Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I just caught the third one on tv over the weekend. After grimly sitting though it I can honestly say the only way I'm sitting through another one is if someone straps me to a chair and forces me to watch, like in Clockwork Orange.

My opinions of the RE films;


1: Great film, could find a fault with it

2: Started straying off track, wasnt all bad, but not great.

3: Why did they release it? huge waste of money on a film that fits into nothing.

4: ill watch it when it comes out, might aswell since there isnt much out lately worth watching




About the only decent film ive watched lately was hurt locker.

whatwhat wrote:

You're forgetting they were highly popular games in their time, they're the reason it's now a major franchise and has four movies adapted from it. Maybe they haven't stood the test of time but then few of the best games of their own time do.

Some of them were. I think you're also forgetting that resident evil was a shovelware license that has had nearly 20 games. Most of them terrible.

Erm, really. By todays standards most old games have "ALL of them" as you say. Lets see... poor story telling, having trouble thinking of one game pre 2000 which I can actually remember a worthwhile story besides maybe zelda or final fantasy.

Zeldas stories are always iconic, but they are never good. They are simple childrens stories. Final fantasy was the opposite, sprawling epic tales designed for 14 year olds. I think you're confusing where I mention story and presentation of story.

awful voice acting, most games didn't even bother with voice acting back then and had lines of text you had to read, where the dialogue ussually read like a childrens book.

Click the youtube link. The resident evil series is classic because of it's campy and awful dialogue.

Mediocre graphics, again no different from any other game of it's time they were no worse than most of what was being released at the time.

Sure they were. Muddy texture work and unrecognizable monsters were pretty commonplace but unlike parasite eve, legacy of kain, banjoe kazooi, and quite a few other games it didn't really have a noteable visual flair. It was just boring looking.

God-awful writing, again nothing remarkably different from other games of the time. Incredibly poor controls and a poor camera system , third person games haven't overcome either of these problems until very recently.

It kind of makes you wonder why people are mad at the movies for not following the games storylines when they are awful. As for cameras and controls, third person games overcame those when mario64 came out. Probably sooner. The problems have been solved for years, capcom and resident evil in general is just lazy.

You're forgetting they were highly popular games in their time, they're the reason it's now a major franchise and has four movies adapted from it. Maybe they haven't stood the test of time but then few of the best games of their own time do.

And survival horror games of the time were all known to have awful controls and poor graphics. It was a genre of bad games that floated on top of the "horror" idea and a total lack of competition.

I,like Deadshane,am a Zombie film fanatic.
I will literaly watch ANY zombie film I happen upon,just to see how it stacks up...I am often disapointed.
Concerning the Resident Evil films,I thought the first one was ok (nothing great,but watchable) and thought the rest were gak,as I belive this latest instalment will also be.
The only thing I find remotely enjoyable about the last few RE films is of course Milla Jovovich,I could watch her read the phone book and still be happy...
Basicly ,when it comes to zombie films,there are very few that are really well done,most of those are either the works of Romero or Fulci,and the rest are "hit or miss".
Sure most of the RE films blow,but they could be much worse...check out "Children shouldn't play with Dead things", "House of the Dead" (damn you Uwe Boll) or any of the "Return of the living Dead" films.

I rather like all of the RE films.

Cheese Elemental wrote:I rather like all of the RE films.

Does this qualify as a shocking revelation???

Alpharius wrote:

Cheese Elemental wrote:I rather like all of the RE films.

Does this qualify as a shocking revelation???

Oi! Just what are you implying?

I've seen about a half hour of the first movie. I have no idea if it was any good or not, but I do know that ludicrous wire-fu stunts set to heavy metal are just not for me. I'm also a fan of zombie movies, but the appeal for me is ordinary people surviving in a horrific world, and once people start doing flying kicks then it's clear the movie is about other things and I lose interest.

Deadshane1 wrote:This series is a horrible example of how movies dont even have to be remotely intelligent or even watchable to make money nowadays. One day I will take a dump, snap on a rubber glove, throw the feces onto several peices of paper, then take a trip to Hollywood in order to sell my new blockbuster script. Apparently, that's all one has to do in order to make Sci-Fi/Horror/Action movies nowadays. (Transformers, GI Joe, Indiana Jones/Crystal Skull)

Dude, this is how it's always been. This is how it will always be. Decent, original ideas in functional have a long development time, and are a very risky proposition. Another film that's similar to another movie that made money and can be tied in to merchandise and video games is a lot more likely to make money, and it and can be slotted into the production and release schedules quite neatly.

