Pacific Rim....worthy? or not?

[Chiropteran]

. Why does the sword come out at the EXACT LAST MOMENT. Not beforehand? Why does none of the other jaegers have the apparently such an amazing sword that it one hit KO's the kaju that the power based jaegers couldn't kill?

Certain other weapons like the EMP were stupid because it was such a plot device that never comes up again. The EMP burns out the "digital" jaegers. Okay. So, why do they suddenly stop attacking the disabled jaeger and only attack when provoked? What, do they suddenly know that the jaegers are permanently disabled and not temporarily? Such a massive plot hole. And why is it not used again. Why don't they use the EMP to shut down the jaegers during the trench fight? Why do nukes work? The kaju know that humanity has nukes and we can use them, why don't they develop a counter measure for those?

All of those questions have very obvious answers if you actually paid attention to the movie and thought about things. The problem is you are going into it as an adversary, *looking* for things to complain about, so of course you will find them. Every movie in existence has flaws, and those flaws can easily be exaggerated if you ignore the in-movie explanations.

Shawshank Redemption, the #1 top rated movie on imdb:
"When Norton is at his desk loading the revolver the brand of ammunition shown on the box is Remington Kleenbore. However, looking at the cylinder as he is loading it, the cartridges have a WW head stamp indicating Winchester Western ammunition."

OMG, it has a flaw, it's a terrible bad movie! Not really.

Okay lets lay out a general movie character description.

...

Okay so, now. Am I laying out the character descriptions of Star Trek or Pacific Rim?

In my favorite movie, the main character could be characterized as follows:

After his wife's brutal murder, he seeks to find and kill the man responsible.

Guess what? That description applies to dozens of movies. Some of them good, some bad, and only one of them is my favorite movie.

I'm just not even sure what your point is. You could make similar comparisons between characters everywhere from low budget nearly zero plot pornos and highly praised books.

What personality do the characters have that's not related to the words "cocky, arrogant, past trauma" I could easily make the above more detailed and still have it apply to both movies.

So what? What point are you trying to make?

Are you trying to say that if two movies share a similar character that are copies of each other? I'd laugh in your face if you tried to suggest that to me in real life. I don't get your point.

 

[sushiwarrior]

You apparently have a problem distinguishing between your opinion and fact.

Most of those movies are remakes. Side Effects was interesting, but I thought it was inferior to similar mindbender type stories like Memento because it was just super predictable beyond a certain point.

I heard This is the End got fairly good reviews, I might check it out, but it's really an entirely different genre.

I actually enjoyed most of the movies in your list, but NONE of them got me excited like Pacific Rim. It's been a long time since I have come out of the theater and immediately thought- I want to see that movie again- only Pacific Rim had that effect.



The thing is, your initial assumption "Star Wars and Star Trek were some of the first movies to have that plot line" is patently false. It's said there are only seven basic types of plots. Whether you agree that the number 7 is correct or not is beside the point, I can guarantee you that the plots used in Star Wars or any Star Trek movie have been used before, long before, in plays or books or stories told and remembered.

All in all, reusing an old plot is a requirement- there is no other way to make a movie ,there is no such thing as an original plot.

On the other hand, the specific characters, events, actions, *can* be made unique. Pacific Rim has done this. Yet another Star Trek sequel or yet another Superman sequel or yet another Batman sequel or yet another iteration of Ironman... none of these are new in *any* way.

I guess it comes down to preference. You like watching the same movie repeatedly, apparently. After some dozen or so super hero movies in the last five years, I'm sick of watching the same story play out over and over with subtle differences.

Remakes that are better than Pacific Rim. Pacific Rim has excellent action. Sadly, it is only 1/3 action, and the backstory behind the fighting is about as intelligent as the stories I came up with when I was 6 years old.

Now, I don't really have a problem with people who like Pacific Rim. I mean, it's good for people who enjoy mindless action. But calling it the "film of the year"? That sort of level demands both good action AND writing. "Film of the year" should not be a pick one of action or story.

Lol, you are confusing story with movie. Yes, they are all tropes to an extent, but there are a lot of unconventional movies out there which don't follow the seven stories whatsoever.

