|
Rhonne posted:I actually somehow didn't even know 6 existed for the longest time. I don't think I found out about it until around the time the Zombie reboots were happening. For years I thought the original series just ended on the shot of Jamie alone in a bombed out police department surrounded by bodies crying that Micheal escaped. Curse of Michael Myers did mediocre box office, everybody who saw it hated it, horror (slashers especially) was arguably at its lowest point ever with the mainstream, Miramax didn't have any faith in the franchise's viability in future theatrical releases, so there was no real reason for anyone to ever bring it up at all and it got memory-holed immediately. I distinctly remember when H2O came out wondering (a) if anyone else even remembered The Curse of Michael Myers and (b) how it was possible it had been less than 3 years since its release, I would've sworn at least 5 had passed.
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:Curse of Michael Myers did mediocre box office, everybody who saw it hated it, horror (slashers especially) was arguably at its lowest point ever with the mainstream, Miramax didn't have any faith in the franchise's viability in future theatrical releases, so there was no real reason for anyone to ever bring it up at all and it got memory-holed immediately. I remember only even hearing of Curse of Michael Myers via like PPV tv listings in what turns out to be the same year it came out so yeah everyone wanted that film buried fast lol, thinking back I don't think I ever even saw it in a video store This is probably better than 5 and Curse and I have a feeling fans of Ends will appreciate it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y9GwVJC4YI quote:The Shape (1991) Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Oct 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 03:42
|
|
|
bear named tators posted:5 rules at the very least because of the laundry shoot sequence. I don't understand the appeal of 4 (which seems far more popular?) at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 04:06
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I remember only even hearing of Curse of Michael Myers via like PPV tv listings in what turns out to be the same year it came out so yeah everyone wanted that film buried fast lol, thinking back I don't think I ever even saw it in a video store Haha, I also remember noticing that it had ads for PPV but none that I recall for video. I do remember some commercials for the theatrical release, there was one in particular where one girl was on the phone with her next door neighbor screaming "He's in your house, get out of your house!" that caught my attention. I recall absolutely zero mention of any kind of cult or conspiracy, I guess the marketing people knew that was stupid lol. I also swear I remember seeing MTV promos for some kind of halloween special that touted "with special appearance by Michael Myers*," though googling doesn't pull up anything. I think the ad campaign was very specifically targeted to teenagers. *(yes I'm sure it wasn't Mike Myers)
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 05:24
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:It's still bad though. This is true
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 06:05
|
|
|
For those that weren't around to remember the 90s, the Halloween series was way, WAY more fragmented then than it feels today. I was young and hadn't even seen any of the movies but just from what pop culture I could gleam from stuff like TV Guide I could tell there was this gulf between the classy old 70s Halloween and the modern Halloween sequels meant to cash in on the popularity of Jason and Freddy (and looking like a distant and pathetic third wheel also-ran compared to them). I also knew there was something called "Halloween III: Season of the Witch" whose existence confounded me and had me thinking there might've been a whole separate series that also had the name "Halloween" (which was believable to me because it's a pretty generic title when you think about it). In any case, it was apparent that you couldn't just mention "the Halloween movies," you'd have to specify which one(s) you meant. Halloween H2O did quite a bit to reconcile the series, even if technically it ignored many of the previous (which wasn't really apparent unless you were familiar with them, and, well, most people weren't). And yeah, this time Halloween was playing second fiddle to Scream, but a "modern" Halloween working hard to tie in to the "old" Halloween lent the series a stronger sense of identity. Nowadays Halloween is enjoying a cachet it really hasn't since at least 1981. It's kind of wild! Neo Rasa posted:This is probably better than 5 and Curse and I have a feeling fans of Ends will appreciate it: I've only skimmed this but I think it might already have a better mask than Halloween 5 SidneyIsTheKiller fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Oct 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 06:43
|
