The last film was a production shitshow but I'd argue that he manages to make lemonade from a lemon. It has some genuinely good dialogue, and some striking imagery. It's also a film that pivots hard due to running out of money, time, and the film has brutal executive meddling. (Why is it edited that way? It's because the studio fired his favorite editor over creative disagreements with Resident Evil Retribution and its somewhat butchered theatrical cut and the director's cut the studio refused to release on home video).
Even this mess of a film is still INTERESTING. It still manages to have something to say. It still manages to say things about its predecessor, about its franchise, about its nature as a movie. Despite conditions getting worse and worse, none of the films are soulless studio slop.
They're super fun movies with genuine vision behind them. The second trilogy openly embraces the idea that these films are fiction. I wish we could get director's cuts because the studio started to meddle harder and harder.
The reality is that most people are too young to understand that Paul W.S. Anderson went from a god-tier filmmaker with a bright future to a sellout after multiple flops in the 90s. The number of people who have seen Shopping is insignificant.
I understand not liking the films, but they seem to attract a weird animosity. The kind you usually only associate with Michael Bay or Zack Snyder. People who don't like these films seem to RESENT these films, and the fact they kept refusing to flop made them resent all the harder.
I liked 1,2, 4 and 5. 3 was eh, and 6 didn't like at all.
Overall I have a positive opinion about them and would watch them over anything else made in the last dozen of years
Paul W.S. Anderson is a better director than Kurt Wimmer. Now of course his second unit guys do a substantial amount of heavy lifting, but when you compare Resident Evil: Afterlife to Ultraviolet, it's chalk and cheese. In his entire career as a director, the only film that genuinely fell apart would have to be Pompeii. That film does not work. It was shot weird. The VFX look wrong. But Kurt Wimmer proved incapable of delivering a coherent movie after Equilibrium.
With Afterlife and Retribution, Anderson embraced the Kurt Wimmer style and made functional movies that don't fricking suck out of it.
I read the Afterlife script, and there are some odd differences between the script and the movie. For example, Wesker's introduction is different (it has him exercising in his private quarters), the VTOL crash is different, and how Alice survived/what happened to Wesker is explained. There's scenes where Alice tries to use her powers, but can only shift a water bottle an inch. There's a flashback scene that explains how Wesker knows Chris. This was all either not filmed (most likely, they had a tight budget) or cut to save time. Also, Wesker has leeches under his skin, and these leeches are related to his feeding. He has been sucking the life out of the crew of the ship.
What it reveals to me is that every odd plot point in these movies was something they were aware of, but at some point they just said, "Frick it." There is absolutely a sense that these movies were trimmed because Screen Gems didn't want them longer than 100 minutes.
The second film is the worst in the series, possibly because it is the most similar to the games. 3 is absolutely fantastic. 4 is a bit uneven, but it has god-tier music and visuals. 5 is a studio-ass-fricked version of a very intelligent movie, but it's unclear if we'll ever get the director's cut. 6 is a talented team attempting to fix a fricked project, with some success.
This feels like bait. I don't see people saying that the X-Men films weren't worth the human cost because of the awful motorbike stunt on Deadpool 2. Frickups happen. The court documents make Jeremy Bolt sound like as snake, and Paul W.S. Anderson sound like a coward who, to his credit, continued to offer financial support long after Sony and the other parties had turned their backs on the stuntwoman, but it simply wasn't enough financial support.
I was reading the documents recently and it turns out that Anderson didn't meet with the stuntwoman's family, so that was all Bolt and a representative from Sony. The one who made promises that the medical expenses would be taken care of was Bolt. So to a degree, frick Bolt. He's a talented producer in terms of keeping costs down, but frick him if his cost-cutting results in people's lives being ruined.
This feels like bait. I don't see people saying that the X-Men films weren't worth the human cost because of the awful motorbike stunt on Deadpool 2. Frickups happen. The court documents make Jeremy Bolt sound like as snake, and Paul W.S. Anderson sound like a coward who, to his credit, continued to offer financial support long after Sony and the other parties had turned their backs on the stuntwoman, but it simply wasn't enough financial support.
I was reading the documents recently and it turns out that Anderson didn't meet with the stuntwoman's family, so that was all Bolt and a representative from Sony. The one who made promises that the medical expenses would be taken care of was Bolt. So to a degree, frick Bolt. He's a talented producer in terms of keeping costs down, but frick him if his cost-cutting results in people's lives being ruined.
