>not a single scene in the entire flick >entire movie is just 5second shots edited into each over
really, have you ever seen this flick?
1st one is the only one that is watchable
Some people don't mind fast editing. Apocalypse was definitely choppy, though. Basically the two fastest paced/edited movies are Apocalypse and Final Chapter. Because Afterlife and Retribution were shot in 3D (and had different editors) the pacing of cuts was a lot slower. 3D audiences get sick if you cut constantly.
I will never understand game fans seething about Barry and Leon in Retribution. "They did him dirty," bla bla bla. They're perfectly fine versions of the characters. Barry goes out pretty heroically, and even the mind controlled Jill is shook by it. Leon doesn't have much to say, but he's a competent guy with a gun. That's all Leon ever was. A guy with a gun.
It feels like RE megafans have this insane headcanon about how deep and complicated these characters are. And it gets weird when they start citing non-game materials that didn't exist when these movies were made. You can't go on about how deep Leon is because <random thing in Damnation> or <random thing in Vendetta>. Leon has all the depth and personality of liquified onions. Half of what people think of as his personality is jokes added by the RE4 localization team.
Correct answer. Was legitimately in shock when I was marathoning these shit films and Apocalypse just BTFO the first two films and it hasn't been topped since.
>basically the time where Alice has all types of ridiculous mutant powers and also thousands of clones
If only they made an entire movie like the beginning of 4.
The problem isn't really the camera work. It's Doobie White's decision to construct scenes out of dozens of overlapping takes. There are entire scenes composed of 6-12 frame shots in sequence. Characters jumping off a ledge becomes 5 different shots assembled together. It is so aggressive. The actual camera work is solid. The editing is hyper-aggressive. Monster Hunter (which White returned as editor on) has some of the same problems, but it's nowhere near as aggressive.
The basic editing theory at work is actually pretty similar to Mad Max Fury Road, but the cutting is simply too fast, and the audience loses track. He also breaks the 180 rule too frequently, particularly in the elevator fight with Isaacs.
I'd argue that White's excesses are less overt in Monster Hunter. It's still choppy, but it's not Final Chapter choppy. Monster Hunter has more of a fixation on the fight scene equivalent of shot/reverse-shot. I'm not sure why directors let White edit their movies this way. He worked on Gamer, and that's edited in the exact same way, and it's very challenging to watch. You go back and you watch the 2002 RE movie or RE Afterlife and Retribution which were shot in 3D and needed stable visual cohesion, and they're much nicer to watch. Choppy editing can be impactful, but... like, fricking hell, the scene with the Red Queen in the bunker, where she says, "Behind you." You don't see the monster attacking Alice for longer than like 12 frames at a time. Many shots are about 3 frames long. And it's like... frick this. Who thought this was a good idea? My thinking is maybe directors are too close to the material, and they don't understand how that editing looks in isolation.
Quantum of Solace was the first movie in that style I found legit disconcerting. I think the entire style was popularized by the Bourne movies, and frankly I'm not convinced that the Bourne sequels benefit from the incessant cutting.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I still find it more tolerable than the other Craig Bond films, straightforward action plot and nice short runtime. His other 007 flicks are bloated messes
2 years ago
Anonymous
The plot in Quantum of Solace is probably simple because of the writer's strike more than anything else. It's an odd movie.
2 years ago
Anonymous
True, but I still kinda like. Also the Bond girls are top notch, though admittedly Olga was hotter in The November Man with Pierce Brosnan which is superior to any of Craig's movies
Theres no way the jump cut editing in any movie is worse than monster hunter. It physically hurt and i had to turn it off really early
I'd argue that White's excesses are less overt in Monster Hunter. It's still choppy, but it's not Final Chapter choppy. Monster Hunter has more of a fixation on the fight scene equivalent of shot/reverse-shot. I'm not sure why directors let White edit their movies this way. He worked on Gamer, and that's edited in the exact same way, and it's very challenging to watch. You go back and you watch the 2002 RE movie or RE Afterlife and Retribution which were shot in 3D and needed stable visual cohesion, and they're much nicer to watch. Choppy editing can be impactful, but... like, fricking hell, the scene with the Red Queen in the bunker, where she says, "Behind you." You don't see the monster attacking Alice for longer than like 12 frames at a time. Many shots are about 3 frames long. And it's like... frick this. Who thought this was a good idea? My thinking is maybe directors are too close to the material, and they don't understand how that editing looks in isolation.
This jump cut editing is in the entirety of RE2
It is fricking painful to see
The first film is the best in terms of quality and writing. The rest of the films are GOOD movies but they don't live up to the first movie, which was a GREAT movie. I wish Final Chapter's budget hadn't been cut because there's a much stronger film trying to get out underneath a lot of awkward compromises and rewrites.
Reminder that she's the only character in all six movies to just plain beat Alice in a fight
Jill was supposed to be in Extinction, but they couldn't get her actress back and Anderson didn't want to recast. (Sony kept pressuring him to recast actors and he kept refusing.) So they introduced Claire in her place.
The original plan for Apocalypse was to shoot a scene of Chris and Jill in the mansion trying to arrest Wesker and getting BTFO, but they couldn't afford this, I think. So the scene was cut. It's in the script and would have explained Wesker's history with Chris and Jill.
Anyway, the original plot for Resident Evil: Final Chapter was a movie where Wesker would lead Alice, Jill, Leon, and Ada back to the Hive, joining up with Claire and possibly Chris along the way. It would be the grand showdown as the Red Queen tries to kill the entire planet because she's gone bonkers.
Then...
Uh...
Sony cut the budget.
And Milla got pregnant.
