First off, I am sorry for putting another of these threads up here, but....
I made a statement in one of the other threads that I seriously doubted that I or too many others here would think highly of this movie. I just wanted to publicly retract that statement.
I went and saw it Sunday, and have to say I truley injoyed it. It was a good movie. The cars were still riced out and they did some thing I dont see happening. But for the most part, I did actually injoyed it. The director, and writer actually did a good job with a decent plot this time.
Anyway, sorry again for bringing this topic back up, but I couldn't find the original thread I posted it in.
Another 2fast 2furious thread...
-
nissanrcer240
- Posts: 1657
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 5:22 am
- Car: 90 Nissan 240SX SR20DET
- Contact:
i also think it was an enjoyable movie, however, it would have been much better (i think) if rob cohen directed it and if most (if not some) of the original characters from the first one were in it. i also think that the second one did not have much to do with street racing, which i thought was supposed to be the point of the movie. At least in the first one, the story revolved around street racing.
-
InstantRice
- Posts: 1146
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 11:58 am
- Contact:
Own3d!!
Seriously though, 240sxedUp, why would I want to forget everything I know about cars when watching the movie? I find no entertainment value in watching car shows that are filled with inaccuracies.
I keep forgetting...these aren't car movies; they are lifestyle movies....therefore we are supposed to accept automotive inaccuracies and bad acting? I'll pass.
Seriously though, 240sxedUp, why would I want to forget everything I know about cars when watching the movie? I find no entertainment value in watching car shows that are filled with inaccuracies.
I keep forgetting...these aren't car movies; they are lifestyle movies....therefore we are supposed to accept automotive inaccuracies and bad acting? I'll pass.
-
Holisticbeatz
- Posts: 1221
- Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 6:09 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
-
JESTER
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 5:08 am
- Car: 2004 Chevy Colorado Bright a** Red 3.5 five cylinder
Darn guys, the acting is way, way better in the second one.
You guys are sortta being like I am with the Marvel comic movies. I get ill because they try and change the story from it's original plot line. But you have to actually ignore that and watch the movie.
The acting and the plot were actually good. Just because they screwed up a perfectly good Skyline and sprayed more nitrous than all the drag racers in the NIRA and NHRA combined, it was still a good movie.
You guys are sortta being like I am with the Marvel comic movies. I get ill because they try and change the story from it's original plot line. But you have to actually ignore that and watch the movie.
The acting and the plot were actually good. Just because they screwed up a perfectly good Skyline and sprayed more nitrous than all the drag racers in the NIRA and NHRA combined, it was still a good movie.
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54541
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
SmithSR wrote:I keep forgetting...these aren't car movies; they are lifestyle movies....therefore we are supposed to accept automotive inaccuracies and bad acting? I'll pass.
I agree 100%. Besides, "lifestyle movie" sounds like I'm going to see a production of "Hairspray". (which, incidentally, probably has better acting - AND they're all more masculine than the 2F2F geeks.)
-
JohnI3laze
- Posts: 397
- Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2003 8:18 pm
I can't believe ANY body actually enjoyed that POS movie. It was terrible, and I'm not even thinking of the cars and CGI stunts. The dialogue was weak as hell. The plot had more holes than my socks and the acting was abysmal. Surprisingly, I think Ludicris was the best actor in the whole movie. Vin Diesel woulda been good but he had the brains to walk away from this turkey.
I didnt really go see the movie for award winning acting or a strong plot. I wanted to see shiny cars, fast driving, half naked girls, and Tyrese's ghetto slang. The movie delivered.The only thing this movie has done for the import world is to make cops want to pull over anyone with an exhaust and it also helped turn out 500k ricers in a year.
So, it's OK to use CGI stunts in a car movie??...darn...there I go again....it's a lifestyle movie. OK, so CGI doesn't belong in a movie with a supposed idea that the action is realistic. We hear John Singleton talk about how his aim was to emphasize realism and focus on the nuances of the cars to make them believable.
He should have taken a class from the late John Frankenheimer, his most recent big hits being one of the BMW short films and the car chase cult-classic Ronin. He didn't need CGI to film a beautiful Audi S8 drifting around corners on wet streets. He shot the car chase taking place in Nice in real time, from the beginning to the end...on real streets with real cars, no CGI. Similar to another movie, widely considered to have the best car chase ever filmed... Bullitt. I'd sooner wear out my dvd player watching Ronin and chapter 14 of Bullitt before I plop down $25 or $35 or whatever outrageous price they ask for 2F2F on dvd. I'll pass on paying the theater/organized crime/racket/pyramid scheme/ungodly prices. $4 for a Coke? Go to hell.
He should have taken a class from the late John Frankenheimer, his most recent big hits being one of the BMW short films and the car chase cult-classic Ronin. He didn't need CGI to film a beautiful Audi S8 drifting around corners on wet streets. He shot the car chase taking place in Nice in real time, from the beginning to the end...on real streets with real cars, no CGI. Similar to another movie, widely considered to have the best car chase ever filmed... Bullitt. I'd sooner wear out my dvd player watching Ronin and chapter 14 of Bullitt before I plop down $25 or $35 or whatever outrageous price they ask for 2F2F on dvd. I'll pass on paying the theater/organized crime/racket/pyramid scheme/ungodly prices. $4 for a Coke? Go to hell.
-
JESTER
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2002 5:08 am
- Car: 2004 Chevy Colorado Bright a** Red 3.5 five cylinder
I am seriously thinking of getting investors to open a movie theater for smokers. I think it would be a big hit.
But there are down falls.1. So much smoke your vison may be blocked from the movie.2. Some dumb a$$ would set the darn place on fire and kill 50 or so people.
So what do you think, is it worth the risk.
But there are down falls.1. So much smoke your vison may be blocked from the movie.2. Some dumb a$$ would set the darn place on fire and kill 50 or so people.
So what do you think, is it worth the risk.
-
Holisticbeatz
- Posts: 1221
- Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 6:09 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
1. Add a very high-tech air ventilation systems like the ones in Las Vegas casinos.2. Use non-flammable materials in the construction of the theater.JESTER wrote:I am seriously thinking of getting investors to open a movie theater for smokers. I think it would be a big hit.
But there are down falls.1. So much smoke your vison may be blocked from the movie.2. Some dumb a$$ would set the darn place on fire and kill 50 or so people.
So what do you think, is it worth the risk.
I think it's a great idea, non-smoking movie theaters discrimnate against smokers. Also, I would like to see a fully-stocked bar in a theater. That would be cool.
-
S13hashiriya
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 7:04 am
- Car: snowboarding
s13hashiriya: u are right on all points. after seeing the movie my driving skills are definatley much better. i can now take single lane 90 degree turns with my stock suspension at 100+ mph.
smithSR: i think using CGI stunts was weak also but i think it would be pretty hard to capture these stunts in real life seeing as how they would have to close los angelos streets(or whatever city they used) for multiple days and then on top of that it would be extremley hard to get the shots where the camera goes from inside the cabin of the car to zzoming 20 feet behind the car while it drifts around a corner going fast enough to make it look phat. just my opinion
smithSR: i think using CGI stunts was weak also but i think it would be pretty hard to capture these stunts in real life seeing as how they would have to close los angelos streets(or whatever city they used) for multiple days and then on top of that it would be extremley hard to get the shots where the camera goes from inside the cabin of the car to zzoming 20 feet behind the car while it drifts around a corner going fast enough to make it look phat. just my opinion