'Yet another Starship Troopers fan born after 1990 who'd rather watch slickedy 90210 characters fight computer generated monsters, and can't place movies from a time when filmmakers didn't have millions after millions after millions dollars to make the film, or existing concepts to base it on, or a computer that poo yet another bug.'
God I love how planks like you categorise people because of thier dislike of crap movies.
The Evil Dead, The deadly Spawn, Killer Klowns from outer space, Halloween, Just before dawn, It's Alive, The Beastmaster, Scanners...Need I go on?
I happen to be 32 years old and the early to mid 80's was my era as far as movies are concerned.
All of the movies I have mentioned above are cheap, low budget horror/sci-fi movies from around the same time frame as Galaxy of Terror, with only one difference...The people who made them actually gave a *beep* about the people who would eventually get to watch thier movies.
Galaxy of Terror has been made with little or no thought to the poor people who would be put through this tripe, the story, acting, special effects, music, camera work, everything, is rushed to make a quick dollar from a bit of inventive marketing. It has no entertainment value whotsoever.
Probably all or most of the movies i mentioned above will have had similar budgets.
So think on next time you start ranting on about how I'm a silly child born after 1990 who likes nothing more than beverly hills 90210 actors and campy CGI.
If you disagree with what i say then fine, say so, but don't pretend you know who I am and what I know.
"Hasta la vista, baby."
reply
share
shilrah
16 years ago
Fair enough.
90210-kids... there are a lot of those on the message boards and they tend to bash older movies because of their lack of CGI and brainless pace. They come up with the most ininspired ideas, and I honestly thought, based on you comperasons that you were one of them, but it seems I jumped to that conclusion too quicly and that we're dealing with a genuine difference of opinion here. I'd also like to say that I didn't intend to call anyone names. I was mere trying to illustrate the perception that some people have on movies (appearantly wrongfully accusing you of it) so, sorry if I offended you.
As far as the discussion goes... Again, I will not go as far as to say GOT was a good movie, but I think that if you have the financial means and all the reasources that filmmakers have today and you come up with a movie that is in any way comparable (if not worse), like Alien vs Predator (-'says the huge Alien fan), THEN we're talking a BAD movie. I'll agree that many of the things in GOT were portraited with little inspiration, but the pevital elements of the script were pretty clever written for a film that indeed stood at the dawn of films of it's kind, which gave us loads of crap indeed, not to mention that they probably had about $12 to make the movie, so to say. I also agree with ccr1633 when he says that it had more cojones then the avarage horrorflick in those days. Not that the same approach would've have worked for other movies like let's say Alien (which according to some implies that Lambert gets tailraped by the alien), but in my opinion it did for GOT. So in that sense it is indeed a piece of 'antique'. As you stated, I don't know about other people, but I know that I can, taking rubber limbs and puppetwires into consideration, appreciate a movie of GOT's caliber if placed in the right perspective.
reply
share