Sequels aren't inherently bad. They simply take a character we know and give them a new story. Or, a universe we know. This does not inherently cheapen the end result.

If you're sick of super hero movies, I have absolutely no idea why you weren't sick of pacific rim. Iron Man with bigger suits, worse acting, worse story (and Iron Man 3 was already bad to begin with).

 

[Ricochet]

You didnt stay shortly after the credits did you? because 2. gets resolved.

Nope, I didn't. Is it on Youtube yet? Going to find out.

 

[Oyeve]

Remakes that are better than Pacific Rim. Pacific Rim has excellent action. Sadly, it is only 1/3 action, and the backstory behind the fighting is about as intelligent as the stories I came up with when I was 6 years old.

Now, I don't really have a problem with people who like Pacific Rim. I mean, it's good for people who enjoy mindless action. But calling it the "film of the year"? That sort of level demands both good action AND writing. "Film of the year" should not be a pick one of action or story.

Lol, you are confusing story with movie. Yes, they are all tropes to an extent, but there are a lot of unconventional movies out there which don't follow the seven stories whatsoever.

Sequels aren't inherently bad. They simply take a character we know and give them a new story. Or, a universe we know. This does not inherently cheapen the end result.

If you're sick of super hero movies, I have absolutely no idea why you weren't sick of pacific rim. Iron Man with bigger suits, worse acting, worse story (and Iron Man 3 was already bad to begin with).

This response doesn't even make sense. Now I feel you are just trolling.

 

[Chiropteran]

the backstory behind the fighting is about as intelligent as the stories I came up with when I was 6 years old.

See, this is called "your opinion". Most fans of Pacific Rim simply disagree with you.

If your entire argument boils down to "my opinion is the only one that matters!" then there really isn't any point in discussing anything further.

Also...

Sequels aren't inherently bad.

Most of the movies you listed are not even sequels. They are flat-out remakes of stories that have already been told. Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, Star Trek Into Darkness, and Evil Dead are simply remakes, even lower on the creativity scale than sequels. The stories were already told, either in prior film or comics.

 

[sushiwarrior]

See, this is called "your opinion". Most fans of Pacific Rim simply disagree with you.

If your entire argument boils down to "my opinion is the only one that matters!" then there really isn't any point in discussing anything further.

Oh thanks for reminding me that any kind of creative work is a matter of opinion it's not like I can measure how good a movie is.

Pacific Rim is absolutely chock full of plot holes and has extremely weak character development and acting. That is pretty much unanimously agreed upon. Some people, however, insist it's an AWESOME movie, the BEST OF THE YEAR, despite that. My opinion is that those people are simple minded and care too much for explosions and CGI. It's even difficult to call the movie "fun" considering the entire middle section. Was I enjoying the fights between the monsters? Hell yes! Was I enjoying any other section of pretty much the entire movie? No. So if you want to tell me that a movie that is 30% AWESOME and 70% SHIT is the best of the year, I think you have an awfully weak memory.

 

[waggy]

I thought Pacific Rim was great for what i wanted. A mindless movie where big giant robots kick the shit out of monsters. I was very happy with what i received.

did it fallow a formula sure did. oddly i just read this article

I will get it it on blu-ray. I suspect i missed a lot and would like to watch it again. I will also go see 2 if/when it comes out.

I would enjoy a book/comic on this. yes i know there is 1 but would like more heh

,

 

[Aikouka]

The asian chick needs to stop talking. Every scene where she talked I started getting angry.

It kind of reminds me of Expendables 2 where I wished that they would have signed Maggie Q for the role. She's (half-)Asian and doesn't have the awkward accent.

It actually makes no sense for her to have the accent anyway as

Spoiler

she was raised by Idris Elba's character for over a decade (she's maybe 5 in the flashback).

Why don't they use the EMP to shut down the jaegers during the trench fight?

Because only one Kaiju could use the EMP blast, and

Spoiler

it was killed by Gipsy Danger.

Why do nukes work?

'cause nukes blow shit up real good.

Spoiler

Especially when they're right by the target!