When production began proper they no longer had the money to bring back the actors for Jill, Ada, and Leon. They no longer had the money to shoot the White House scenes, and they also had problems with Capcom when they pitched the idea of the characters dying in a massacre. (See Monster Hunter's scene with the team getting killed in soft focus for what this would have looked like.)
So Final Chapter, which was undergoing waves of rewrites to make it cheaper ended up scrapping a shitload of material and plot points. Becky disappeared. The White Queen was cut. The fight with Wesker was cut because they couldn't afford the climactic fight to the death against a mutating Wesker as Claire and her boyfriend Doc (who wasn't a traitor originally), struggled to deploy the airborne anti-virus via a special dispenser, before either Doc or Claire saved the day by shooting Wesker with an RPG.
Jill is dead but they can't say she's dead for legal reasons. And if they ever make a cash grab Alice sequel they might retcon Final Chapter.
I kinda wish Anderson would talk publicly about what happened on Final Chapter, because it feels like a lot of vocal people take the uncharitable view that he didn't care. But Anderson was trying to get the movie despite numerous aspects of production falling apart. The Final Chapter we got was not the Final Chapter he originally set out to make, the one they would have shot in 2014. Cutting the budget from 60 (mentioned in Sony leaks) to 40 million meant numerous changes. Making a movie like this on 60 million is a lot of pressure. Action movies like this regularly cost 100+ million. So to lose another 20 million off the budget was always going to frick the movie in terms of what they could afford. And autistic fans will always whine when you kill off a character in an indignant way. But if they knew that Wesker had to die that way because they had no money to shoot the planned fight scene, then maybe it would clear the air. We only know stuff about this movie because a detailed description of the screenplay leaked in 2015. And we know stuff from the Sony leaks in 2014. I still like Final Chapter, but it's messy and the editing is unpleasant. It should have been the triumphant end to the Resident Evil film that went out with a bang instead of this weird, rough movie with clear budget issues.
>I kinda wish Anderson would talk publicly about what happened on Final Chapter
Isn't that the installment in which a stuntwoman got mutilated and amputated to shit and some other guy got killed when a Hummer dropped on him? I bet Anderson just wants to forget that entire experience and is glad the movie and especially the production doesn't get talked about more.
>Isn't that the installment in which a stuntwoman got mutilated and amputated to shit and some other guy got killed when a Hummer dropped on him?
Accidents happen, anon. It was a tragedy, but it was absolutely the South African company that fricked up. My primary criticism would be that Anderson and Bolt could have done more to help the stuntwoman instead of arguing that the South Africans should pay her. Were they legally in the right? Yes. Was it kind of scummy to not do something more? Yes.
The Resident Evil sets were always kind of dangerous. Low budgets, foreign shooting locations, lots that can go wrong. Milla got acid burns on the first RE film. She doesn't do hand modeling because her hands are all kinds of scuffed up from the injuries she's sustained on the series.
>Isn't that the installment in which a stuntwoman got mutilated and amputated to shit and some other guy got killed when a Hummer dropped on him?
Accidents happen, anon. It was a tragedy, but it was absolutely the South African company that fricked up. My primary criticism would be that Anderson and Bolt could have done more to help the stuntwoman instead of arguing that the South Africans should pay her. Were they legally in the right? Yes. Was it kind of scummy to not do something more? Yes.
The Resident Evil sets were always kind of dangerous. Low budgets, foreign shooting locations, lots that can go wrong. Milla got acid burns on the first RE film. She doesn't do hand modeling because her hands are all kinds of scuffed up from the injuries she's sustained on the series.
>Good news for Jackson: she won her case in 2020. According to Variety.com, the High Court in South Africa decided on a ruling that "the stunt was negligently planned and executed by the South African company operating the camera and filming vehicle." >South Africa's Road Accident Fund is "liable" to pay Jackson, but no one is sure what amount of money that would be. >Jackson hasn't gotten very much money: ABC News Go reported that she was paid $33,000 by the film's producers and then given $990. >Jackson shared with The Hollywood Reporter that this accident has affected her so much. It sounds truly heartbreaking and so painful. She said, “Numerous things were changed at the last minute that I wasn’t aware of. Which resulted in the crane operator not lifting the crane in time and basically driving it straight into my left arm and left shoulder.” She continued, “It’s had such a huge impact on every single part of my life, my body is so physically damaged and a lot of it beyond repair. Every single moment of my time I’ve got nerve pain.”
https://www.thethings.com/what-happened-to-charlize-therons-stunt-double-for-mad-max-fury-road/
The root of the frickup is that Anderson wanted the scene changed. Also that due to weather they were shooting the scene where Alice rides away on the stolen bike instead of the scene they were originally going to shoot. The South African contractor was supposed to organize the stunt and brief everyone on the changes. They fricked up royally doing this. They stuntwoman was not informed, and the stunt was not coordinated correctly.
The scene where a guy was crushed was late in production when they were setting up a scene I kind of hate where Alice is chased by a flying monster. The platform the truck was on tipped. Again, the filmmakers weren't involved in this. The SA company was fricking up. And this is a worrying trend. Companies filming in South Africa because it's cheap and cutting corners.
Frick sake. Final Chapter would have been watchable if they included all that cut shit. Was looking forward to seeing some mayhem with mankind's last stand at the white house.
[...]
Jill was supposed to be in Extinction, but they couldn't get her actress back and Anderson didn't want to recast. (Sony kept pressuring him to recast actors and he kept refusing.) So they introduced Claire in her place.
