Assassin's Creed - Part 2

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]513149[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]369741[/split]

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The best video game movie of the year is Angry Birds with a rotten tomato score of 43%.

And from what I've seen of Angry Birds while watching it with my babies (nephews), that movie is bad.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I don't think it's a matter of time spent as much as purpose. In ACIII there was a huge Desmond present day sequence where you played the game mechanics just as the past, but it was to go after Vidic at the Abstergo complex. For me personally it was rewarding because you got to go after and kill the guy that was screwing with you from the first game.

In AC1 the present day scenes were purposely boring. You didn't do anything, you were limited to a lab room, it was just to interact with characters and get backstory.

I remember the purpose, it added to the time out of the animus.
Man, the first game pissed me off significantly.

 

[Mysteryman]

The only way a video game film adaptation will ever succeed is if the script is more faithful to the story that the movie is trying to tell as opposed to being faithful to the adaptation of the gameplay.

 

[TheVileOne]

That's what this movie tried to do and it still didn't work.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

It will meet better success if it's... good.

 

[Roose Bolton]

Good is a point of view Aziz. Comic Book films and Video Game films are similar in almost every way...including their quest for greater power.

 

[TheVileOne]

You guys really think Tom Rothman will want to fast track Uncharted after this?

 

[Xrated48]

I think uncharted at this point will be in development h*** longer than it would be if this film was hit with critics .

 

[jokesonm3]

"You might prefer to watch the movie with the DLC Patch fix included" ~ AC reviewer

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Good is a point of view Aziz. Comic Book films and Video Game films are similar in almost every way...including their quest for greater power.

MUST..HAVE...POOWWEEERRRR.
Video game movies won't reach the success something like Blade II garnered.

You guys really think Tom Rothman will want to fast track Uncharted after this?

Maybe.
Leaning more toward the no.

"You might prefer to watch the movie with the DLC Patch fix included" ~ AC reviewer

That was a running joke since the days of the trailer being new.

 

[TheVileOne]

Maybe the DLC patch for this is the 140 minute Director's Cut that defenders are still claiming exists. I mean, it might exist, but who knows.

The film is about 102 minutes without credits. There's about 15 minutes of credits for this film.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Maybe the DLC patch for this is the 140 minute Director's Cut that defenders are still claiming exists. I mean, it might exist, but who knows.

The film is about 102 minutes without credits. There's about 15 minutes of credits for this film.

Is this really being argued?

 

[Tacit Ronin]

lol wut?

 

[TheVileOne]

Is this really being argued?

Someone is on Box Office forums. I don't know how it started, but I think there were rumors of the film having a 2 hour plus running time at one point.

EDIT:

OK the rumor started here: http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2016/...l-be-2-hours-20-minutes-long-or-8400-seconds/

So these reports were going around. My guess is that the 140 minute runtime at theaters includes trailers with the showing. That would make a 113 minute movie close to 2 hours 20 minutes.

So EMPIRE Cinemas listed an incorrect running time, and other sites picked that time up.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Is this really being argued?

There are always ridiculous people claiming that some mythical cut will make a bad movie a masterpiece.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Maybe the DLC patch for this is the 140 minute Director's Cut that defenders are still claiming exists. I mean, it might exist, but who knows.

The film is about 102 minutes without credits. There's about 15 minutes of credits for this film.

I'll hazard a guess and say it goes like this:
"More animus scenes, more depth to the historical characters, more action"
More BS.

 

[jokesonm3]

There are always ridiculous people claiming that some mythical cut will make a bad movie a masterpiece.

 

[Marvolo]

There probably is a longer cut that existed at some point, and it might have characterization that the theatrical cut is lacking and possibly has more past scenes, but Im not holding out hope that we will see it. Unless the studio decides to use an extended cut in an attempt to boost home video sales.

 

[TheVileOne]

Now to be fair, I love the extended cut of Chronicles of Riddick. I'm not sure it would've made the movie do better in theaters, but I actually genuinely like the movie now with the extended cut.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't know if I've ever seen the Extended Cut for The Chronicles of Riddick. That being said I thought the theatrical cut was an OK movie. It's a misguided Pitch Black sequel though.

 

[TheVileOne]

Well the extended cut makes it feel more Pitch Black-ish. It has a bit more edge and a bit more of Riddick's brutal side.

 

[Marvolo]

Its rare that an extended cut turns a bad film into a good film, but it does happen.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I never bothered with any of the Riddick movies.