The kaju know that humanity has nukes and we can use them, why don't they develop a counter measure for those?

Develop a counter-measure? They did! It's called the portal that had the

Spoiler

super, huge, major flaw of letting anything with Kaiju DNA through... even with a hitchhiker!

 

[Chiropteran]

Was I enjoying any other section of pretty much the entire movie? No

It makes me sad that you were so deceived by the movie. I guess you thought it was going to be 2 hours of mindless action, but instead you got story and character development. Some people enjoy more than just action, try to realize you are not in the majority in this case.

 

[Attic]

Saw it in IMAX 3D. Loved it, right film for the extra screen size, sound and 3D effects stood out particularly awesome when copters were flying around the jaigers.

I would have liked the their 5 Kaigu fight o have been on land and been more badass and have it end with a knee drive to the kaigus face that breaks off its face. A people's elbow midway in one of the fights would have been worthwhile to see too.

 

[Howard]

It actually makes no sense for her to have the accent anyway

She was already 13 when she met Pentecost, and Pentecost did not

Spoiler

adopt her immediately

.

 

[Aikouka]

She was already 13 when she met Pentecost, and Pentecost did not

Spoiler

adopt her immediately

.

I might have to watch it again because I do not recall her looking 13 in that scene.

 

[Howard]

I might have to watch it again because I do not recall her looking 13 in that scene.

She didn't look 13, but that's canon for you.

 

[sushiwarrior]

It makes me sad that you were so deceived by the movie. I guess you thought it was going to be 2 hours of mindless action, but instead you got story and character development. Some people enjoy more than just action, try to realize you are not in the majority in this case.

You really miss the point. I expected believable story or character development given an hour of time to do it. Pacific Rim tried to do character development and failed, and tried to give a semi-believable plot and failed horrifically. I enjoy way more than just action. Everything in Pacific Rim besides action was trash, absolute bottom tier trash.

 

[Chiropteran]

I expected believable story or character development given an hour of time to do it

Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, Despicable Me 2, World War Z, Star Trek, Warm Bodies, Side Effects, Place Beyond the Pines, Evil Dead, Great Gatsby, This Is the End, The Worlds End.

Despicable Me 2, Evil Dead, and Warm Bodies are your ideas of a superior movie, because Pacific Rim isn't believable enough?

Your argument isn't very believable.

 

[Chiropteran]

She didn't look 13, but that's canon for you.

Asian women only show signs of age every other decade.

 

[Adrenaline]

It kind of reminds me of Expendables 2 where I wished that they would have signed Maggie Q for the role. She's (half-)Asian and doesn't have the awkward accent.

It actually makes no sense for her to have the accent anyway as

Spoiler

she was raised by Idris Elba's character for over a decade (she's maybe 5 in the flashback).

Because only one Kaiju could use the EMP blast, and

Spoiler

it was killed by Gipsy Danger.

'cause nukes blow shit up real good.

Spoiler

Especially when they're right by the target!

Develop a counter-measure? They did! It's called the portal that had the

Spoiler

super, huge, major flaw of letting anything with Kaiju DNA through... even with a hitchhiker!

I enjoyed the movie. We saw it in 3-D.

Spoiler

The category 5 at the end did not die to the major nuclear blast in the ocean. I thought they had to fight it and take it through the portal.

 

[Aikouka]

Spoiler

The category 5 at the end did not die to the major nuclear blast in the ocean. I thought they had to fight it and take it through the portal.

I was referring to

Spoiler

the nuclear blast from self-detonating Gipsy Danger to blow up the evil aliens.

 

[stag3]

Oh thanks for reminding me that any kind of creative work is a matter of opinion it's not like I can measure how good a movie is.