If people spent some time finding out what movies were actually good before handing over their money, then there'd be profit to be had in making sure a film is decent. But audiences don't and never have, so we get what we deserve.

First off, I am HUGE fan of the games (1, 2, and Nemesis...some of the others)...the films are horrible and prison skull-feth raped the storyline....

but the lack of love for RE1 and 2, the games, makes me feel like this...

ShumaGorath wrote:

whatwhat wrote:

You're forgetting they were highly popular games in their time, they're the reason it's now a major franchise and has four movies adapted from it. Maybe they haven't stood the test of time but then few of the best games of their own time do.

Some of them were. I think you're also forgetting that resident evil was a shovelware license that has had nearly 20 games. Most of them terrible.

Erm, really. By todays standards most old games have "ALL of them" as you say. Lets see... poor story telling, having trouble thinking of one game pre 2000 which I can actually remember a worthwhile story besides maybe zelda or final fantasy.

Zeldas stories are always iconic, but they are never good. They are simple childrens stories. Final fantasy was the opposite, sprawling epic tales designed for 14 year olds. I think you're confusing where I mention story and presentation of story.

awful voice acting, most games didn't even bother with voice acting back then and had lines of text you had to read, where the dialogue ussually read like a childrens book.

Click the youtube link. The resident evil series is classic because of it's campy and awful dialogue.

Mediocre graphics, again no different from any other game of it's time they were no worse than most of what was being released at the time.

Sure they were. Muddy texture work and unrecognizable monsters were pretty commonplace but unlike parasite eve, legacy of kain, banjoe kazooi, and quite a few other games it didn't really have a noteable visual flair. It was just boring looking.

God-awful writing, again nothing remarkably different from other games of the time. Incredibly poor controls and a poor camera system , third person games haven't overcome either of these problems until very recently.

It kind of makes you wonder why people are mad at the movies for not following the games storylines when they are awful. As for cameras and controls, third person games overcame those when mario64 came out. Probably sooner. The problems have been solved for years, capcom and resident evil in general is just lazy.

You're forgetting they were highly popular games in their time, they're the reason it's now a major franchise and has four movies adapted from it. Maybe they haven't stood the test of time but then few of the best games of their own time do.

And survival horror games of the time were all known to have awful controls and poor graphics. It was a genre of bad games that floated on top of the "horror" idea and a total lack of competition.

So obviously you were either too young or old and gakky and didn't really pay attention to anything relating to video games back then. 1, EVEN WITH its campy voice acting, had amazing music, terrific mood, and beuatiful photorealistic (for the the time) textures. 2 just came and showed it up, I love RE2, it is one of my favourite games. POOR STORYLINE??!! ARE YOU SMOKING BASIL AND PENCIL SHAVINGS? the storyline from resident evil 1 and 2, with 3 and 0 adding to the mystique are brilliant, and SO many films and games have stolen from it. Shun Nishigaki made the music of RE 1 and 2...he is a genius, and the mood he set, along with (especially 2's) the beautiful HIGHLY detailed backgrounds is just excellent. The only game that came out around that time that is better would be LoZ: OoT, or FFVII, 2 of the greatest games ever...oh, and fething MARIO KART 64.

everybody should petition for a NETHACK movie... where an big ascii "@" symbol attacks big ascii "D" graphics dragons while running around a maze made of dots.

Looks like they ran a crap movie through photoshop a million times.

Bad art is bad art no matter how well you polish it to distract the dumb masses.

ShumaGorath wrote:

whatwhat wrote:

You're forgetting they were highly popular games in their time, they're the reason it's now a major franchise and has four movies adapted from it. Maybe they haven't stood the test of time but then few of the best games of their own time do.

Some of them were. I think you're also forgetting that resident evil was a shovelware license that has had nearly 20 games. Most of them terrible.

I'm trying to point out to you that there are an abundance of other people who don't share your ill opinions of the games, which you are trying to pass off as objective fact.

Does it look terribly cheesy? Yes!

Will I go see it anyway? Yes!

Ever drive by a train wreck?

So obviously you were either too young or old and gakky and didn't really pay attention to anything relating to video games back then.

Well that, or they generally were games that were pretty poor and existed on the merits of existing in the vacume of a new genre.

ARE YOU SMOKING BASIL AND PENCIL SHAVINGS?

I dunno. Did you just say that the resident evil storyline was original? Big evil corporation accidentally releases a virus that turns people into zombies, oh, and they had been working on bio weapons too I guess so elite military team gets sent in to investigate. Original? Really? Reeaaaaaaly? Are you sure you don't mean utterly generic?