The original plan for Apocalypse was to shoot a scene of Chris and Jill in the mansion trying to arrest Wesker and getting BTFO, but they couldn't afford this, I think. So the scene was cut. It's in the script and would have explained Wesker's history with Chris and Jill.
Anyway, the original plot for Resident Evil: Final Chapter was a movie where Wesker would lead Alice, Jill, Leon, and Ada back to the Hive, joining up with Claire and possibly Chris along the way. It would be the grand showdown as the Red Queen tries to kill the entire planet because she's gone bonkers.
Then...
Uh...
Sony cut the budget.
And Milla got pregnant.
When production began proper they no longer had the money to bring back the actors for Jill, Ada, and Leon. They no longer had the money to shoot the White House scenes, and they also had problems with Capcom when they pitched the idea of the characters dying in a massacre. (See Monster Hunter's scene with the team getting killed in soft focus for what this would have looked like.)
So Final Chapter, which was undergoing waves of rewrites to make it cheaper ended up scrapping a shitload of material and plot points. Becky disappeared. The White Queen was cut. The fight with Wesker was cut because they couldn't afford the climactic fight to the death against a mutating Wesker as Claire and her boyfriend Doc (who wasn't a traitor originally), struggled to deploy the airborne anti-virus via a special dispenser, before either Doc or Claire saved the day by shooting Wesker with an RPG.
Jill is dead but they can't say she's dead for legal reasons. And if they ever make a cash grab Alice sequel they might retcon Final Chapter.
they ran into problems with Sony refusing to give them money to lock down actors between movies, and they were unable to say what happened to Jill in Final Chapter because they couldn't afford to bring her back, and didn't have the legal clearance to explicitly kill her. So the movie dances around the point.
They introduced Claire in Extinction because they couldn't get Jill's actress due to contractual obligations. They had to write around never-ending production issues. Sony who were paying for the movies would never greenlight movies until they had proven successful at the box office and on home video. This is bad for franchise filmmaking. Imagine trying to make the MCU except you can't sign contracts with any of the actors, so you can't get Robert Downey Jr for Infinity War but maybe you can get him for Endgame.
Watched them all recently. The only one I really, really liked and have any desire to rewatch is the first one. I didn't find any of them particularly bad, even being a fan of the game series, besides whichever sequel had that headache-inducing editing. The rest were alright.
the building one where she lands a plane on a tiny roof and a black guy slam dunks the wing down. also has the re5 wesker fight recreated but i think i still prefer the building scenes
>I thought 4 was the most moronic and the best and I'm shocked that's a controversial opinion
Apocalypse has way too many videogame references without justifying context. From what I've heard Capcom asked Anderson to include some RE5 stuff for cross-promotion purposes and he obliged. But it feels weird in live action. the Wesker fight is already kind of goofy in RE5, and Afterlife drives home how goofy it is.
However, Afterlife is a pretty good movie. It's nicely shot. Has a really good soundtrack. It is a very experimental movie. Most action films aren't shot the way Afterlife is. The opening scene in the film is nothing like other zombie/horror movies.
I have seen all of them.
The only thing I remember is a black guy who tried to kung fu a laser net and lost, and the computer was a e-girl. I think that was both the first one.
Forgetable: The franchise.
The one with Nemesis was the best one. The desert one was good too. And I liked how in the last movie it was revealed that Milia was a clone of the owner of Umbrella or some shit.
The first movie is peak Jovovich. I didn't realise this until recently and went back to watch it and she is distinctly different looking in the first one compared to even Apocalypse. She was beautiful in that 2002 movie in a way that she was never quite again like.
She does have long term beauty, it's just not the same now. Jennifer Connelly was the same, always beautiful but compared to how she was when she was between the ages of 18 and 21? There has not existed an actress like quite like that ever.
Retribution, easily. It was clear they were just having fun with the budget in that one.
Very entertaining, good OST and has the best opening sequence of them all.
yet you have no problems with the movie series where the director makes her wife an unstoppable badass and he treats the game characters like idiots.
I didnt really like wtrc that much, saw it opening day, but its still miles better than any of the anderson joints. black jill was ok, leon was a disgrace though, but it has more to do with the writing. chris was perfect and birkin was fairly good too.
been planning to rewatch it soon already knowing what Im getting into and I suspect I'll like it a bit more on rewatch.
>yet you have no problems with the movie series where the director makes her wife an unstoppable badass
This is a very strange criticism. Every major action franchise is built around a central character who has a strong relationship with the director, and the film is designed to flatter them. Mission Impossible, Terminator, Alien, even something like Top Gun. It's all about Maverick. He's the only one who can pull of the move.
It feels like source material cucks seething that the movies aren't about their pet characters from the source material. Boo, fricking hoo. There can be only be one protagonist in an action franchise like this. Everyone else exists to reinforce how much of a badass the protagonist is.
>but its ok to boo fricking hoo because they picked a black actress to play jill?
Those people are morons. I thought WTRC Jill was fine, and Roberts did an okay job trying to make Jill a more nuanced character. >the hypocrisy of anderson cucks never fails to amaze me.
With respect, anon, I don't think Anderson's fans are the kind of people getting upset about Lance Reddick as Wesker, black Jill, and stuff like that. It's game purists who angrily hate that stuff.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Those people are morons. I thought WTRC Jill was fine, and Roberts did an okay job trying to make Jill a more nuanced character.
The reboot should have been a trilogy. Mansion, then city/RPD, then the city's destruction/RE3 adaptaion.
Imagine if they shot them back to back on that kind of budget instead of blowing their load. I liked WTRC too but where the hell do you go with a sequel from that?