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:I distinctly remember when H2O came out wondering (a) if anyone else even remembered The Curse of Michael Myers and (b) how it was possible it had been less than 3 years since its release, I would've sworn at least 5 had passed. Scream opened up a lot of doors. Re-opened, I guess more accurately.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/BrianWCollins/status/1586851614916194304
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2022 23:13
|
|
|
"Dead last" looooolll
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2022 01:34
|
|
|
Okay, Halloween Ends. I myself thought it was quite good, and quite different, but not in a way that the strident types are decrying (then again I really liked Last Jedi), but I can see where they're coming from. It does feel like instead of a trilogy, it should have been a quadrology, and there's a film missing between Kills and Ends that could have better driven home the points made in Ends. --- Discussing of Halloween 1978 leads to my own little analysis: Michael Myers of the first film is generally an avatar of western society's understanding of serial killers at the time. While they existed before the 70's, of course, continual advancement of communication and the general 'dark cynicism' of the decade that produced a lot of grim as gently caress famous films (Apocalypse Now, Chinatown, Alien at the very end of the decade) had really started to bring them into the general public eye. We'd already had the likes of Gein, Charles Manson, the Zodiac Killer, and the Boston Strangler each provided a barely understood nightmare piece that just kept getting more intense in the 70's, what with Bundy, Gacy, and Berkowitz, along with lesser knowns but arguably even worse ones like Rodney Alcala and Dean Corill... (Yes, I know in several ways Gein and Manson weren't 'serial killers', but that's basically the difference between knowing fatty foods are bad for you and knowing exactly how said foods alter your body for the worse and most only know the former). It all manifests in Michael Myers. He doesn't kill for money, or out of jealousy, or to cover up a crime or gain power. He just kills...because. He has no reasoning, or rather a reasoning we can understand. He is both utterly inhuman (the white mask) and at the same time, utterly invisible (how easily he sneaks around town). It goes so far as when he's shot and then vanishes, with the film concluding over his breathing, it's basically saying "They're like smoke. They appear and disappear. They could be anywhere. And you'll never know." (Just how many serial killers when caught had all the people around them utterly stunned that they were just that?) Michael of the OG Halloween is an anthropomorphic representation of the actions of serial killers and normal people's inability to understand the whys of them. This would shift in the 80's into further misunderstandings, mainly the idea that since serial killers could get away with their crimes and kill dozens if not more people before being caught, that they must be exceptional people, a sub-breed of superb humanity, an elite monster, best shown in the creation of Hannibal Lecter, which further mutated into the idea that serial killers were artists and refined, as shown by their constant triumph over 'normal' society. This persists to this day; probably one of the reasons Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is just so drat NASTY is it actually presents a much more accurate concept of what a serial killer actually is like. Because the ideas around Myers and Lector are all bullshit, of course, but it would take decades of study for the reality to permeate public consciousnesses. Serial killers aren't superhuman, they're subhuman. Their motives are wholly understandable: utter power and control, the most base and banal of reasons. They get away with their crimes not because they're smarter and deadlier than normal people, but because by chance they drive through certain holes in society that many people just don't realize are there unless they're in them, namely targeting the 'less dead' (prostitutes, people of other ethnicities, gay men, etc). They are, in essence, the very definition of pathetic, and they sure as poo poo aren't incomprehensible monsters like Michael Myers. But that was the general concept then, and Michael in his ways never stopped embodying it. Even Zombie's film, which actually went in the precise opposite direction and tried to show off the sort of low-grade hell that often shapes serial killers, showing how understanding of things had changed, as said despite that there's still something dark in Michael beyond his abusive, messed up childhood upbringing. Ultimately, an issue with Michael is in the same vein of "Why doesn't Batman kill the Joker?" The ultimate problem of the question is it can't be answered in universe. The answer lies outside of the whole fictional concept and world; Batman can't kill the Joker because the Joker is too popular as a villain and someone will always want to tell a Joker story. The questions around Michael of 'Why' and 'What IS The Shape' can't be answered, because they lie outside the fictional world. Michael just IS, because he's a tulpa of the viewpoints of legions. He's a literal question with no answer. Cornwind Evil fucked around with this message at 12:01 on Nov 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2022 11:56
