28 weeks later... the sequel.
Yes and no.Grudge wrote:Speaking of which, RE: Apocalypse was utter, utter shit.
No, because it got some of the things from the games spot on. The stars where good, with or without the actual RE members, and the nemesis, no matter how short the guy looked, actually looked the part.
But yes, because the film was utter shite to the highest degree and made for 12 years, by 12 year olds. If RE was aimed at the target audience the games were aimed at, then it would of been a gritty horror film. With zombies. Instead, we get an action flick with bullet time and shit. Woo, thats new.
The fact you haven't played the games means you should of liked it more.Grudge wrote:I haven't played the games, so to me it was just a really, really shitty movie.
The fact you still thought it was shit is the exact reason anderson should not even touch a third movie (Which, unfortunatly, he IS doing...)...
-
Tormentius
- Posts: 4108
- Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am
-
Guest
-
reefsurfer
- Posts: 4065
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2003 8:00 am
if i remember correctly, one of the best movies of all time was shot in AU

and dawn of the dead kicked a lot of ass as well.
anyways... what is the plot supposed to be? is it just about americans repopulating england? wtf where is the "horror" aspect supposed to come from?

and dawn of the dead kicked a lot of ass as well.
anyways... what is the plot supposed to be? is it just about americans repopulating england? wtf where is the "horror" aspect supposed to come from?
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/HerrDrFunkenstein/lol.jpg[/img]