In all seriousness, people talk about how tragic it was that Brandon Lee died on The Crow, but nobody ever talks about how the on-set conditions were a nightmare, and nobody talks about how it was basically Alex Proyas's fault. His set was a shitshow, and they were having accidents from day 1. >Filming began on Feb. 1, 1993, on Stage 4 at Carolco Studios, an old cement factory with lingering lime dust. Almost from the start, there were problems -- crew injuries, accidental destruction of property, a winter storm that destroyed a set. According to O'Barr, "the whole film was shot at night." The nonunion crews, he says, "would start filming at 10 o'clock until light came up." The set was cold, claustrophobic, dark and dank. >In July, Premiere reported that Lee's manager, Jan McCormack, had called Wilmington to complain that "conditions on the set had become subhuman." Later in the same conversation, McCormack added, "You guys are killing Brandon down there." >Last August, Caldwell filed suit in North Carolina Superior Court against Ed Pressman Film Corp., Proyas, stunt coordinator Jeff Imada and actor Michael Massee, who, in the character of Funboy, pulled the trigger. Caldwell's suit charged negligence in the death of Brandon Lee and sought unspecified punitive and compensatory damages. While district attorney Spivey did not press charges, the filmmakers were fined $77,000 for workplace violations. Caldwell settled out of court in September for an undisclosed sum.
While Paul W.S. Anderson should be blamed for his set, his frickup, whatever, the fact is, people tend to ignore frickups if they like a director. The venn diagram of people who bring up the accidents on RE6 and the people who hate Paul W.S. Anderson tend to be a near-perfect circle.
They're amazing films by one of the greatest auteurs working in film. And also the one Russell Mulcahy made is pretty good because said auteur took the movie off him in post-production.
It's crazy how Netflix ripped off Resident Evil to make Stranger Things, complete with their Alice ripoff Eleven, and it was a huge hit, but when they tried to make an RE show of their own, they fricked it up.
I just hate that every movie after 2 is completely fricking disconnected and could be its own movie with different characters and nothing would change.
1 is amazing, 2 is a great followup, everything else is just a joke
3 is a continuation of 2, though. With the same supporting cast, and the cliffhanger ending of 2 is central to the plot. And 4 picks up immediately after 3. Then 5's opening is a direct continuation of 4's ending. 6 is an anomaly but that's because the film went off the rails behind the scenes.
Resident Evil 3 is largely based on a deleted scene from the first movie where the Red Queen explains how the outbreak will take about 2 months. Then at the end of the film the White Queen was going to appear and say that it was too late to stop the outbreak and she was very sorry for everything.
>1 ends with Alice leaving the hospital. >2 opens with Alice leaving the hospital. >2 ends with Alice under Umbrella's control. >3 opens with Alice wandering around in the desert to Umbrella can't find her and control her. >3 ends with Alice talking to the Umbrella execs in Toyko saying she's coming for them. >4 opens with Alice coming for them. >4 end with Alice watching the fleet of Umbrella VTOLs launching at attack on Arcadia. >5 opens with the attack on Arcadia. >5 ends with Alice watching the onslaught on the White House. >6 opens the next day as Alice crawls out of an escape tunnel leading from the White House.
One caveat here is that for whatever reason it seems PWSA decided to lean into the studio meddling and as a result, none of the early films actually happened. There's no reason to believe the events of the first movie or the second movie or the third movie or the fourth movie were real. They're fiction. That's why the final movie completely disregards the events of Apocalypse. Because those events never happened. Angie Ashford never existed. Like how the girl in Tokyo never existed.
That "frick it, none of it was real, let's burn this franchise to the ground" mindset is why 4-6 feel different to 1-3. Truth is rewritten on the fly.
Milla is a passable actress, but she can't sell the dry, sarcastic, but tough Alice like her mother can. She's fine as the Red Queen, fine as Alicia Marcus, but she's not Milla Jovovich. That balance Milla struck is something a lot of female action stars try to achieve with mixed results.
nobody's pretending
They were pretty good/comfy except for the last one, that one was truly terrible.
