crowd pleaser and it's not hard to see why: Americans kicking ass. Flags being raised from the ashes. C'mon now.

But as a film, it's wholeheartedly predictable. There's not one moment that we don't see coming. There is not one instance where we as audience members fear for Gerard Butler's life. The special effects are beyond shoddy. The direction and cinematography are bland. I saw OHF with a semi-packed crowd and half of the audience was belly laughing at all the parts that were not meant to be humorous at all, and I was laughing along with them. I get that it's mindless, Americanized, popcorn action. It's meant to be light and fun, we're meant to enjoy watching countless people gunned down and stabbed violently, but I don't see how anyone in their right mind could take the film seriously. I would have given it an A-Cinemascore purely based on how hilarious it was! Seriously, it was really funny.

Insert Bruce Willis and rename the main character 'John McClane" and we would have had a nice R-rated Die Hard sequel. There are so many blatant similarities in OHF to the original Die Hard (right down to the villains) that it wouldn't be a reach to say that it's almost a quasi-remake of Die Hard.

I'm just hoping that White House Down has something different to bring to the table. Some actual intensity and visceral filmmaking would be nice. A few twists and turns to keep us on our toes would be great, and hopefully they can actually convey a level of sadness when bad things happen to good people. But if you're saying that OHF is actually the more realistic of the two films, then I have no hope for White House Down and probably won't be seeing it. OHF was completely absurd and over-the-top (Hydra weapons, Cerberus, massive planes appearing over Washington DC out of nowhere, a 7-year-old kid outliving dozens of highly trained Secret Service agents, a hilarious situation room filled with idiots) so I was hoping WHD would be more of a true nail-biting thriller.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Of course that's my opinion of it, but as a student of film, I can recognize a poorly made film when I see one.

I'm a student of film, with connections to one of the top film companies out there as my main mentor. And because of them I'll have sold my first screenplay to a major studio by latest when I am 26 years old. So with all of this "I'm a film student, I know better than everyone" crap that film students prep themselves up on -- leave that all behind. I don't know if you are that way, but many film students do leave that way.

Here's a word from the master Joss Whedon himself:

It’s very important to know when to stick to your guns, but it’s also very important to listen to absolutely everybody. The stupidest person in the room might have the best idea.

Just saying because the 'student of film' seriously rubs me the wrong way. In order actually be someone, you have to know enough to know that even the counter clerk might know something that you don't. And anyone working in Hollywood can tell you the same thing. Being a film student just means you've watched many films. But, nothing prepares you for what's truly out there other than being able to listen to even the stupidest person in the room -- because they might know something your film degree didn't teach you. So if you truly want to make it? Drop the whole elitist 'I'm a student of film' thing that some film students have after graduation. It's just going to make you overlook the most important people in the room -- everyone else around you who doesn't have a film degree. Okay, enough of that rant.

It was a film that knew what it was. Hell, more than half of the time it was tongue and cheek. Why? The setting itself and what was happening was so dark that if you approached it seriously or not tongue in cheek you'll probably eliminate the enjoyment factor in it. There are many "Die Hard" ins and people walking in knew that's what it was -- thing is, that film did it a lot better than this one.

White House Down only offers extremely over the top action, obvious PG-13 violence, and a lot more humor. There is no actual intensity because it seems PG-13, the saving grace of this film -- like in 'Independence Day' and 'Day After Tomorrow' are the quieter character moments (which do feel out of place due to being within a siege on the white house -- the characters wouldn't have time to joke around). There is no level of sadness once so ever, it's all happy and jokey.

You have three versions. The realistic, nail-biting, overly depressing yet realistic take on it -- which studios would stay away from because it might be too bleak for some audience members. The tongue-and-cheek yet still dark at portions view on things. And then the classic Hollywood staple everything is happy blockbuster (as said, the script is entertaining but it just feels odd given the circumstances surrounding them).

 

[jacobed]

So because you're a student that makes the movie obviously poor? A lot of you film students are all the same, think you're better than everyone. This movie knew exactly what it is and it had fun with it. Was he script great? No but it made up for it in other aspects such as the actors and action.

 

[Ultimatehero]

So because you're a student that makes the movie obviously poor? A lot of you film students are all the same, think you're better than everyone.

