Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies, Books, TV & Media' started by KnightBrolaire, Jan 30, 2019.
Doesn't look very good imo..
Coincidentally reviews of Polar (Akerlund’s current movie) just came out and are absolutely terrible.
oh is that the one with mads mikkelsen trying to survive in the arctic, or the other mads mikkelsen movie where he's basically john wick?
The arctic one is named Arctic, for ease of identification.
Ah yess how could I confuse Polar with arctic. Polar looks like good stupid fun though. Arctic is being hyped up a lot with critics calling it one of the best "man vs wilderness" films in a long time.
I just thought it was funny cause you asked if it was the arctic one and the arctic one is titled arctic!
I don't even know why the other one's called Polar, doesn't sound like it takes place close to a pole. Belarus seems to be the setting? Maybe it's about POLAR OPPOSITES. I liked that when I searched for it on Google, the preview for Rotten Tomatoes said:
"A gross, stupid and relentlessly ugly film from start to finish. ... Polar is an execrable motion picture, a sad, lint-filled key bump scraped together ..."
I think this subject matter doesn't lend itself to a movie other than a documentary. The only approach I could see working is if it's in the style of like, Eyes of My Mother. That movie is bad, but I think the stylistic approach might work here.
It looks awful. Could barely sit through the trailer/preview thing.
"It appears the target audience for this film are overly horny teenage boys who want to see female nudity and graphic violence with little to no real plot."
WELL I'M SOLD NOW. seriously I love a good stupid action movie.
Yeah I felt the same, it looks like a lame attempt to take an interesting tidbit of metal history and try and exploit it in a low budget indie horror film.
It doesn't have a whole lot of reviews yet, but the reception so far is actually pretty good. 11 out of 12 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are positive.
Of course, these are the opinions of people reviewing it on its merits as a film, whereas I think most people here would be a lot more likely to scrutinize the accuracy of its biographical content and base our final opinions on that, regardless of the quality of the filmmaking craft being displayed. Without seeing it, I can't really say where it lands there.
At least it will have some good bad music
Emory Cohen in the main role, can't get more kvlt than that, right?
Actually, I was watching the trailer and basing my feeling on its merits as a film. So, maybe I'm wrong, then. I'll probably watch this years from now after I've forgotten all about it and stumble upon it somewhere.
Ehhhhhhh, judging a movie by its trailer is always a dicey proposition. While it's more common for bad movies to have good trailers, there have been plenty of really good movies that suffered from having shit trailers as well.
I usually don't watch trailers before a movie unless it's some big-budget thing that I'll know the tone of, ex effects movies. They too often either misrepresent anything interesting or away from the beaten path, or will ruin a surprise since otherwise the trailer would have no content. Reading about them from intelligent writers is ALWAYS better.
Sometimes I hear a trailer is particularly good and will watch it. Ex, the first trailer for Suspiria last year. But often I'll watch a trailer after seeing something and think "wow, that was nothing like the movie." It's rare that a trailer does anything other than try to cram it into one of the handful of movie templates that studios think audiences are looking for. It's especially egregious with things that are partly horror or partly comedy, the trailer always amps up that aspect and usually has nothing in common with what the movie's actually like.
Like I said to a friend Post on FB some days ago.. the acting on this Trailer is just Atrocious...and this is being Polite.
I liked Spun.
I was more judging it based on the "acting" that I saw in the trailer.
Gotta love trailer tropes, such as:
- Inception "BWOOMMM"
- Slowed down versions of pop songs that sound like they're being sung while on quaaludes.
Like uhhh.. dude let's burn a church for da cause!! Totes McGoats!
Is it true the bands it's based on refused offers to use their music in it? They don't even want anything to do with it apparently.
This is true, yes, and it's already been slammed by Mayhem themselves, not to mention Varg. Apparently, the filmmakers didn't bother asking ANYONE who was actually involved with that scene anything and pretty much just made everything up based on what they've read in the news and shit. Not seeing this shit.