Pacific Rim is absolutely chock full of plot holes and has extremely weak character development and acting. That is pretty much unanimously agreed upon. Some people, however, insist it's an AWESOME movie, the BEST OF THE YEAR, despite that. My opinion is that those people are simple minded and care too much for explosions and CGI. It's even difficult to call the movie "fun" considering the entire middle section. Was I enjoying the fights between the monsters? Hell yes! Was I enjoying any other section of pretty much the entire movie? No. So if you want to tell me that a movie that is 30% AWESOME and 70% SHIT is the best of the year, I think you have an awfully weak memory.

lol i guess i'm simple minded then cuz the movie rocked. i did not want to see an oscar worthy drama, i wanted to waste 2 hrs watching awesomeness and it delivered period.

if you go to the theater and let everyone know who's in line to watch Pacific Rim that there's huge plot holes, no character development and it's just stupid explosions and cgi, do you think you could get 1 person to not watch it and watch a movie of your choice instead? i highly doubt that. you seem to have a thing against popcorn flicks, there's enough room for all types of movies, not just the ones you like

 

[sushiwarrior]

lol i guess i'm simple minded then cuz the movie rocked. i did not want to see an oscar worthy drama, i wanted to waste 2 hrs watching awesomeness and it delivered period.

if you go to the theater and let everyone know who's in line to watch Pacific Rim that there's huge plot holes, no character development and it's just stupid explosions and cgi, do you think you could get 1 person to not watch it and watch a movie of your choice instead? i highly doubt that. you seem to have a thing against popcorn flicks, there's enough room for all types of movies, not just the ones you like

I have absolutely no problem with popcorn flicks, but that's just it - call it a popcorn flick, some cheap entertainment, that's it. It's most certainly not a "classic" as I have been hearing people call it, it isn't anything revolutionary, it's awesome robot fighting with terrible shmuck filling in the middle part.

Despicable Me 2, Evil Dead, and Warm Bodies are your ideas of a superior movie, because Pacific Rim isn't believable enough?

Your argument isn't very believable.

Evil Dead was an example of what a movie not taking yourself seriously should be like. Despicable Me 2 and Warm Bodies both can actually make characters seem like people with brains, rather than flat pieces of cardboard.

Oh, but Pacific Rim has 100% more robots fighting monsters. So if that's your criteria, it's the best movie of all time of course.

 

[Zeze]

Please don't argue with Chiropteran. He made everyone's head explode over there at Gaming forums.

He doesn't know what he's talking about. He has a warped view of this world and lacks basic comprehension. He will spew non-sense just to save his face. I don't know how someone like that could exist in reality.

Don't do it. Just move on.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

You also basically described Star Wars, and pretty much every other movie ever made.

The point is that certain stories work, and certain character combinations work, but you can create them in different ways. You can take Luke Skywalker, change his hair, his name, a few of his life details, the time period, the universe, and put him in a giant robot instead of an x-wing, OR you can keep everything the same and call it a sequel.

Sure, it's a bit lazy to use the same plot devices and character traits, but it's even more lazy to just put "2" at the end of the movie name.

Sure certain combinations work, but of course the problem is when people claim that the characters are SO UNIQUE and SO MUCH CHARACTERIZATION that I had to step back and realize that people are delusional. Its literally 99% exactly the same, how these characters act, their back stories, people they choose to make friends with, their personalities. And that really took me out, because its not even subtle or anything, its loud and proud about how it has the most generic cast ever.

On the other hand, the specific characters, events, actions, *can* be made unique. Pacific Rim has done this. Yet another Star Trek sequel or yet another Superman sequel or yet another Batman sequel or yet another iteration of Ironman... none of these are new in *any* way.

I guess it comes down to preference. You like watching the same movie repeatedly, apparently. After some dozen or so super hero movies in the last five years, I'm sick of watching the same story play out over and over with subtle differences.

How. You keep claiming how unique the events and story is with pacific rim. Exactly what about it is so unique versus every other action movie thats come out in the past 5 years. You don't explain it. I gave a nice little summary of how the new star trek and pacific rim basically have the exact same characters, events, and such. You have not given a way that pacific rim is different

All of those questions have very obvious answers if you actually paid attention to the movie and thought about things. The problem is you are going into it as an adversary, *looking* for things to complain about, so of course you will find them. Every movie in existence has flaws, and those flaws can easily be exaggerated if you ignore the in-movie explanations.

