Posted: 10/20/2011 10:47:09 PM EDT
|
So I just got back from a midnight showing of this. I haven't even seen the first two. Somehow my friends convinced me to go.
Bad idea. Not because it was bad, or even that freaky (though they said it was by far creepier than the first two), but mainly because I just don't do movies like that. It's incredible the creepy places I will nonchalantly walk into on a daily basis working my job but watching these damn movies freaks me out. Yes, call me a puss. I deserve it. |
|
1 and 2 are really freaky so I don't blame you for being scared of 3. My wife watched half of one at night and refused to watch the rest until it was day time. Also another funny story about number 1 that movie came out when I was in AFG and someone sent us a copy. My squad leader watched the first 20 minutes of it alone and then came outside to come get me so he could have someone to watch it with him hahahahaa he was to scared to watch the rest alone. |
|
Well, and it's funny because it's true, as I was telling my friends tonight I can watch all the Texas Chainsaw Friday the 13th SAW etc etc movies all day long. It's the weird (and more relate-able) freaky shit that bothers me.
And I will say that this is once again a prequel just as 2 is to 1. So I guess if you've seen those two already you owe it to yourself to go ahead and check this one out. |
3 was ok, I thought it was a disappointing follow up to 1 and 2. It almost felt like a knock off (I wanted to say "cheap knockoff" but that is not accurate, yet somehow making it more expensive made it less cool). It wasn't as immersive, I was aware I was watching a movie, more so than the originals. I thought the scariest (most startling?) part was the mom jumping out of the closet with the halloween mask on, that got me to jump 
|
|
People liked the formula of the first two. So they kind of just stuck with what works. The other option was to try something different and than people would complain about that as well.
My wife and I find fault in it, because we felt it did not advance the story. A couple of things stand out: 1. In the First Movie we are told that the main actress doesn't have any photos of her childhood, because there was a fire. Now I'll have to go back and watch the first and second, but I know that there was a fire mentioned in the first movie. It was clear to me in the first one that their house burned down when they were kids or at least that was heavily implied. 2. In the Second One we are told that from the oldest daughter's boyfriend's internet search that the Demon wants the first born male heir/child and that apparently this may have been what was due to it, because of some pact with the devil. 3. There is not really more information on the deal with the devil or what was gained out of it. If it was for wealth they sure weren't spending wisely, but it does seem as though the wife in the third one is the one with the money. So, just looking for some intel that wasn't there in the third movie. Now what's next? Do they go back further in time to the older film cameras like the old 8mm? Due to film tech you're kind of limited on how many generations back you can go. Also, we know in the second one that it wants the male baby. Why? What the hell is it going to do with the male baby? Sacarafice? Just kind of felt jipped in that nothing was answered. |
|
Quoted:
Thought 1 was boring, we fast forwarded through it to get to the end. Yeah, the whole point to PA is to build-up things slowly to the end not to just go nuts from the get go. So, if you need a lot of action going on it's not going to be your kind of film. Director's cut should be interesting. I noticed two scenes that were in the trailers that did not make the final edit for the movie. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thought 1 was boring, we fast forwarded through it to get to the end. Yeah, the whole point to PA is to build-up things slowly to the end not to just go nuts from the get go. So, if you need a lot of action going on it's not going to be your kind of film. Director's cut should be interesting. I noticed two scenes that were in the trailers that did not make the final edit for the movie. I get ya I just thought it was slow. After about 2/3's then we were so bored we couldn't stand it. |
|
Quoted: The pay-off wasn't worth the wait, in either of the first two movies. At least, IMO.Quoted: Quoted: Thought 1 was boring, we fast forwarded through it to get to the end. Yeah, the whole point to PA is to build-up things slowly to the end not to just go nuts from the get go. So, if you need a lot of action going on it's not going to be your kind of film. Director's cut should be interesting. I noticed two scenes that were in the trailers that did not make the final edit for the movie. I get ya I just thought it was slow. After about 2/3's then we were so bored we couldn't stand it. |
|
Yeah, the whole point to PA is to build-up things slowly to the end not to just go nuts from the get go. So, if you need a lot of action going on it's not going to be your kind of film.
Director's cut should be interesting. I noticed two scenes that were in the trailers that did not make the final edit for the movie. We noticed this as well, however, I remember having the same thought when 2 came out, and I think I have yet to see all the scenes from the promos make it to a disc. |
|
Trailer shows the house on fire as well, which was talked about in PA1 and that did not make the final cut of the movie.
Apparently they brought in $54 MILLION this weekend, which according to the news is the highest grossing horror film opening weekend in history. So a #4 is definitely coming. I read another comment by somone at IMDB that said in the PA1 the chick talks to her Dad on the phone. In PA4 the guy isn't their dad, but stepdad or mom's boyfriend...not sure which. So PA4 could definitely be the girls going to live with daddy since he would take full custody unless he parental rights had been terminated. Grandma wouldn't get the kids before Dad in most cases. So I'm guessing PA4 takes place in the 90's with the girls in their early teens? |