|
|
|
Full disclosure - I'm a long way from being a hardcore Halloween fan. I've only seen the original and the 2018 DGG movie, I haven't even seen Kills. From talking to a few people about Ends (who mostly didn't like it, which doesn't seem uncommon!) I thought it might interest me and I had a chance to see it so went for it. I really liked it for a large portion of it. The weirdest part for me was that in the big, epic, trilogy ending showdown, Michael Myers is by far the least interesting character and feels perfunctory to a lot of the events. Even without seeing Kills I get some of the commentary of potentially swapping the order of Ends/Kills - this would be a really interesting second chapter I think, just have MM crippled from the events of Halloween 2018 and lean into the nature/nurture thing with Corey and Allyson. The idea of Haddonfield/the shape sharing some inherent, unexplained evil that could potentially be passed on was done well I thought. I'm definitely in the camp of 'the more you explain about MM the less interesting he is' and it felt like it at least tried to dodge that, even if it placed him firmly into supernatural territory. The kills/gore weren't fun (the blowtorch and tongue skipping on the record were a brief bit of good horror but it all felt quite rushed) but they did make it obvious that this is both an inexperienced killer and one with personal grudges against those he kills, which is separate from MM, so I'm almost okay with it. All in all I had a good time and found it intriguing. The parts I liked the least were with Laurie/MM. It is one of the few recent movies with big backlashes where I kind of get it - if you just want to see MM stalk and kill isolated random citizens and babysitters before a big showdown the marketing certainly didn't try to make one think any differently. A couple of questions - did I miss something, or did they play with the idea of tag team kills (outside of the sewer) with the doctor/nurse and then never really try it again? Did I miss an obvious tell otherwise? And any particular reason for the hatred of the DJ outside of the dickishness when they interacted with him? I'm ignoring some of that additional context the novelisation gives another poster mentioned above just to see if maybe I missed something in the film. Lots of words, but basically from someone inexperienced with the series I found this to generally be a satisfying and well-made movie, even if I get why it might not work for those looking for particular things from it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 18:17
|
|
|
Cornwind Evil posted:Even Zombie's film, which actually went in the precise opposite direction and tried to show off the sort of low-grade hell that often shapes serial killers, showing how understanding of things had changed, as said despite that there's still something dark in Michael beyond his abusive, messed up childhood upbringing. I think a lot of the Halloween movies inadvertently stumbled into turning this into a strength of Myers as a character unique compared to Jason/etc. (while the Zombie movies and the most recent ones are much more intentional with it) where in many of the movies characters think they've figured out how he works or deduced his pathology or otherwise worked out what his "rules" are, which all ends up being just stuff they're building around him instead of actually mattering. Him being called The Shape and the Boogeyman is pretty appropriate in that respect, and the way the movies make him both a regular human but absurdly resilient and powerful at the same time work well with that. PTizzle posted:Full disclosure - I'm a long way from being a hardcore Halloween fan. I've only seen the original and the 2018 DGG movie, I haven't even seen Kills. From talking to a few people about Ends (who mostly didn't like it, which doesn't seem uncommon!) I thought it might interest me and I had a chance to see it so went for it. I liked the movie overall too for the reasons you gave, but also agree that that last act with Myers felt like it was from a completely different movie. Just feels weirdly placed to be the third movie of what the 2018 movie and Kills set up. This felt more like a Stephen King story like Christine or something, I dug it but just an odd choice for a trilogy ending movie. You didn't miss anything with the tag team kills, it's a bit choppy but I think the intention was that Corey just leaves Myers behind to do his own killing, but Myers is now invigorated a bit and sort of follows him around by chance? Like you didn't miss anything but it definitely felt like there was a missing scene that should have been left in or something. Regarding the DJ, I don't know if it was actually all filmed but IIRC those bits in the novelization were originally going to be in the movie too so that was it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:33