2 years ago
Anonymous
The problem is that a movie just about the mansion risks being rather boring. WTRC tries to solve this issue by combining RE1 and RE2. It had budget cuts which meant that CG-heavy elements had to be reduced. That's why Lisa's plotline doesn't go anywhere. She was meant to be part of a climactic fight they had to cut.
Here's the basic problem. Nobody except RE game fans is asking for an adaptation of RE1, RE2, and RE3. You make a faithful adaptation of RE3, and there's a huge risk people will view it as a soulless version of Apocalypse.
The best way to move forward from WTRC aside from potentially using those actors in the TV show if they want to bring game characters into the cast is to make the Code Veronica or RE4-based sequel they wanted to do. Just turn RE4 into more of an ensemble film. Or do Code Veronica, which is cheaper.
but its ok to boo fricking hoo because they picked a black actress to play jill? the hypocrisy of anderson cucks never fails to amaze me. Sad!
>but its ok to boo fricking hoo because they picked a black actress to play jill?
Those people are morons. I thought WTRC Jill was fine, and Roberts did an okay job trying to make Jill a more nuanced character. >the hypocrisy of anderson cucks never fails to amaze me.
With respect, anon, I don't think Anderson's fans are the kind of people getting upset about Lance Reddick as Wesker, black Jill, and stuff like that. It's game purists who angrily hate that stuff.
>Absolutely fails on trying to even follow the source material >ITS THE GAME PURISTS FAULT!
No one likes this POC/PROGRESSIVE pandering bullshit. People want to see proper casting for an adaptation. People love Apocalypse the most because they cast a pretty god damn good Jill in the role. Wasn't perfect, but they at least took the time to get the fricking LOOK down.
Most adaptations where they racewash a character, no matter what direction, is lazy as frick. At that point it shows they don't want to make an adaptation, they just want to push a narrative.
Which is surprising as frick considering they nailed the casting for Chris in that Amell guy.
fails on trying to even follow the source material
There is no inherent merit in fidelity to source material. You don't "fail" to do anything. >People love Apocalypse the most
No they don't. Apocalypse was seen as a massive step down back in 2004. The people who like it tend to be game fans fixated on characters from the games, particularly Jill Valentine. The first RE film was great. Apocalypse was made by a new director who had no fricking clue how to shoot action scenes. It's an interesting movie, but it's messy and lacks the polish of 1 and 3.
A lot of people will mock you for this, but Welcome to Raccoon City is absolutely worth watching. It feels a bit too derivative of RE2 remake, and the budget issues are super obvious with the lack of set pieces, but it has some style, and it's a very interesting contrast to Anderson's films. Anderson and Bolt are credited as executive producers, but they had no involvement.
Retribution feels underrated. The stuff with Becky, the Dawn of the Dead homages, the reversed opening, the white hallway fight, the fact Alice spends the entire movie in literal BDSM gear... It's pretty cool.
However, Retribution has a C+ CinemaScore wheras most of the other films, including Final Chapter, were a B. People didn't like how Retribution was just one non-stop fight scene. But I think maybe there's a bit more appreciation for that style of movie in a post John Wick world.
Paul W.S. Anderson was busy making other movies when Apocalypse and Extinction were made. AvP and Death Race respectively. But what's interesting is that they still feel like his movies. It's almost George Lucas-esque where all 6 original Star Wars movies feel like Lucas, and the ones made after he left don't capture the style quite right.
The source of Final Chapter's choppy editing is the guy they hired, Doobie White, who has a history of this. (Crank, Gamer, Polar, etc.) I guess maybe Bourne Identity had come out in 2002, and Apocalypse released in 2004, so maybe the editor was fixated on it? I think they changed editors ever other movie. The original film has very relaxed editing that picks up pace during action scenes. Apocalypse is way faster, and mixes in a lot of incoherent close-ups during fight scenes. It's possible the director didn't shoot coverage properly. Milla complained that he was incompetent at shooting fight scenes and that you couldn't tell the actors were doing their own stunts.
Yes and no. RE7 becomes way more expensive if you're going to have monsters from the game. As a horror/slasher film set in a big house? Totally doable. You do have some issues, though. Like, what is the HOOK? Because horror movies need some angle that gets people excited. You can't just sell people a brand name like Capcom do with the games. You have to work for the audience's attention.
For example, the movie X came out this year. It was successful because it was made cheap as chips. Made 15 million at the box office. But you can't really adapt RE7 on anything lower than 30 million. You're gonna have to build sets. You're gonna have to do some expensive VFX.
My idea would involve very little enemies outside the bakers, Marguerite could be done cheaply I think, and Jack would never turn into the boat house thing. Just a couple of molded probably, including the fat one in the barn fight.
I would focus more on the bakers before finding eveline and how they turned, and I would expand Mia's background in the later episodes.
Afterlife was my favourite, it was in the same vain as Suckerpunch in the sense that it was a shit movie but the aesthetic, feeling and soundtrack had an air to it that was unique to the 2010-2012 era of shit moneygrabber movies. I just love the gritty greyish moody atmosphere, not many movies come close. I'm biased because that was the last time period where I was naïvely optimistic about the future. I really miss that early 2010s feeling and by early 2010s I mean very early 2010s (2010-2012 only), as a time period it was very culturally distinct from both the 2000s and the rest of the 2010s. It's a personal golden age that can never be replicated or returned to.
Apocalypse.
Yes
>not a single scene in the entire flick
>entire movie is just 5second shots edited into each over
really, have you ever seen this flick?
