f13.net

f13.net General Forums => Movies => Topic started by: 01101010 on February 06, 2011, 04:45:10 PM



Title: Priest
Post by: 01101010 on February 06, 2011, 04:45:10 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hinWQiv2rVc

Looks like good fun which will surely be shredded by the critics.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: K9 on February 06, 2011, 04:49:11 PM
Looks, awesome


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Arthur_Parker on February 06, 2011, 05:12:13 PM
Judge Dredd vs Vampires, looks great.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Ironwood on February 07, 2011, 03:49:25 AM
Um.

Where's Edward ?


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Surlyboi on February 07, 2011, 09:12:17 AM
Hopefully rotting in a ditch.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: HaemishM on February 07, 2011, 10:06:12 AM
Yeah, I'll bite.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: pxib on February 07, 2011, 10:43:06 AM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: 01101010 on February 07, 2011, 12:36:16 PM
I agree with ya, but if I am not mistaken, this is cut straight from the graphic novel. And we all know how "reality" is in that media.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Samwise on February 07, 2011, 01:09:49 PM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.

The original "wampyres" of folklore had a lot more in common with what we'd today call "ghouls" or "zombies" than the cape-wearing Dracula types.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: SurfD on February 07, 2011, 01:18:54 PM
I want a modern movie about Chinese Hopping Vampires damnit


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: lamaros on February 07, 2011, 07:23:43 PM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.

You've got me well at truly stumped. What angle are you taking here?


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Wasted on February 07, 2011, 08:01:28 PM

The original "wampyres" of folklore had a lot more in common with what we'd today call "ghouls" or "zombies" than the cape-wearing Dracula types.

This.  More 30 days of Night and less Bram Stoker.

Personally I don't mind some differing mythos, I prefer the more viscious but can enjoy the suave monster. The Twilight vampires are crimes against nature though.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: pxib on February 07, 2011, 10:47:28 PM
You've got me well at truly stumped. What angle are you taking here?
Bram Stoker. I want vampires as supervillains, monstrous without being merely monsters. Also without being part of tedious secret societies designed to create plots for comic books and romance novel soap operas. Also with the overwhelming, surprising, and arbitrary weaknesses supervillains tend to have.

If you want secret societies, use humans. They're scarier and their flaws are more fun. If you want ghouls, use ANY OF THE DOZENS OF HUMANOID BEASTS AVAILABLE FROM WORLD FOLKLORE.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Ingmar on February 09, 2011, 02:37:41 PM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YfumoNcZy-U/TIZgjpOu9zI/AAAAAAAAAR4/8e1jyjQYHBc/s400/nosferatu1.jpg)
 :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Sjofn on February 09, 2011, 03:18:13 PM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.

Anne Rice's have more in common with what you expect than, like, actual folklore vampires. As people pointed out. But I wanted to point it out too!

The best vampires were Octavia Butler's vampires (http://boingboing.net/2006/01/17/octavia-butlers-fled.html) though!


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Typhon on February 10, 2011, 09:18:14 AM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.

I feel the need to pile on here - Bram's Dracula didn't burn in the sunlight, he just wasn't as strong and couldn't shift shape (well, at noon he could shift shape).  He was repulsed by crosses though.  And needed soil from his home turf.

Seems like you are describing the Hammer-style vampire.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: pxib on February 10, 2011, 10:54:34 AM
Okay yeah, I've done my research and I have no idea what I actually like.

I just don't like centuries of inbred vampire politics and I don't like animalistic vampire ghouls.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Ironwood on February 10, 2011, 01:22:00 PM
As long as they don't sparkle while raping 14 year old girls, I'm ok with it.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Sir T on February 10, 2011, 06:07:00 PM
As I've said before, Vampires were good before they were turned into teenagers. Even Anne Rice acknowledged the 2 real forms of vampires in her original book. I know you all like Blade but that film was just another step along the road to sparkly vampires.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: K9 on February 10, 2011, 06:10:53 PM
this thread is waaaaay to neckbeardy

Lets talk about how awesome Paul Bettany is instead


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Nevermore on February 10, 2011, 09:06:43 PM
Little nitpick: These, like the creatures they resemble in I am Legend, are more ghouls than vampires. They eat human flesh in order to survive rather than drinking human blood to gain power. Vampires aren't animalistic monsters, even starving vampires, and movies cheapen the idea of a vampire by making them so. Additionally they're not physically beautiful so much as they have a hypnotic aura of power and command. Also they don't twinkle in the sunlight, they set fire and turn to ash.

The mythos is in pretty poor shape. I blame Anne Rice.

Vampires bursting into flame and turning into ash in sunlight is a thoroughly modern convention.  Vampire myths show up in a great many different cultures, and different cultures have different takes.  Some *are* animalistic monsters.  None sparkle, though.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Riggswolfe on February 11, 2011, 12:38:54 AM
As long as they don't sparkle while raping 14 year old girls, I'm ok with it.

Sparkling is where I draw my line as well. This far! No further!


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: UnSub on September 10, 2011, 08:47:56 AM
Paul Bettany is a good actor.

Pity that he keeps appearing in drek like this.

It's possible that the filmmakers could have fit in a few more cliches into this movie, but I'm not sure where. It's a base of "The Searchers" mixed with "Pitch Black", a strong splash of "The Matrix" and a hint of "Mad Max".

Not worth watching as you've probably already seen it.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Sand on September 10, 2011, 08:59:41 AM
I would disagree a bit. If you liked Pitch Black, which i did, you will like this movie.
Essentially the same thing but with vampires.

Not high art but some decently done sci-fi escapist action fun.


I do agree though that Paul Bettany should be getting much better roles, as i think he's a very good actor.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Threash on September 10, 2011, 11:28:03 AM
Pitch Black was a great fucking movie.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Der Helm on September 10, 2011, 11:55:45 AM
This is a fun action movie.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Pennilenko on September 10, 2011, 11:59:59 AM
Pitch Black was a great fucking movie.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: SurfD on September 10, 2011, 03:56:52 PM
Pitch Black was a great fucking movie.
Anyone know if the third Riddick movie is still supposed to be happening? or did it get lost in the shuffle somewhere?


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Zetleft on September 10, 2011, 06:25:05 PM
Prob lost after all the horrible movies Vin has been doing since pitch black.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Evildrider on September 10, 2011, 07:40:57 PM
Pitch Black was a great fucking movie.
Anyone know if the third Riddick movie is still supposed to be happening? or did it get lost in the shuffle somewhere?

I saw an article about it a few days ago, its in pre-production right now and will be rated R.  Vin Diesel took a pay cut and is only getting paid scale just so that it got the R rating as well.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: UnSub on September 11, 2011, 06:20:23 AM
Pitch Black was a great fucking movie.

I agree that you should watch "Pitch Black" instead of "Priest".


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Tebonas on September 12, 2011, 03:49:15 AM
Priest was no horrible movie, but it was a run-of-the-mill storyline where every four year old could have connected the plot points in advance with a cranyon.



Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Bunk on September 12, 2011, 08:03:12 AM
I enjoyed it - a good fun popcorn movie. Paul Bettany was suprising (just not the kind of role I pictured him in), Karl Urban got to act very Karl Urbany, over the top Christopher Plummer, and


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Threash on September 21, 2011, 09:25:45 PM
I hate movies that set up a sequel and then fucking bomb.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Sir T on September 22, 2011, 09:34:54 AM
So you hate 99% of movies then.


Title: Re: Priest
Post by: Furiously on November 14, 2011, 12:21:31 PM
I watched it this weekend and wouldn't recommend to anyone.