Shawshank Redemption, the #1 top rated movie on imdb:
"When Norton is at his desk loading the revolver the brand of ammunition shown on the box is Remington Kleenbore. However, looking at the cylinder as he is loading it, the cartridges have a WW head stamp indicating Winchester Western ammunition."

OMG, it has a flaw, it's a terrible bad movie! Not really.

In my favorite movie, the main character could be characterized as follows:

After his wife's brutal murder, he seeks to find and kill the man responsible.

Guess what? That description applies to dozens of movies. Some of them good, some bad, and only one of them is my favorite movie.

I'm just not even sure what your point is. You could make similar comparisons between characters everywhere from low budget nearly zero plot pornos and highly praised books.

So what? What point are you trying to make?

Are you trying to say that if two movies share a similar character that are copies of each other? I'd laugh in your face if you tried to suggest that to me in real life. I don't get your point.

You see, your first point isn't an answer to mine. I wasn't pointing out some weird minor flaws or discrepancies. I pointed out major plot issues and inconsistencies that really hurts the movie.

As to your second point, thats one line description. I have a multi paragraph description of the characters, plot, and backstories that are indistingusihable from different movies. that's what I'm talking about. I could literally keep going and continue to write more details that completely match up the movies.

The characters are ALL almost exactly the same, the same types of characters, the same types of interactions, the exact same "character development". You keep saying character development, but there is exactly no development in the movie, outside the "became a bit more nobler" schtick thats been done dozens of times, in the past 5 years.

Because only one Kaiju could use the EMP blast, and

Spoiler

it was killed by Gipsy Danger
'cause nukes blow shit up real good.

Spoiler

Especially when they're right by the target!

Develop a counter-measure? They did! It's called the portal that had the

Spoiler

super, huge, major flaw of letting anything with Kaiju DNA through... even with a hitchhiker!

Spoiler

Considering that the kaju are being developed by ultra advanced beings, and they figured out that EMP's disable the jaegers, they only make one? The entire point is that they are all clones of each other, so its not like every single kaju is insanely unique. They don't just straight up equip every single kaju with EMP's? They make the point that the kaju evolve extremely rapidly and suddently they only ever make ONE emp kaju? Why doesn't the cat 5 have an EMP that insta disables the jaeger holding the nuke? They know it works on it, and they didn't even try it again?

This also doesn't answer the point where the kaju for some reason stopped attacking the disabled jaegers, for no reason at all. Such a massive plothole. Its not like they have any qualms about giving the killing blow to already disabled jaegers, as shown when they killed the russians that were already disabled.

As for the nukes, I'm surprised that the US never bothered using any of those low yield, ultra high penetrating bunker busting nukes. Minimal falloff for a nuclear weapon, and can go through a mile of reinforced concrete. Anyway, the cat 5 only survived because all the damn energy of the blast went into the stupid water. And contrary to what the complete emptying of the ocean would tell you, the nuke they quoted output wasn't that strong, it was actually a piece of shit output wise. think it was like 1 million pounds of TNT, aka 1 megaton. a POS.

 

[Zeze]

I told you to ignore Chiro. He's really sick in the head. This isn't some leftover vendetta against him. He really is sick and I'm giving you a friendly warning.

In the other thread, his ignorance was so absurd, no less than 4 people gave up on talking to him. He also managed to bait out a lurker to sign up JUST TO correct him because he was so dumbfoundedly ignorant (and ultimately the lurker ignored him too).

 

[NikolaeVarius]

I told you to ignore Chiro. He's really sick in the head. This isn't some leftover vendetta against him. He really is sick and I'm giving you a friendly warning.

In the other thread, his ignorance was so absurd, no less than 4 people gave up on talking to him. He also managed to bait out a lurker to sign up and correct him because he was so dumbfoundedly ignorant (and ultimate the lurker ignored him too).

Ah, I was already in mid post when you posted your recommendation.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Please don't argue with Chiropteran. He made everyone's head explode over there at Gaming forums.

He doesn't know what he's talking about. He has a warped view of this world and lacks basic comprehension. He will spew non-sense just to save his face. I don't know how someone like that could exist in reality.

Don't do it. Just move on.

Irrigation, srsly.