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I think a lot of the Halloween movies inadvertently stumbled into turning this into a strength of Myers as a character unique compared to Jason/etc. (while the Zombie movies and the most recent ones are much more intentional with it) where in many of the movies characters think they've figured out how he works or deduced his pathology or otherwise worked out what his "rules" are, which all ends up being just stuff they're building around him instead of actually mattering. Him being called The Shape and the Boogeyman is pretty appropriate in that respect, and the way the movies make him both a regular human but absurdly resilient and powerful at the same time work well with that. One of the interesting takes I've seen is that Loomis' increasingly unhinged attitudes in the movies is down to the fact he encounter True Evil and it broke him. I don't think the filmmakers had this in mind as they just wanted a more slasher treadmill stuff (said as somebody who can absolutely enjoy slasher treadmill) but maybe Pleasance thought that way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:47
|
|
|
It would certainly explain Loomis spending the majority of part 5 screaming at Jamie and throwing poo poo. "COOKIE WOMAN?!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 21:00
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:One of the interesting takes I've seen is that Loomis' increasingly unhinged attitudes in the movies is down to the fact he encounter True Evil and it broke him. I don't think the filmmakers had this in mind as they just wanted a more slasher treadmill stuff (said as somebody who can absolutely enjoy slasher treadmill) but maybe Pleasance thought that way. Yeah I like the idea that Michael has transcended in some way (the ending of Kills definitely goes this route too) but that he's still a human being, like it's nothing you can figure out like he was possessed or whatever. Even Halloween 5 as lovely as it was, they originally filmed him straight up dying and then being magically brought back to life by a an evil shaman named Dr. Death, but replaced that with him just being found by some loner hermit guy who nurses him back to health from near death. So on some level they realized staying on that razor's edge of "he SHOULD be a monster because that would actually make sense, but he's just an evil guy wtf" was the right idea. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Nov 2, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
PTizzle posted:Full disclosure - I'm a long way from being a hardcore Halloween fan. I've only seen the original and the 2018 DGG movie, I haven't even seen Kills. From talking to a few people about Ends (who mostly didn't like it, which doesn't seem uncommon!) I thought it might interest me and I had a chance to see it so went for it. Not having seen Kills is your problem here. The epic ending you want comes at the end of Kills, and it doesn't stop Michael. That's why his death in Ends is so low key; you can't slay the monster if you have a passion for the task, because that just makes a monster out of you. Laurie defeats Michael in the end because she no longer hates him or fears him. Killing him isn't her life's goal any more. It's just something that has to be done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 12:10
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Not having seen Kills is your problem here. I kinda like that then, it makes sense. I'll try to make some time and go back and watch Kills in the coming days as I enjoyed H18/Ends enough to justify it. To be clear, I definitely didn't feel like Ends was lacking an 'epic' ending on a personal level, I was more commenting that given the marketing/place in the trilogy it felt like they were forced into a showdown that didn't really work in the context of the film that they were making.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:15
|
|
|
If you want your epic Laurie/Michael showdown you have H20 anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:40
|
|
|
I honestly feel the concept of (the finale of Ends) Halloween Ends not having an 'epic final showdown' is greatly exaggerated bitterness. It's not like this was the final fight at the end of Bloodrayne 3, which is truly a shining example of an anticlimax. Laurie just doesn't shoot Michael once and he falls over dead forever this time because HE JUST COULDN'T TAKE IT ANY MORE. They fight for a few minutes, it goes back and forth, Laurie and Allyson inflict no less than FOUR mortal wounds on him (chest stab, neck stab, slit throat, slit wrist to further bleed out) and then they literally parade his corpse around the town and then pulp it into hamburger in a junk yard scrap shredder to drive home that Michael Myers, this Shape, is dead and gone. Maybe if this had been a singular movie instead of the last film of a trilogy where they already fought at the end of 2018 and the whole mob scene in Kills I could understand the disappointment, but it mostly just reeks of the sour grapes of people who didn't get exactly what they wanted. If you want a ludicrous over the top brawl between two horror icons, you can always rewatch Freddy vs Jason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
