Max-Shreck
Joined Jan 2014
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings357
Max-Shreck's rating
Reviews6
Max-Shreck's rating
This new instalment/reboot of the Hellraiser franchise was quite mediocre and uninspired unfortunately. An assembly line job well done. Nothing more.
The positives include excellent photography, the design of the configuration, the make up effects (although not flawless, more of it later), some nice kills and ideas, and the fact that it attempts to further the lore instead of rehashing the original. That by itself deserves some respect.
But by God, why does it seem that modern Hollywood is absolutely incapable to create likeable protagonists these days? Why is it seemingly so hard to do that? Just look at Kirsty from the original film for crying out loud. A good person, a hero. I'm so bored of this modern deconstuctivist bollocks!
The main protagonist is an obnoxious, self centred, annoying individual, who despite the fact that she's getting people killed (no spoilers) still feels that the main narrative has to be her and her hardship only. Incredibly infuriating. Also, every human character looks like a model stepped off the pages of a well established fashion magazine. Not human beings. Any one of the creators of this film who read the screenplay (assuming they had to) did not find the characters just a tad irritating? Their actions unreasonable? The answer lies in the mere fact that the film got made. You literally pray for these people to get killed.
It doesn't bother me that most of the cenobites are female, but what bothers me is the tagline of the original film changed to "what's your pleasure ma'am?" Stop! It only reminds the audience that you aren't watching the better film. The story was stupid with barely any tension. The score was uninspired. A fact that was blatantly highlighted when you heard the original leitmotif of Christopher Young coming in. That also reminded you that you aren't watching the better film.
Now about the aforementioned cenobites, they look cool. There is some gruesome scenes that you actually can feel. But I'm not sure I like the look. Make up effects came a long way since the original and yet these look less real than the old ones. Imho. The original had the grit, the blood, the sweat. These kinda look like what they essentially were: silicon suits. Not bad, but didn't blow my mind either.
All in all I'm very underwhelmed that this is what we got from the director of "The ritual" and "Night house". Disappointing. I went back to watch the original right after this that just further confirmed my stance on this one. And before anyone would say; I'm not a purist. I gave the film five stars and there is stuff to appreciate here. But that's just gonna further annoy the average viewer as the problems with the film would have been so easy to fix. 5/10 And that's a gesture of good will.
The positives include excellent photography, the design of the configuration, the make up effects (although not flawless, more of it later), some nice kills and ideas, and the fact that it attempts to further the lore instead of rehashing the original. That by itself deserves some respect.
But by God, why does it seem that modern Hollywood is absolutely incapable to create likeable protagonists these days? Why is it seemingly so hard to do that? Just look at Kirsty from the original film for crying out loud. A good person, a hero. I'm so bored of this modern deconstuctivist bollocks!
The main protagonist is an obnoxious, self centred, annoying individual, who despite the fact that she's getting people killed (no spoilers) still feels that the main narrative has to be her and her hardship only. Incredibly infuriating. Also, every human character looks like a model stepped off the pages of a well established fashion magazine. Not human beings. Any one of the creators of this film who read the screenplay (assuming they had to) did not find the characters just a tad irritating? Their actions unreasonable? The answer lies in the mere fact that the film got made. You literally pray for these people to get killed.
It doesn't bother me that most of the cenobites are female, but what bothers me is the tagline of the original film changed to "what's your pleasure ma'am?" Stop! It only reminds the audience that you aren't watching the better film. The story was stupid with barely any tension. The score was uninspired. A fact that was blatantly highlighted when you heard the original leitmotif of Christopher Young coming in. That also reminded you that you aren't watching the better film.
Now about the aforementioned cenobites, they look cool. There is some gruesome scenes that you actually can feel. But I'm not sure I like the look. Make up effects came a long way since the original and yet these look less real than the old ones. Imho. The original had the grit, the blood, the sweat. These kinda look like what they essentially were: silicon suits. Not bad, but didn't blow my mind either.
All in all I'm very underwhelmed that this is what we got from the director of "The ritual" and "Night house". Disappointing. I went back to watch the original right after this that just further confirmed my stance on this one. And before anyone would say; I'm not a purist. I gave the film five stars and there is stuff to appreciate here. But that's just gonna further annoy the average viewer as the problems with the film would have been so easy to fix. 5/10 And that's a gesture of good will.
Only in a world where the ultimate crap that Jurassic World was that movie receives praise and standing ovation and BvS receive the amount of hate and backlash it got. It makes me sad. I went into BvS with high expectations and a reasonable amount of fear that they going to screw this up and I - an ultimate Batman fan - will hate the guts of the film. Instead, I turned out to be loving it.
I liked Henry Cavill in MOS so I knew what to expect, and I absolutely LOVED Batfleck. And while Michael Keaton will be my favorite Batman probably until the day I die, Affleck comes in a close second. HE IS AMAZING. He is taking this character so seriously and represents it with such passion it just blew me away. The only thing I'm still uncertain about is Eisenberg's Luthor. Even though I have seen the movie twice already I'm still convinced that he is a wrong casting choice for the character. Besides both heroes are in their mid-thirties-forties and then Luthor is a teenage kid? No, that is not okay. At least for me. Anyway, I could bore you much more with my rumbling but I won't do that as I try to keep this brief.
In short, I loved this film and this is the superhero movie I wanted to see. It is not perfect, and some stuff remains unexplained I do feel that the truth behind the incredible backlash is that Batman and Superman are just too iconic characters for their own good. Everybody have their own perceptions and know how these characters should be when it comes to creating them. I'm convinced that no matter who directed this movie, or what they managed to achieve plays no part in how people see this film. Besides, we are spoiled now when it comes to superhero films. People can nitpick way too much. I think it is an excellent movie and people should watch it, disregard all the criticism, and make up their own minds. The hate the movie gets is unreasonable. I also feel that the psychology behind that people seem to unable to relate to Superman's character is because we live in a disillusioned world with full of fear. People don't care about good/pure characters anymore. This is actually represented in the film quite clearly. Anyway, give it a shot and let's see if you like it!
I liked Henry Cavill in MOS so I knew what to expect, and I absolutely LOVED Batfleck. And while Michael Keaton will be my favorite Batman probably until the day I die, Affleck comes in a close second. HE IS AMAZING. He is taking this character so seriously and represents it with such passion it just blew me away. The only thing I'm still uncertain about is Eisenberg's Luthor. Even though I have seen the movie twice already I'm still convinced that he is a wrong casting choice for the character. Besides both heroes are in their mid-thirties-forties and then Luthor is a teenage kid? No, that is not okay. At least for me. Anyway, I could bore you much more with my rumbling but I won't do that as I try to keep this brief.
In short, I loved this film and this is the superhero movie I wanted to see. It is not perfect, and some stuff remains unexplained I do feel that the truth behind the incredible backlash is that Batman and Superman are just too iconic characters for their own good. Everybody have their own perceptions and know how these characters should be when it comes to creating them. I'm convinced that no matter who directed this movie, or what they managed to achieve plays no part in how people see this film. Besides, we are spoiled now when it comes to superhero films. People can nitpick way too much. I think it is an excellent movie and people should watch it, disregard all the criticism, and make up their own minds. The hate the movie gets is unreasonable. I also feel that the psychology behind that people seem to unable to relate to Superman's character is because we live in a disillusioned world with full of fear. People don't care about good/pure characters anymore. This is actually represented in the film quite clearly. Anyway, give it a shot and let's see if you like it!