1st one is the only one that is watchable
Some people don't mind fast editing. Apocalypse was definitely choppy, though. Basically the two fastest paced/edited movies are Apocalypse and Final Chapter. Because Afterlife and Retribution were shot in 3D (and had different editors) the pacing of cuts was a lot slower. 3D audiences get sick if you cut constantly.
Such a boss.
I will never understand game fans seething about Barry and Leon in Retribution. "They did him dirty," bla bla bla. They're perfectly fine versions of the characters. Barry goes out pretty heroically, and even the mind controlled Jill is shook by it. Leon doesn't have much to say, but he's a competent guy with a gun. That's all Leon ever was. A guy with a gun.
It feels like RE megafans have this insane headcanon about how deep and complicated these characters are. And it gets weird when they start citing non-game materials that didn't exist when these movies were made. You can't go on about how deep Leon is because <random thing in Damnation> or <random thing in Vendetta>. Leon has all the depth and personality of liquified onions. Half of what people think of as his personality is jokes added by the RE4 localization team.
You're overstating it, the editing is not that bad
Most of Apocalypse's editing is fine. It's the up close and personal fight scenes that are incoherent. Alice vs Nemesis is a cobb salad.
Correct answer. Was legitimately in shock when I was marathoning these shit films and Apocalypse just BTFO the first two films and it hasn't been topped since.
The ones where she is shown naked
the good one
Retribution. Ridiculous wacky nonsense that doesn't give half a frick and is the pinnacle of this series and of Milla Jovovich's career.
1 is probably the best, realistically.
2 is my favorite.
3 is the one I watched the most, by far.
The rest were fricking awful.
>1 is probably the best, realistically.
>2 is my favorite.
This is the thinking man's take.
4 is the best objectively speaking.
the end of 3 and beginning of 4
basically the time where Alice has all types of ridiculous mutant powers and also thousands of clones
>basically the time where Alice has all types of ridiculous mutant powers and also thousands of clones
If only they made an entire movie like the beginning of 4.
2>5>4>1>6>3
6 would be on par with 4 if the camera work wasn't complete ass.
The problem isn't really the camera work. It's Doobie White's decision to construct scenes out of dozens of overlapping takes. There are entire scenes composed of 6-12 frame shots in sequence. Characters jumping off a ledge becomes 5 different shots assembled together. It is so aggressive. The actual camera work is solid. The editing is hyper-aggressive. Monster Hunter (which White returned as editor on) has some of the same problems, but it's nowhere near as aggressive.
The basic editing theory at work is actually pretty similar to Mad Max Fury Road, but the cutting is simply too fast, and the audience loses track. He also breaks the 180 rule too frequently, particularly in the elevator fight with Isaacs.
Theres no way the jump cut editing in any movie is worse than monster hunter. It physically hurt and i had to turn it off really early
I'd argue that White's excesses are less overt in Monster Hunter. It's still choppy, but it's not Final Chapter choppy. Monster Hunter has more of a fixation on the fight scene equivalent of shot/reverse-shot. I'm not sure why directors let White edit their movies this way. He worked on Gamer, and that's edited in the exact same way, and it's very challenging to watch. You go back and you watch the 2002 RE movie or RE Afterlife and Retribution which were shot in 3D and needed stable visual cohesion, and they're much nicer to watch. Choppy editing can be impactful, but... like, fricking hell, the scene with the Red Queen in the bunker, where she says, "Behind you." You don't see the monster attacking Alice for longer than like 12 frames at a time. Many shots are about 3 frames long. And it's like... frick this. Who thought this was a good idea? My thinking is maybe directors are too close to the material, and they don't understand how that editing looks in isolation.
We each probably have our own film that triggers this revulsion.
To this day, I feel like I hated Quantum of Solace more than anything I've ever seen, yet find this webm from Taken 3 hilarious
Quantum of Solace was the first movie in that style I found legit disconcerting. I think the entire style was popularized by the Bourne movies, and frankly I'm not convinced that the Bourne sequels benefit from the incessant cutting.
I still find it more tolerable than the other Craig Bond films, straightforward action plot and nice short runtime. His other 007 flicks are bloated messes
The plot in Quantum of Solace is probably simple because of the writer's strike more than anything else. It's an odd movie.
True, but I still kinda like. Also the Bond girls are top notch, though admittedly Olga was hotter in The November Man with Pierce Brosnan which is superior to any of Craig's movies
This jump cut editing is in the entirety of RE2
It is fricking painful to see
The first film is the best in terms of quality and writing. The rest of the films are GOOD movies but they don't live up to the first movie, which was a GREAT movie. I wish Final Chapter's budget hadn't been cut because there's a much stronger film trying to get out underneath a lot of awkward compromises and rewrites.
how's her ass in the suit in 5?
ok I just watched it and it wasn't very big
nice bodysuit movie overall though, haven't seen any other than underworld
2
Sienna Guillory can girl boss my wiener 24/7
Apocalypse for Movie Jill
the patrician choice
Reminder that she's the only character in all six movies to just plain beat Alice in a fight
Did they ever even explain what happened to her? I don't remember much past the 3rd movie, which she wasn't in.
Jill was supposed to be in Extinction, but they couldn't get her actress back and Anderson didn't want to recast. (Sony kept pressuring him to recast actors and he kept refusing.) So they introduced Claire in her place.
The original plan for Apocalypse was to shoot a scene of Chris and Jill in the mansion trying to arrest Wesker and getting BTFO, but they couldn't afford this, I think. So the scene was cut. It's in the script and would have explained Wesker's history with Chris and Jill.
Anyway, the original plot for Resident Evil: Final Chapter was a movie where Wesker would lead Alice, Jill, Leon, and Ada back to the Hive, joining up with Claire and possibly Chris along the way. It would be the grand showdown as the Red Queen tries to kill the entire planet because she's gone bonkers.