The last film was a production shitshow but I'd argue that he manages to make lemonade from a lemon. It has some genuinely good dialogue, and some striking imagery. It's also a film that pivots hard due to running out of money, time, and the film has brutal executive meddling. (Why is it edited that way? It's because the studio fired his favorite editor over creative disagreements with Resident Evil Retribution and its somewhat butchered theatrical cut and the director's cut the studio refused to release on home video).
Even this mess of a film is still INTERESTING. It still manages to have something to say. It still manages to say things about its predecessor, about its franchise, about its nature as a movie. Despite conditions getting worse and worse, none of the films are soulless studio slop.
They're super fun movies with genuine vision behind them. The second trilogy openly embraces the idea that these films are fiction. I wish we could get director's cuts because the studio started to meddle harder and harder.
Only moronic zoomers think they are good or "le comfy xD"
Zoomers have the worst nostalgia and rose tinted glasses when it comes to film
The reality is that most people are too young to understand that Paul W.S. Anderson went from a god-tier filmmaker with a bright future to a sellout after multiple flops in the 90s. The number of people who have seen Shopping is insignificant.
The first one is genuinely comfy, everthing after is bad
I love Resident Evil and they all sucked
It sounds like you're a fan of the source material who hated Paul W.S.'s fundamental reimagining of the material.
I.e., a nerd.
I understand not liking the films, but they seem to attract a weird animosity. The kind you usually only associate with Michael Bay or Zack Snyder. People who don't like these films seem to RESENT these films, and the fact they kept refusing to flop made them resent all the harder.
Mika Nakashima looks amazing there
the first two are kino, the others are alright
Take a shot everytime they cut:
Congratulations you now have liver cirrhosis!
Great reddit post
You would know, wouldn't you? I've seen your posts on r/cuckold
I liked 1,2, 4 and 5. 3 was eh, and 6 didn't like at all.
Overall I have a positive opinion about them and would watch them over anything else made in the last dozen of years
I wish we could get director's cuts. The studio were always pressuring him to dumb down the story. That's why Retribution had so much cut from it.
>Apocalipse
Paul W.S. Anderson is a better director than Kurt Wimmer. Now of course his second unit guys do a substantial amount of heavy lifting, but when you compare Resident Evil: Afterlife to Ultraviolet, it's chalk and cheese. In his entire career as a director, the only film that genuinely fell apart would have to be Pompeii. That film does not work. It was shot weird. The VFX look wrong. But Kurt Wimmer proved incapable of delivering a coherent movie after Equilibrium.
With Afterlife and Retribution, Anderson embraced the Kurt Wimmer style and made functional movies that don't fricking suck out of it.
I read the Afterlife script, and there are some odd differences between the script and the movie. For example, Wesker's introduction is different (it has him exercising in his private quarters), the VTOL crash is different, and how Alice survived/what happened to Wesker is explained. There's scenes where Alice tries to use her powers, but can only shift a water bottle an inch. There's a flashback scene that explains how Wesker knows Chris. This was all either not filmed (most likely, they had a tight budget) or cut to save time. Also, Wesker has leeches under his skin, and these leeches are related to his feeding. He has been sucking the life out of the crew of the ship.
What it reveals to me is that every odd plot point in these movies was something they were aware of, but at some point they just said, "Frick it." There is absolutely a sense that these movies were trimmed because Screen Gems didn't want them longer than 100 minutes.
the first 2? yes. The other 4 are pure garbage, the fifth is bearable because of Jill and Ada but still bad
The second film is the worst in the series, possibly because it is the most similar to the games. 3 is absolutely fantastic. 4 is a bit uneven, but it has god-tier music and visuals. 5 is a studio-ass-fricked version of a very intelligent movie, but it's unclear if we'll ever get the director's cut. 6 is a talented team attempting to fix a fricked project, with some success.
Nah, they don't justify the human sacrifice that was required to make them.
This feels like bait. I don't see people saying that the X-Men films weren't worth the human cost because of the awful motorbike stunt on Deadpool 2. Frickups happen. The court documents make Jeremy Bolt sound like as snake, and Paul W.S. Anderson sound like a coward who, to his credit, continued to offer financial support long after Sony and the other parties had turned their backs on the stuntwoman, but it simply wasn't enough financial support.
I was reading the documents recently and it turns out that Anderson didn't meet with the stuntwoman's family, so that was all Bolt and a representative from Sony. The one who made promises that the medical expenses would be taken care of was Bolt. So to a degree, frick Bolt. He's a talented producer in terms of keeping costs down, but frick him if his cost-cutting results in people's lives being ruined.