Exactly. And the thing is -- to get ahead, one needs to drop that and start learning that they know just as much as everyone else around them. The elitist take on things never gets one far. Those are the people who go to Hollywood thinking "they're all that" and will start "acting Hollywood" then drop out once they see the truth of the matters. I was taken under their wing because I was a naive, humbled, fish out of the water that respected everyone around me and genuinely wanted to do the work. If I was the egotistical, "I'm all Hollywood LA dude," that never would have happened. And if someone in the industry does seem elitist - chances are they only wound up that way later in life after tons of blockbusters behind them, they didn't start out that way. You want to be the kid they take under their wing due to wide-eyed energy that I don't see the elitist kind of film student having - those are the kids I saw disappearing.

 

[The Shape]

So because you're a student that makes the movie obviously poor? A lot of you film students are all the same, think you're better than everyone. This movie knew exactly what it is and it had fun with it. Was he script great? No but it made up for it in other aspects such as the actors and action.

All I said was that I'm a student of film and I can recognize when a film sucks...and I said that right after stating this was purely my opinion. Not trying to indicate that I'm better than anyone else, just that I thought OHF sucked.

In fact, the overall hokeyness and absurd nature of the film is exactly why it succeeded. I recognize that. I even said that I had a great time watching it because the film was so ridiculous. Just because many people enjoy watching a film doesn't qualify it as "great filmmaking". I had hoped White House Down would be the opposite side of this coin, a more serious take on the idea that'd be even more visually striking, but apparently people in this thread have already seen it and are telling me otherwise? So whatever.

Not even gonna respond to the other dude who got all up in arms because i said I was a film student. There's no argument here, it's all opinion. I could whine and say "Oh, well because it has an A-Cinemascore, that makes it a great film?" Absolutely not. And "as a film student", I'll be the first to tell you that I love films that know "exactly what they are". I'm probably as big of an action movie buff as anyone here. I just happened to think Olympus Has Fallen was pretty lousy, like TV-movie bad at some parts. Sorry to rain on everyone's parade and (apparently) insult people in the process, somehow.

 

[The Shape]

Exactly. And the thing is -- to get ahead, one needs to drop that and start learning that they know just as much as everyone else around them. The elitist take on things never gets one far. Those are the people who go to Hollywood thinking "they're all that" and will start "acting Hollywood" then drop out once they see the truth of the matters. I was taken under their wing because I was a naive, humbled, fish out of the water that respected everyone around me and genuinely wanted to do the work. If I was the egotistical, "I'm all Hollywood LA dude," that never would have happened. And if someone in the industry does seem elitist - chances are they only wound up that way later in life after tons of blockbusters behind them, they didn't start out that way. You want to be the kid they take under their wing due to wide-eyed energy that I don't see the elitist kind of film student having - those are the kids I saw disappearing.

There is nothing elitist about me saying Olympus Has Fallen is a sucky movie. Nothing at all. So relax.

It's a movie that knows exactly what it is. Popcorn, violent action. Why am I not allowed to say that the movie itself is just bad? How does that make me elitist? Your Hollywood experiences have nothing to do with me saying "I'm a student of film". Even if I had never mentioned that, it doesn't change the fact that I think Olympus Has Fallen is a lame movie...

 

[Ultimatehero]

It was more the way you phrased it which did make you appear pompous. That's also why I said I was unsure if you are that kind of person or not. It's also notable that I wasn't the only one who saw it come off as such. But, if you even are slightly - that's something you need to drop. Because everyone knows those all so serious students in film school with an elitist attitude, from my experience - those guys never go far. I was one of the humble guys at the school and now I'm about to launch my dream career for real. So, as said, whether if you are or aren't - it did sound that way (and not only to me) - and if that is there, that is something to let go of. And as said, mentioned "don't know if you are or aren't." Most who've made it wouldn't even think to add "as a student of film" because that implies you knowing better than the "non students of film." So it had nothing to do with your take on the film, rather the seeming put down to the non-students of film which someone else did read it that way.

 

[The Shape]

It was more the way you phrased it which did make you appear pompous. That's also why I said I was unsure if you are that kind of person. But, if you even are slightly - that's something you need to drop. Because everyone knows those all so serious students in film school with an elitist attitude, from my experience - those guys never go far. I was one of the humble guys at the school and now I'm about to launch my dream career for real. So, as said, whether if you are or aren't - it did sound that way - and if that is there, that is something to let go of.