They told me it was a movie about Laurie vs Michael. It’s on the poster. It’s in the trailer. It’s in the synopsis. Yea I’m a bit bitter lol. It didn’t subvert my expectations or surprise me. It lied to me. I didn’t expect the movie to be a hour long battle between two senior citizens but I at least expected the film to be focused way more on them than it was.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 18:15
|
|
|
I really don't give a poo poo about not getting a good Michael vs Laurie battle or whatever. I just can't fathom people watching the love story of loving Corey and finding that poo poo compelling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 20:05
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:They told me it was a movie about Laurie vs Michael. It’s on the poster. It’s in the trailer. It’s in the synopsis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 01:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 02:56
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I really don't give a poo poo about not getting a good Michael vs Laurie battle or whatever. But then why are you watching a Halloween movie if not for that? There are countless horror movies where a silent man in a mask brutalises people
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 03:09
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:They told me it was a movie about Laurie vs Michael. It’s on the poster. It’s in the trailer. It’s in the synopsis. At this point, any discussion becomes purely arbitrary personal opinion, so before we even begin, I am not insulting anyone for not 'getting' the film or stuff like that. Laurie vs Michael IS the centerpoint of the film. Michael's dark influence literally infects Corey. Laurie finds herself in opposition to him because she was the one who introduced Corey to Allyson and let him in. In that fight, she loses. Corey succumbs to the darkness and tries to become Michael anew, and Laurie ultimately has to go to the final solution: stop Corey with intended lethal violence. Then along comes Michael himself, and Laurie basically goes "If I don't stop him, this could start all over again, maybe I have peace giving up Michael's curse but evil doesn't die, it just changes shape, and who knows who will be infected anew? Look at the parents of that kid who died in the accident, they're basically bearing 'the curse of Michael' themselves: had this happened in a town and world where there was no Michael Myers, the negative forces that ultimately made Corey vulnerable to what happened to him would likely have been considerably less. People say 'Michael is hardly in the film'. Technically yes, but thematically, Michael's essence is shot through every minute of the film. Maybe the actual OG Shape does little, but he doesn't HAVE to. The whole town is now The Shape. It's blackly funny. Kills had that whole 'EVIL DIES TONIGHT'...and in a sense, it DID. Michael was never the same after that night, despite all his success in mass murder. But evil can't die. It just...changes. Also, I generally approve of trailers that successfully hide what the film is actually about. Too many films give away the whole plot and all the best bits in the trailer. Maybe I'm just lucky when it comes to be surprised in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 06:27
|
|
|
I’m gonna just stick to the last part because that’s kind of my point but the thing is even removing the trailer or poster or anything, halloween kills ended on a cliffhanger. Michael got away, he killed the town, he killed Karen, Laurie was in the hospital… The film was setting up the final confrontation and closure for the characters. And the film, as a sequel, decides it’s not interested in that any more and that’s deeply frustrating. Back to the trailer, if the trailer said “hey there’s this character Corey and him and Allyson fall in love and maaaaybe he’s going dark!” Then I wouldn’t be so blind sighted. There’s zero mention of it at all, and zero hint that the film would not only not really be a slasher film, but that one of the main characters who you’re kind of there to see would barely be in it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 06:50
|
|
|
The film is what it is and what it is isn’t very good to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 06:53
|
|
|
Cornwind Evil posted:At this point, any discussion becomes purely arbitrary personal opinion, so before we even begin, I am not insulting anyone for not 'getting' the film or stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 10:32
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I just can't fathom people watching the love story of loving Corey and finding that poo poo compelling. That "love story" was also the most incel misconception of romance: A creepy awkward dude does absolutely nothing and an attractive woman (with a job) just starts loving you unconditionally. This is the reason they're mad at the "femoids" - they never get picked for their fantasy of arbitrary obsession. A relationship takes mutual effort & interest, not Kills's beautiful fish jumps into your canoe scenario.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 11:55
|
|
|