Then...
Uh...
Sony cut the budget.
And Milla got pregnant.
When production began proper they no longer had the money to bring back the actors for Jill, Ada, and Leon. They no longer had the money to shoot the White House scenes, and they also had problems with Capcom when they pitched the idea of the characters dying in a massacre. (See Monster Hunter's scene with the team getting killed in soft focus for what this would have looked like.)
So Final Chapter, which was undergoing waves of rewrites to make it cheaper ended up scrapping a shitload of material and plot points. Becky disappeared. The White Queen was cut. The fight with Wesker was cut because they couldn't afford the climactic fight to the death against a mutating Wesker as Claire and her boyfriend Doc (who wasn't a traitor originally), struggled to deploy the airborne anti-virus via a special dispenser, before either Doc or Claire saved the day by shooting Wesker with an RPG.
Jill is dead but they can't say she's dead for legal reasons. And if they ever make a cash grab Alice sequel they might retcon Final Chapter.
I kinda wish Anderson would talk publicly about what happened on Final Chapter, because it feels like a lot of vocal people take the uncharitable view that he didn't care. But Anderson was trying to get the movie despite numerous aspects of production falling apart. The Final Chapter we got was not the Final Chapter he originally set out to make, the one they would have shot in 2014. Cutting the budget from 60 (mentioned in Sony leaks) to 40 million meant numerous changes. Making a movie like this on 60 million is a lot of pressure. Action movies like this regularly cost 100+ million. So to lose another 20 million off the budget was always going to frick the movie in terms of what they could afford. And autistic fans will always whine when you kill off a character in an indignant way. But if they knew that Wesker had to die that way because they had no money to shoot the planned fight scene, then maybe it would clear the air. We only know stuff about this movie because a detailed description of the screenplay leaked in 2015. And we know stuff from the Sony leaks in 2014. I still like Final Chapter, but it's messy and the editing is unpleasant. It should have been the triumphant end to the Resident Evil film that went out with a bang instead of this weird, rough movie with clear budget issues.
>I kinda wish Anderson would talk publicly about what happened on Final Chapter
Isn't that the installment in which a stuntwoman got mutilated and amputated to shit and some other guy got killed when a Hummer dropped on him? I bet Anderson just wants to forget that entire experience and is glad the movie and especially the production doesn't get talked about more.
>Isn't that the installment in which a stuntwoman got mutilated and amputated to shit and some other guy got killed when a Hummer dropped on him?
Accidents happen, anon. It was a tragedy, but it was absolutely the South African company that fricked up. My primary criticism would be that Anderson and Bolt could have done more to help the stuntwoman instead of arguing that the South Africans should pay her. Were they legally in the right? Yes. Was it kind of scummy to not do something more? Yes.
The Resident Evil sets were always kind of dangerous. Low budgets, foreign shooting locations, lots that can go wrong. Milla got acid burns on the first RE film. She doesn't do hand modeling because her hands are all kinds of scuffed up from the injuries she's sustained on the series.
>Good news for Jackson: she won her case in 2020. According to Variety.com, the High Court in South Africa decided on a ruling that "the stunt was negligently planned and executed by the South African company operating the camera and filming vehicle."
>South Africa's Road Accident Fund is "liable" to pay Jackson, but no one is sure what amount of money that would be.
>Jackson hasn't gotten very much money: ABC News Go reported that she was paid $33,000 by the film's producers and then given $990.
>Jackson shared with The Hollywood Reporter that this accident has affected her so much. It sounds truly heartbreaking and so painful. She said, “Numerous things were changed at the last minute that I wasn’t aware of. Which resulted in the crane operator not lifting the crane in time and basically driving it straight into my left arm and left shoulder.” She continued, “It’s had such a huge impact on every single part of my life, my body is so physically damaged and a lot of it beyond repair. Every single moment of my time I’ve got nerve pain.”
https://www.thethings.com/what-happened-to-charlize-therons-stunt-double-for-mad-max-fury-road/
The root of the frickup is that Anderson wanted the scene changed. Also that due to weather they were shooting the scene where Alice rides away on the stolen bike instead of the scene they were originally going to shoot. The South African contractor was supposed to organize the stunt and brief everyone on the changes. They fricked up royally doing this. They stuntwoman was not informed, and the stunt was not coordinated correctly.
The scene where a guy was crushed was late in production when they were setting up a scene I kind of hate where Alice is chased by a flying monster. The platform the truck was on tipped. Again, the filmmakers weren't involved in this. The SA company was fricking up. And this is a worrying trend. Companies filming in South Africa because it's cheap and cutting corners.
Which is weird to think about because Resident Evil was a big financially sound franchise, movie wise. Always made bank especially in foreign markets
Movie Claire is pretty hot though
Movie Claire is great.
Frick sake. Final Chapter would have been watchable if they included all that cut shit. Was looking forward to seeing some mayhem with mankind's last stand at the white house.
Nope. Paul's thing was to just throw in franchise characters without explanation every new movie.
As explained by
they ran into problems with Sony refusing to give them money to lock down actors between movies, and they were unable to say what happened to Jill in Final Chapter because they couldn't afford to bring her back, and didn't have the legal clearance to explicitly kill her. So the movie dances around the point.
They introduced Claire in Extinction because they couldn't get Jill's actress due to contractual obligations. They had to write around never-ending production issues. Sony who were paying for the movies would never greenlight movies until they had proven successful at the box office and on home video. This is bad for franchise filmmaking. Imagine trying to make the MCU except you can't sign contracts with any of the actors, so you can't get Robert Downey Jr for Infinity War but maybe you can get him for Endgame.