In all seriousness, people talk about how tragic it was that Brandon Lee died on The Crow, but nobody ever talks about how the on-set conditions were a nightmare, and nobody talks about how it was basically Alex Proyas's fault. His set was a shitshow, and they were having accidents from day 1.
>Filming began on Feb. 1, 1993, on Stage 4 at Carolco Studios, an old cement factory with lingering lime dust. Almost from the start, there were problems -- crew injuries, accidental destruction of property, a winter storm that destroyed a set. According to O'Barr, "the whole film was shot at night." The nonunion crews, he says, "would start filming at 10 o'clock until light came up." The set was cold, claustrophobic, dark and dank.
>In July, Premiere reported that Lee's manager, Jan McCormack, had called Wilmington to complain that "conditions on the set had become subhuman." Later in the same conversation, McCormack added, "You guys are killing Brandon down there."
>Last August, Caldwell filed suit in North Carolina Superior Court against Ed Pressman Film Corp., Proyas, stunt coordinator Jeff Imada and actor Michael Massee, who, in the character of Funboy, pulled the trigger. Caldwell's suit charged negligence in the death of Brandon Lee and sought unspecified punitive and compensatory damages. While district attorney Spivey did not press charges, the filmmakers were fined $77,000 for workplace violations. Caldwell settled out of court in September for an undisclosed sum.
While Paul W.S. Anderson should be blamed for his set, his frickup, whatever, the fact is, people tend to ignore frickups if they like a director. The venn diagram of people who bring up the accidents on RE6 and the people who hate Paul W.S. Anderson tend to be a near-perfect circle.
Ever resident evil soon?
They were abysmal
They're amazing films by one of the greatest auteurs working in film. And also the one Russell Mulcahy made is pretty good because said auteur took the movie off him in post-production.
It's crazy how Netflix ripped off Resident Evil to make Stranger Things, complete with their Alice ripoff Eleven, and it was a huge hit, but when they tried to make an RE show of their own, they fricked it up.
I just hate that every movie after 2 is completely fricking disconnected and could be its own movie with different characters and nothing would change.
1 is amazing, 2 is a great followup, everything else is just a joke
3 is a continuation of 2, though. With the same supporting cast, and the cliffhanger ending of 2 is central to the plot. And 4 picks up immediately after 3. Then 5's opening is a direct continuation of 4's ending. 6 is an anomaly but that's because the film went off the rails behind the scenes.
Resident Evil 3 is largely based on a deleted scene from the first movie where the Red Queen explains how the outbreak will take about 2 months. Then at the end of the film the White Queen was going to appear and say that it was too late to stop the outbreak and she was very sorry for everything.
>1 ends with Alice leaving the hospital.
>2 opens with Alice leaving the hospital.
>2 ends with Alice under Umbrella's control.
>3 opens with Alice wandering around in the desert to Umbrella can't find her and control her.
>3 ends with Alice talking to the Umbrella execs in Toyko saying she's coming for them.
>4 opens with Alice coming for them.
>4 end with Alice watching the fleet of Umbrella VTOLs launching at attack on Arcadia.
>5 opens with the attack on Arcadia.
>5 ends with Alice watching the onslaught on the White House.
>6 opens the next day as Alice crawls out of an escape tunnel leading from the White House.
One caveat here is that for whatever reason it seems PWSA decided to lean into the studio meddling and as a result, none of the early films actually happened. There's no reason to believe the events of the first movie or the second movie or the third movie or the fourth movie were real. They're fiction. That's why the final movie completely disregards the events of Apocalypse. Because those events never happened. Angie Ashford never existed. Like how the girl in Tokyo never existed.
That "frick it, none of it was real, let's burn this franchise to the ground" mindset is why 4-6 feel different to 1-3. Truth is rewritten on the fly.
>RE
will be all reset starring her daughter in several years.
Great
Milla is a passable actress, but she can't sell the dry, sarcastic, but tough Alice like her mother can. She's fine as the Red Queen, fine as Alicia Marcus, but she's not Milla Jovovich. That balance Milla struck is something a lot of female action stars try to achieve with mixed results.
>Milla is a passable actress,
her voice is her greatest weakness, she just sounds like a nobody.
They were always kino.