moths posted:That "love story" was also the most incel misconception of romance: A creepy awkward dude does absolutely nothing and an attractive woman (with a job) just starts loving you unconditionally. Corey does do stuff for Allyson though. Right after she patches up his hand, he starts working on her car and this is after they've bonded about how lovely Allyson's coworkers are. Like is Corey a great catch? No, but there's absolutely an effort made in the plot to illustrate an actual relationship going on between them. Then she follows up by taking her car to the junkyard to get the work done and he gets it done even at the significant personal cost (because the poo poo with the teen bully + dad's car is going on in the same scene). THEN they go on a date and the motorcycle rides start happening. Like, that's a pretty okay start to a romantic relationship in a film. They have shared interests, they are outsiders who find company with each other, and they help each other out. Corey is fumbling at it, but it's way different from the incel misconception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 12:02
|
|
|
moths posted:That "love story" was also the most incel misconception of romance: A creepy awkward dude does absolutely nothing and an attractive woman (with a job) just starts loving you unconditionally. Incel is a great way to describe this lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 12:03
|
|
|
moths posted:That "love story" was also the most incel misconception of romance: A creepy awkward dude does absolutely nothing and an attractive woman (with a job) just starts loving you unconditionally. I’ve been surprised to see this critique a lot. Teenagers/young people are not super always rational actors about their relationships. The dark and brooding bad boy being attractive even though he’s dangerous or toxic is like the #1 genre for romance stories and series like Twilight and all those similar stories are super popular. Add in their shared grief, trauma, and hate and I think the story works fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 13:05
|
|
|
Cornwind Evil posted:Look at the parents of that kid who died in the accident, they're basically bearing 'the curse of Michael' themselves: had this happened in a town and world where there was no Michael Myers, the negative forces that ultimately made Corey vulnerable to what happened to him would likely have been considerably less. Good point, I hadn’t made that connection. The mom is being eaten alive by her fear and hate of Corey like Laurie was of Michael. Laurie can see the dark path she’s on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 13:07
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:But then why are you watching a Halloween movie if not for that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 14:46
|
|
|
Arivia posted:
That's ...arguably more in line with the incel model of dating. He fixed her car, earning a Nice Guy token (that is later exchanged for sex.) His only friend is a sewer creature, he's living with his parents, unavailable emotionally and socially, and has literally nothing of interest to offer beyond bad dancing. But he's arbitrarily "chosen" by an attractive protagonist character, on the sole grounds that the script says so. Violator posted:The dark and brooding bad boy being attractive even though he’s dangerous or toxic is like the #1 genre for romance stories and series like Twilight and all those similar stories are super popular. Agreed that "Young women making poor relationship choices" is a staple of YA romance, but that doesn't make it good storytelling. Or appealing to a horror audience. This is the closing chapter of a beloved franchise. Their "romance" of a newly introduced character was about as relevant as a seventeen minute podrace. Maybe if it was compelling at all or if the characters had chemistry, you could argue that it belongs. But you could chop all of that out and have a better paced film.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 14:49
|
|
|
You do know that lots of regular relationships start like that, right? Like you’re the one applying Internet Brain Poisoning to it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 14:56
|
|
|
Yes it is I, the person suggesting that mutual respect should be a component of a relationship, am suffering internet brain-poisoning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 15:17
|
|
|
Two people who are “damaged” falling in love is more of a screenwriting cliche than an incel thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
Sure, those things happened in the movie - she fixes his hand, he fixes her car - but it was just played as casual. Then suddenly they are deeply in love. It came out of nowhere. It should make sense to the audience and it didn't. My wife didn't buy it all either and she eats this stuff up. Along with her ex-bf being some middle aged cop? Like, just poor choices everywhere with this c-plot of a love triangle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:46 |
|
|
Right, my problem isn't that it couldn't happen, it's that it feels like there were multiple scenes just missing from the script. They went from "going to a party together" to "I would literally die for you" basically from one scene to the next.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2022 15:36
|
|