That's unfortunate, sounds much better than what we got in the last movie.
I would lick her feet on command and let her suffocate me with her snatch
Watched them all recently. The only one I really, really liked and have any desire to rewatch is the first one. I didn't find any of them particularly bad, even being a fan of the game series, besides whichever sequel had that headache-inducing editing. The rest were alright.
the building one where she lands a plane on a tiny roof and a black guy slam dunks the wing down. also has the re5 wesker fight recreated but i think i still prefer the building scenes
The first one is truly kino.
I thought 4 was the most moronic and the best and I'm shocked that's a controversial opinion
How the frick do you watch the Wesker fight and not stand up from your chair and shout KINO?
>I thought 4 was the most moronic and the best and I'm shocked that's a controversial opinion
Apocalypse has way too many videogame references without justifying context. From what I've heard Capcom asked Anderson to include some RE5 stuff for cross-promotion purposes and he obliged. But it feels weird in live action. the Wesker fight is already kind of goofy in RE5, and Afterlife drives home how goofy it is.
However, Afterlife is a pretty good movie. It's nicely shot. Has a really good soundtrack. It is a very experimental movie. Most action films aren't shot the way Afterlife is. The opening scene in the film is nothing like other zombie/horror movies.
The first and second one.
The opening scene of Retribution is absolutely kino.
Retribution> Afterlife> Apocalypse > Extinction > First One > Final Chapter
First one only, second and third to some lesser degree, same as fast and furious
I have seen all of them.
The only thing I remember is a black guy who tried to kung fu a laser net and lost, and the computer was a e-girl. I think that was both the first one.
Forgetable: The franchise.
The first and the last one, maybe 2 a little
One with the red dress > One without the red dress
The one with Nemesis was the best one. The desert one was good too. And I liked how in the last movie it was revealed that Milia was a clone of the owner of Umbrella or some shit.
Shit take. 1st movie is only good one.
The first movie is peak Jovovich. I didn't realise this until recently and went back to watch it and she is distinctly different looking in the first one compared to even Apocalypse. She was beautiful in that 2002 movie in a way that she was never quite again like.
She was in 3 as well. But yeah, outside of those she never hit that peak beauty again.
She does have long term beauty, it's just not the same now. Jennifer Connelly was the same, always beautiful but compared to how she was when she was between the ages of 18 and 21? There has not existed an actress like quite like that ever.
I only paid attention to the first one
I take that back; Jill's pits also caught my attention but I've no clue if the movie was good
>Damn we need to get away from the T-Virus as far as possible!!
>The cure was in Racoon City all along
What a frickup
Apocalypse for Jill
Retribution, easily. It was clear they were just having fun with the budget in that one.
Very entertaining, good OST and has the best opening sequence of them all.
1 for the story and horror elements and the second for the action and Jill Valentine.
This was one good
>Leon a spic
>Jill a sassy black woman
>Wesker black
Why?
>Wesker black
Thats the series theyre about to release.
wesker in WTRC is white
yet you have no problems with the movie series where the director makes her wife an unstoppable badass and he treats the game characters like idiots.
I didnt really like wtrc that much, saw it opening day, but its still miles better than any of the anderson joints. black jill was ok, leon was a disgrace though, but it has more to do with the writing. chris was perfect and birkin was fairly good too.
been planning to rewatch it soon already knowing what Im getting into and I suspect I'll like it a bit more on rewatch.
>yet you have no problems with the movie series where the director makes her wife an unstoppable badass
This is a very strange criticism. Every major action franchise is built around a central character who has a strong relationship with the director, and the film is designed to flatter them. Mission Impossible, Terminator, Alien, even something like Top Gun. It's all about Maverick. He's the only one who can pull of the move.
It feels like source material cucks seething that the movies aren't about their pet characters from the source material. Boo, fricking hoo. There can be only be one protagonist in an action franchise like this. Everyone else exists to reinforce how much of a badass the protagonist is.
but its ok to boo fricking hoo because they picked a black actress to play jill? the hypocrisy of anderson cucks never fails to amaze me. Sad!
>but its ok to boo fricking hoo because they picked a black actress to play jill?
Those people are morons. I thought WTRC Jill was fine, and Roberts did an okay job trying to make Jill a more nuanced character.
>the hypocrisy of anderson cucks never fails to amaze me.
With respect, anon, I don't think Anderson's fans are the kind of people getting upset about Lance Reddick as Wesker, black Jill, and stuff like that. It's game purists who angrily hate that stuff.
>Those people are morons. I thought WTRC Jill was fine, and Roberts did an okay job trying to make Jill a more nuanced character.
The reboot should have been a trilogy. Mansion, then city/RPD, then the city's destruction/RE3 adaptaion.
Imagine if they shot them back to back on that kind of budget instead of blowing their load. I liked WTRC too but where the hell do you go with a sequel from that?
The problem is that a movie just about the mansion risks being rather boring. WTRC tries to solve this issue by combining RE1 and RE2. It had budget cuts which meant that CG-heavy elements had to be reduced. That's why Lisa's plotline doesn't go anywhere. She was meant to be part of a climactic fight they had to cut.
Here's the basic problem. Nobody except RE game fans is asking for an adaptation of RE1, RE2, and RE3. You make a faithful adaptation of RE3, and there's a huge risk people will view it as a soulless version of Apocalypse.
The best way to move forward from WTRC aside from potentially using those actors in the TV show if they want to bring game characters into the cast is to make the Code Veronica or RE4-based sequel they wanted to do. Just turn RE4 into more of an ensemble film. Or do Code Veronica, which is cheaper.