Dude, again, your words are wasted on me. Not interested in any of that and it's completely unrelated to the point I was trying to get across.

If you were a student of film, then you will have viewed, studied, and analyzed all kinds of films. I've studied every genre and sub-genre, from Hong Kong cinema and disaster films to the works of Francis Ford Coppola and Stanley Kubrick. My point was something you should know better than anyone...when a large amount of people in America enjoy a film and that film makes money, it does not by any means prove that it is a great film. I knew what to expect going into Olympus Has Fallen and I paid money to see the film purely because my friends and I wanted to watch Gerard Butler kick ass for 2 hours. I did not anticipate that it would be filled with so many eye-rolling moments, however. It was pretty hilarious, but I was still disappointed. That is all.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Hey, be my guest on whether to take that advice from someone who has made it or not. Up to you. It wasn't your point, but it did come off that way to more than just me.

So because you're a student that makes the movie obviously poor? A lot of you film students are all the same, think you're better than everyone. This movie knew exactly what it is and it had fun with it. Was he script great? No but it made up for it in other aspects such as the actors and action.

And my point was - you won't make it if you think that highly of "being a student of film." And that's simply because it just makes one look bad.

My point had nothing to do with the quality which is pretty much all subjective. I'm as easy to please as Robert Downey Jr. -- offer me some form of entertainment in any way possible and I'm all yours. The thing also is that there is no determination of what makes or breaks a film. There are some things. But most things are subjective. If you say critics - critics still get it wrong as well, they said Wizard of Oz was abysmal and that the Les Miserables broadway production was beyond terrible. Critics are like everyone else. So that is subjective down to the person and that's not what I had a problem with.

It was just the elitist type of attitude you seemed to take on when stating "student of film," which didn't really bother me - I was just making a point - that if you want to make it, you have to stop seeing yourself as "a student of film" and just as "one of the masses." That's the secret to getting ahead. It did bother someone else though and I'm sure others upon reading that line as well. Basically all I'm doing is offering hard advice with a little harshness to get the point across in case that is there (why else would one mention it unless to try to brag?)

 

[Hunter Rider]

 

[The Shape]

Hey, be my guest on whether to take that advice from someone who has made it or not. Up to you. It wasn't your point, but it did come off that way to more than just me.



And my point was - you won't make it if you think that highly of "being a student of film." And that's simply because it just makes one look bad.

My point had nothing to do with the quality which is pretty much all subjective. I'm as easy to please as Robert Downey Jr. -- offer me some form of entertainment in any way possible and I'm all yours. The thing also is that there is no determination of what makes or breaks a film. There are some things. But most things are subjective. If you say critics - critics still get it wrong as well, they said Wizard of Oz was abysmal and that the Les Miserables broadway production was beyond terrible. Critics are like everyone else. So that is subjective down to the person and that's not what I had a problem with.

It was just the elitist type of attitude you seemed to take on when stating "student of film," which didn't really bother me - I was just making a point - that if you want to make it, you have to stop seeing yourself as "a student of film" and just as "one of the masses." That's the secret to getting ahead. It did bother someone else though and I'm sure others upon reading that line as well.

I'm confused. You're still going on about "making it" in the film business or not. I'm just saying that Olympus Has Fallen sucked. Are you trying to suggest that if I conform to the masses and praise bad films, I can make it in Hollywood?! Yay!!!

I am both a student of film AND one of the masses. There are plenty of films I love that are bashed by pretentious critics whom you might consider to have an elitist attitude. Once again, I'll re-iterate: I mentioned that "as a student of film, I can recognize a poorly made film when I see one." By that, I meant that THE FILMMAKING BEHIND OLYMPUS HAS FALLEN WAS NOT GOOD OR ANYTHING SPECIAL BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. I don't know why you keep trying to bring film politics into this discussion. Your attitude towards me seems way more 'elitist' than me saying "Hey, I study films and this one sucked." Whether you realize it or not, you've been trying to represent me as some kind of misguided film snob while praising yourself as someone who "made it", and you wanna call me elitist? Jeez.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Your line obviously tells me that you are missing the point. Your original sentence was obviously meant for bragging rights. "I am a student of film therefore I know more than the masses." You didn't nail me because I am someone who's made it in with one of the top five film studios in existence. But, you did offend somebody else and I'm betting others who have read that line as well. And that does matter to me. No one is saying like what you don't like. Everything is subjective. All that's being said is -- don't look down on the masses which you clearly were because why else would one say that if not to try to brag?

