Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > RED EYE : am i a bad person?

Reply
Thread Tools

RED EYE : am i a bad person?

 
 
Goro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005
I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.

-goro-

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ralph Grossi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005

"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
> was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
> myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
> any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
> pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
> I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
> succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
>
> -goro-


Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Harkness
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:38:33 GMT, "Ralph Grossi"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed) roups.com...
>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
>> was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
>> myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
>> any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
>> pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
>> I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
>> succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
>>
>> -goro-

>
>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
>>

>


What spoilers?

That Cillian Murphy's the bad guy? There's nothing in this that wasn't
in the theatrical trailer or the reviews months ago.

John Harkness
 
Reply With Quote
 
Goro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005

Ralph Grossi wrote:
> "Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> >I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
> > was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
> > myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
> > any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
> > pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
> > I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
> > succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
> >
> > -goro-

>
> Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
> >


WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
of this.

-goro-

 
Reply With Quote
 
kaboom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005
On 23 Dec 2005 09:39:53 -0800, "Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

No, I like you just fine, goro. However, if you said that you just
loved "Eye of the Beholder" then I'd have to reevaluate our online
acquaintanceship

kaboomie
 
Reply With Quote
 
moviePig
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005

Goro wrote:

> Ralph Grossi wrote:
>
>>"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed) groups.com...
>>
>>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
>>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
>>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
>>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
>>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
>>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
>>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
>>>
>>>-goro-

>>
>>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
>>

>
> WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
> beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
> some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
> of this.


I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...

What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
an early far-reaching surprise.

(In answer to your subject-header... yes, anyone who ever wants to see
Brian Cox killed is a very bad person...)

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/

 
Reply With Quote
 
Nick Macpherson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005

moviePig wrote:
> Goro wrote:
>
> > Ralph Grossi wrote:
> >
> >>"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >>news:(E-Mail Removed) groups.com...
> >>
> >>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
> >>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
> >>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
> >>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
> >>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
> >>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
> >>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
> >>>
> >>>-goro-
> >>
> >>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
> >>

> >
> > WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
> > beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
> > some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
> > of this.

>
> I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
> usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
>
> What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
> villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
> first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
> the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
> sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
> an early far-reaching surprise.
>

It's a thriller. It has to have a bad guy and there's no other
candidate than Cillian Murphy so I don't see how under any stretch
revealing him as the bad guy could be considered a spoiler violation.
It was a good trailer. It starts out like the trailer to yet another
dreary romantic chick flick (Wth Rachel McAdams taking the Brittany
Murphy part) and then gets tense. I went from, oh man, I'll never ever
ever see this, no, not even on cable, to, oh wow, maybe this is going
to be halfway decent (and it was--and while the ending sucks, I think
Craven cannily turns the film into comedy after the plane lands so it
doesn't matter.)

 
Reply With Quote
 
moviePig
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005

Nick Macpherson wrote:
> moviePig wrote:
>
>>Goro wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ralph Grossi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) legroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
>>>>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
>>>>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
>>>>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
>>>>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
>>>>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
>>>>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
>>>>>
>>>>>-goro-
>>>>
>>>>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
>>>>
>>>
>>>WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
>>>beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
>>>some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
>>>of this.

>>
>>I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
>>usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
>>
>>What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
>>villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
>>first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
>>the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
>>sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
>>an early far-reaching surprise.

>
> It's a thriller. It has to have a bad guy and there's no other
> candidate than Cillian Murphy so I don't see how under any stretch
> revealing him as the bad guy could be considered a spoiler violation.
> It was a good trailer. It starts out like the trailer to yet another
> dreary romantic chick flick (Wth Rachel McAdams taking the Brittany
> Murphy part) and then gets tense. I went from, oh man, I'll never ever
> ever see this, no, not even on cable, to, oh wow, maybe this is going
> to be halfway decent (and it was--and while the ending sucks, I think
> Craven cannily turns the film into comedy after the plane lands so it
> doesn't matter.)


I can defer on the relative quality of trailers, since I almost never
watch them. (Still claiming, though, that in a ideal world Craven wants
us to see Cillian first as sympathetic, however briefly.) And I suppose
a "good trailer" might indeed be one that gets you to watch a good movie
you wouldn't've. From my rigid perspective, though, I can recall right
now only two exemplary trailers: One was CLOSE ENCOUNTERS's, which was
merely a slow dolly along a dark highway, towards an eerie glow just
over the next rise. The other was PSYCHO's, consisting of Hitchcock
himself doing a droll stroll through the newly cleaned room at the Bates
Motel. All questions, no answers. (Well, almost... PSYCHO starts out
as a white-collar crime drama...)