>Absolutely fails on trying to even follow the source material
>ITS THE GAME PURISTS FAULT!
No one likes this POC/PROGRESSIVE pandering bullshit. People want to see proper casting for an adaptation. People love Apocalypse the most because they cast a pretty god damn good Jill in the role. Wasn't perfect, but they at least took the time to get the fricking LOOK down.
Most adaptations where they racewash a character, no matter what direction, is lazy as frick. At that point it shows they don't want to make an adaptation, they just want to push a narrative.
Which is surprising as frick considering they nailed the casting for Chris in that Amell guy.
fails on trying to even follow the source material
There is no inherent merit in fidelity to source material. You don't "fail" to do anything.
>People love Apocalypse the most
No they don't. Apocalypse was seen as a massive step down back in 2004. The people who like it tend to be game fans fixated on characters from the games, particularly Jill Valentine. The first RE film was great. Apocalypse was made by a new director who had no fricking clue how to shoot action scenes. It's an interesting movie, but it's messy and lacks the polish of 1 and 3.
>pajeet leon
>black jill
I will never watch this
A lot of people will mock you for this, but Welcome to Raccoon City is absolutely worth watching. It feels a bit too derivative of RE2 remake, and the budget issues are super obvious with the lack of set pieces, but it has some style, and it's a very interesting contrast to Anderson's films. Anderson and Bolt are credited as executive producers, but they had no involvement.
0/10
Extinction.
Retribution is so much better than the rest it isn't even funny.
Retribution feels underrated. The stuff with Becky, the Dawn of the Dead homages, the reversed opening, the white hallway fight, the fact Alice spends the entire movie in literal BDSM gear... It's pretty cool.
However, Retribution has a C+ CinemaScore wheras most of the other films, including Final Chapter, were a B. People didn't like how Retribution was just one non-stop fight scene. But I think maybe there's a bit more appreciation for that style of movie in a post John Wick world.
I like how Retribution has a Predator combistick in it.
I like the callbacks to the previous movies.
I guess the first one because it tries to be a real movie. As a fan of the games this franchise has always been an embarrassment and an oddity to me.
1 > 2 > 3 >4 > 5 > 6
Paul W.S. Anderson was busy making other movies when Apocalypse and Extinction were made. AvP and Death Race respectively. But what's interesting is that they still feel like his movies. It's almost George Lucas-esque where all 6 original Star Wars movies feel like Lucas, and the ones made after he left don't capture the style quite right.
The source of Final Chapter's choppy editing is the guy they hired, Doobie White, who has a history of this. (Crank, Gamer, Polar, etc.) I guess maybe Bourne Identity had come out in 2002, and Apocalypse released in 2004, so maybe the editor was fixated on it? I think they changed editors ever other movie. The original film has very relaxed editing that picks up pace during action scenes. Apocalypse is way faster, and mixes in a lot of incoherent close-ups during fight scenes. It's possible the director didn't shoot coverage properly. Milla complained that he was incompetent at shooting fight scenes and that you couldn't tell the actors were doing their own stunts.
All I know is the one set in the prison is the worst one by far and one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The rest go up there.
Afterlife is cool. You got filtered, with all due respect.
Afterlife is probably my favorite, the aesthetics, music and tone of the movie all work really well. Although 5 is probably the most fun
1 = 3 > 2 > 6 > 5 >>>>>>>>>>>> 4
5 > 6 > 1 > 3 > 4 > 2
they are all garbage. but if I had to choose I'd say the first one.
at least the premise is interesting and not worn out yet.
Do you guys think Umbrella management brought home lobotomized clones of Alice to use as their personal frick dolls?
Why would you do that when you could have loving housewife Alice on demand?
that one where her husband pays a bunch of people to make shitty movies.
I like the one where she fricks that guy in a shipping container because he threw paint on the wall
Apocalypse was the best one
I think 7 would be pretty easy to adapt into a decent miniseries. You dont even need a huge budget either.
They already cured the whole world, and blue up the entirety of Umbrella. They couldn't make anything.
Yes and no. RE7 becomes way more expensive if you're going to have monsters from the game. As a horror/slasher film set in a big house? Totally doable. You do have some issues, though. Like, what is the HOOK? Because horror movies need some angle that gets people excited. You can't just sell people a brand name like Capcom do with the games. You have to work for the audience's attention.
For example, the movie X came out this year. It was successful because it was made cheap as chips. Made 15 million at the box office. But you can't really adapt RE7 on anything lower than 30 million. You're gonna have to build sets. You're gonna have to do some expensive VFX.
My idea would involve very little enemies outside the bakers, Marguerite could be done cheaply I think, and Jack would never turn into the boat house thing. Just a couple of molded probably, including the fat one in the barn fight.
I would focus more on the bakers before finding eveline and how they turned, and I would expand Mia's background in the later episodes.
>1 is best
>3 is second best
>there is no incorrect order for the rest
Afterlife was my favourite, it was in the same vain as Suckerpunch in the sense that it was a shit movie but the aesthetic, feeling and soundtrack had an air to it that was unique to the 2010-2012 era of shit moneygrabber movies. I just love the gritty greyish moody atmosphere, not many movies come close. I'm biased because that was the last time period where I was naïvely optimistic about the future. I really miss that early 2010s feeling and by early 2010s I mean very early 2010s (2010-2012 only), as a time period it was very culturally distinct from both the 2000s and the rest of the 2010s. It's a personal golden age that can never be replicated or returned to.
Monster Hunter
>Which has the best fan service ?