MovieChat Forums > Rise (2007) Discussion > Rise, a boring film.

Rise, a boring film.


Just checked this out last night and I got so boared watching it, I think this flick is a wasted opertunity but christ it was so boring. is it just me are did anyone find this film rubbish I would also like to hear from the people who liked the film to get their views maybe I am missing a trick and need to watch it again.

reply

[deleted]

Can you define what "an actual vampire flick" is?

I would have been disappointed if it contained the same old classic vampire "rules".

Sadie figuring out what had happened to her and seeking revenge on those who did it was a good plotline.

I wouldn't say this movie was great, but it was a helluva lot better than many I've seen.

And hey - it had Lucy Liu, Mike Chiklis, and somebody else cool at least.

reply

I gotta disagree man. It was very entertaining. Why did you think it was boring?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0389328/board/nest/88487957



reply

One of the worst movies I've ever seen. I shut it off after 52 minutes. Very very, very boring, and I have seen alot of movies.

reply

If this is one of the worst movies you've ever seen, you REALLY have NOT seen a lot of movies.



----- Made you look! -----

reply

I just sat thru this entire movie after renting it and I am was so disappointed. I love Mike Chiklis and Lucy Liu, and could not beleive how awful it was. It was 20 minutes too long, badly edited, badly written, and not interesting but what is worse is that it should have been great!

Lucy Liu, Mike Chiklis and a terrific story; how did they screw that up??? Did this even ever get into a theater ow was it direct to DVD?

reply

I think that philip holland13 is just trying to get a RISE out of the fans.

Actually, I liked the film more than I had expected. I didn't think it was boring at all. It had a fair amount of thrills, bare skin, interesting characters, revenge and mystery. And I was curious as to how it would all play out. But a tighter script would have been more beneficial for us all.

A little less overacting from the bit players would have been nice too. Subtlety often explains more with less effort. The best actors know this. That's really the director's duty, but I understand the budget constraints too. Reshooting everything several times and attempting to fix every little problem in post is very expensive. It's like auto manufacturers trying to build quality into their vehicles by repairing them after they have left the assembly line. It can't be done. More problems arise (scratches, dings, etc.) by taking them out of the system where they are normally protected.

That's why continuity problems happen even in the finest films. The best example is watching persons talk and eat as they sit around a dining table. During the conversation the food on the plates and liquid in the glasses often refill themselves and empty, seemly magically, in a span of seconds. That's because the film is patched together out of sequence to make the conversations flow better. Editing is as much an art form as cinematography.

I'm not a big fan of the classic vampire genre, which is not to say that I don't find them occassionally entertaining. But they're all much the same in content: blood feasting, murder, mayhem and sex. Sometimes a hapless victim gets 'turned.' It can be a comedy, drama, supernatural, sci-fi, noir, or any combination thereof. Rarely is the genre inspirational--although cults of vampire wannabees have been known to thrive in the legendary underground and on the fringes of society.

For the most part, Rise... brought new blood to the genre without resorting to cliches, tired plot lines and overwrought themes. In that sense, it was refreshing.


reply