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/

 
Reply With Quote
 
Goro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-23-2005

moviePig wrote:
> Goro wrote:
>
> > Ralph Grossi wrote:
> >
> >>"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >>news:(E-Mail Removed) groups.com...
> >>
> >>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
> >>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
> >>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
> >>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
> >>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
> >>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
> >>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
> >>>
> >>>-goro-
> >>
> >>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
> >>

> >
> > WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
> > beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
> > some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
> > of this.

>
> I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
> usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
>
> What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
> villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
> first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
> the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
> sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
> an early far-reaching surprise.


I'm not sure there's any way to make a reasonable trailer for this
movie that doesn't give away who the baddie is. I suppose there could
be a teaser-type trailer that shows Cillian and Rachel together and
then shows some of the amped up thriller moments, trying to keep
protagonoists hidden, but i'm not sure that would work well.

One thing i was HOPING would be part of the 3rd act was that Cillian
Murphy was a good guy trying to kill a Bad Guy. I was hoping that the
Senator would be some corrupt, treasonous guy or something and that
Cillian Murphy was some sort of riteous freedom fighter or something
like that.

> (In answer to your subject-header... yes, anyone who ever wants to see
> Brian Cox killed is a very bad person...)


Even in L.I.E.?

-goro-

 
Reply With Quote
 
moviePig
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-24-2005

Goro wrote:

> moviePig wrote:
>
>>Goro wrote:
>>
>>>Ralph Grossi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Goro" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed) legroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>>I just watched the RED EYE dvd. It was a decent movie; the first half
>>>>>was very good, the latter half, quite awful. One thing is that I found
>>>>>myself rooting for Cillian Murphy throuhgout. SInce there's little if
>>>>>any substantial character development, there wasn't anything really
>>>>>pressing me to care about Rachel McAdam's char or the senator target.
>>>>>I did find Cillian Murphy really engagingl, though, and wanted him to
>>>>>succeed and off McAdams and Brian Cox, too.
>>>>>
>>>>>-goro-
>>>>
>>>>Nice double bagger, spoilers on an unreleased DVD (Jan 10). Well done!
>>>>
>>>
>>>WHoops. sorry about that, but to be fair, it's very obvious fromt he
>>>beginning what the outcome is going to be. I guess i should have put
>>>some sppoiler space, though, for people who have avoided the trailers
>>>of this.

>>
>>I, who crusade against spoilers, have occasionally committed worse. I
>>usually just wear a hair shirt for a couple of days. I can loan you mine...
>>
>>What's a bitch is that, e.g., the *trailer* (iirc) gives away who the
>>villain is. Sure, so does the movie within 5 minutes... but it does at
>>first pay a little lip-service to some low-level misdirection. I figure
>>the studio said, "We want clips. Screw the plot." Typical, to be
>>sure... but that means that few screenwriters should ever consider using
>>an early far-reaching surprise.

>
>
> I'm not sure there's any way to make a reasonable trailer for this
> movie that doesn't give away who the baddie is. I suppose there could
> be a teaser-type trailer that shows Cillian and Rachel together and
> then shows some of the amped up thriller moments, trying to keep
> protagonoists hidden, but i'm not sure that would work well.
>
> One thing i was HOPING would be part of the 3rd act was that Cillian
> Murphy was a good guy trying to kill a Bad Guy. I was hoping that the
> Senator would be some corrupt, treasonous guy or something and that
> Cillian Murphy was some sort of riteous freedom fighter or something
> like that.


I don't think Craven does twists. (Hell, he even gave Cillian's game
away by casting Cillian...)


>>(In answer to your subject-header... yes, anyone who ever wants to see
>>Brian Cox killed is a very bad person...)

>
> Even in L.I.E.?


Especially L.I.E. His character was "deep down" good, don'tcha know...
(More seriously, that was a truly memorable performance/character,
imo. One of those movies that I wish I'd known more people I could
safely recommend it to.)

--

/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to Fix Really Bad "Red Eye" Paige Miller Digital Photography 5 01-16-2006 08:29 PM
The Eye of the photographer - The Eye of the Spectator arcturus1111gr@yahoo.gr Digital Photography 0 04-05-2005 07:31 AM
iPhoto red eye removal algorithm Matti Haveri Digital Photography 0 08-08-2003 03:30 PM
Re: How do i get rid of the darn red eye easily JK Digital Photography 2 07-22-2003 07:49 PM
Re: red-eye removal Mark Digital Photography 0 06-25-2003 04:01 AM



Advertisments