And indeed answer that - why did you even mention "as a student of film" without just putting your opinion out there. What was the need to put that? And I bet you won't tell me an answer to that or will try to navigate around an answer to that.

You are clearly ignoring that you did offend someone already. Someone other than me who picked up on what it still seems you were implying. That being a film student gives one better knowledge when it doesn't in no way, shape, or form. It's just one opinion lost in a sea of opinions.

I'll liken it to you're Ben Stiller telling the crew that they can not eat because you want to keep on filming without caring who you offend. While I'm more like Robert Downey Jr telling you to shut the hell up, that these other people matter, and to try to stop looking so big - because the big guys don't need to belittle others just because of some 'title' they may have. (And that's a true story). The difference between you and me? You offended somebody by sounding egotistical even if you didn't intend to. I'm only offending you here because I'm standing up for the crowd, one of which in it was offended.

Also as anyone can see light as day - I've always said you are open to having your opinion because everything is subjective. That's not calling you a snob. That's just saying it's one opinion amidst many other opinions that matter just as much - degree or not.

 

[The Shape]

Your line obviously tells me that you are missing the point. Your original sentence was obviously meant for bragging rights. "I am a student of film therefore I know more than the masses." You didn't nail me because I am someone who's made it in with one of the top five film studios in existence. But, you did offend somebody else and I'm betting others who have read that line as well. And that does matter to me. No one is saying like what you don't like. Everything is subjective. All that's being said is -- don't look down on the masses which you clearly were because why else would one say that if not to try to brag?

And indeed answer that - why did you even mention "as a student of film" without just putting your opinion out there. What was the need to put that? And I bet you won't tell me an answer to that or will try to navigate around an answer to that.

You are clearly ignoring that you did offend someone already. Someone other than me who picked up on what it still seems you were implying. That being a film student gives one better knowledge when it doesn't in no way, shape, or form. It's just one opinion lost in a sea of opinions.

I'll liken it to you're Ben Stiller telling the crew that they can not eat because you want to keep on filming without caring who you offend. While I'm more like Robert Downey Jr telling you to shut the hell up, that these other people matter, and to try to stop looking so big - because the big guys don't need to belittle others just because of some 'title' they may have. (And that's a true story). The difference between you and me? You offended somebody by sounding egotistical even if you didn't intend to. I'm only offending you here because I'm standing up for the crowd, one of which in it was offended.

Also as anyone can see light as day - I've always said you are open to having your opinion because everything is subjective. That's not calling you a snob. That's just saying it's one opinion amidst many other opinions that matter just as much - degree or not.

You just said all the same things you said before... Once again, you "made it in one of the top 5 studios in existence". I'm the one bragging and you're not. Yup. Sure thing, pal. Also, today is opposite day.

I'm sorry that I mentioned I was a film student and that I tried "to look so big". It was TOTALLY my intention to offend everyone in America. Maybe I did offend someone with my offhand remark, but if anyone is coming off as egotistical here, it's you, and it's becoming borderline offensive. Welcome to the offensive club!

 

[Ultimatehero]

I never said I wasn't bragging. Only here your intention was to put down 85% of the members here. My only intention was to put down you just liked RDJ to Stiller. And it seems to have worked. And thank you for avoiding to answer the question that would have meant you didn't originally state it to try to brag about it. I think we're about done here. Everyone is equal regardless of schooling. The end.

 

[Hunter Rider]

From the Set: Roland Emmerich's White House Down

 

[Hunter Rider]

 

[Gianakin_]

Lol@ Tatum trying to channel his inner McLaine.

 

[Liam_H]

Might be just me(probably is) but seeing the attire Tatum will be wearing in this movie. I keep expecting him to start dancing at any moment.

 

[dark_b]

edward dougles on moviemoan said that there will be some comedy between Tatum and Foxx.
http://www.thinkmcflythink.com/movie-moan-podcast/

 

[Hunter Rider]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=103207

 

[Liam_H]

The second poster makes it seem like Tatum is walking away nonchalantly after destroying The White House.

 

[samsnee]

Cool guys don't look at explosions.