So obviously you were either too young or old and gakky and didn't really pay attention to anything relating to video games back then. 1, EVEN WITH its campy voice acting, had amazing music, terrific mood, and beuatiful photorealistic (for the the time) textures.

Yeah, it sure does look photorealistic in here.

There were better looking games.

I'm trying to point out to you that there are an abundance of other people who don't share your ill opinions of the games, which you are trying to pass off as objective fact.

If the size of the fanbase equalled actual quality the twilight thread running concurrently to this one would be full of fans instead of whining.

the first movie was pretty good (considering the quality of the visuals, definately looked photoshopped.)

However, with hollywood in general, what more are you expecting? It's no different than the gaming industry where you have..... 7? 8? Call of Duties, upwards of 20 RE games, 10 something Halo's...... If it sells, its going to be milked really, really badly.



Personally, I am hoping the Prince of Persia movie will be good. It looks good, anyway.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Yeah, it sure does look photorealistic in here.

There were better looking games.

I'm trying to point out to you that there are an abundance of other people who don't share your ill opinions of the games, which you are trying to pass off as objective fact.

If the size of the fanbase equalled actual quality the twilight thread running concurrently to this one would be full of fans instead of whining.

Firstly, hardly. Secondly, metal gear is two years younger. And thirdly, arguing right and wrong on something which is completely subjective does nothing more than prove arrogance and self righteousness on your part.

And thirdly, arguing right and wrong on something which is completely subjective does nothing more than prove arrogance and self righteousness on your part.

I never claimed to be humble.

ShumaGorath wrote:
I never claimed to be humble.

Ladies and Gentlemen, may I proudly present to you ShumaGorath! Here, at his best.

ShumaGorath wrote:

So obviously you were either too young or old and gakky and didn't really pay attention to anything relating to video games back then.

Well that, or they generally were games that were pretty poor and existed on the merits of existing in the vacume of a new genre.

ARE YOU SMOKING BASIL AND PENCIL SHAVINGS?

I dunno. Did you just say that the resident evil storyline was original? Big evil corporation accidentally releases a virus that turns people into zombies, oh, and they had been working on bio weapons too I guess so elite military team gets sent in to investigate. Original? Really? Reeaaaaaaly? Are you sure you don't mean utterly generic?

So obviously you were either too young or old and gakky and didn't really pay attention to anything relating to video games back then. 1, EVEN WITH its campy voice acting, had amazing music, terrific mood, and beuatiful photorealistic (for the the time) textures.

Yeah, it sure does look photorealistic in here.

There were better looking games.

I'm trying to point out to you that there are an abundance of other people who don't share your ill opinions of the games, which you are trying to pass off as objective fact.

If the size of the fanbase equalled actual quality the twilight thread running concurrently to this one would be full of fans instead of whining.

Metal Gear came out on September 3, 1998.

Resident Evil came out on March 22, 1996.

And if you actually understand how game textures work, and how they are applied to the environments and models, yes, those walls and textures are very photorealistic for the times, please, have a knowledge base before you argue something you know nothing about.



for 14 years ago that's pretty badass.

2 is even better.

as far as the plot, show me something the predates this storyline that makes this utterly generic?...it is NOW, because people have stolen it...

and glancing at people playing the game and then taking your loose knowledge of the movies and formulating a plot synopses is pretty lame...

the storyline is brilliant...it is EXTREMELY rich in character development, scientific history, and intrigue...


go here....
http://residentevil.wikia.com/Umbrella_Corporation
and read it, and click on all of the links to find out more...it really is very interesting.
all of these stories can be backed up by not only the games and novels, but The Wesker Report...





.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh, and you will also see how loosely Anderson based the movies on the games....

and how much of a feth tard he is.

Shuma is correct in that the "plot" behind the RE games wasn't "original", the use of "evil corparations" unleashing some sort of "catastrophe"upon the public and trying to cover it up has been used quite a bit in the horror genre...however,how much of anything is particularly "original" anymore?
That being said,I complettely enjoyed the RE games,and thought they were fairly decent looking as well,plus...they are just plain fun to play,of course I may be biased due to that whole "zombie love" I suffer from.

We can all hate on the parts we dont like all we want.

But considering its still popular since 1996?
And 26 games released onto multiple platforms?
4 and soon to be 5th movie?

They have to be doing something right?. Or perhaps we just have different taste then the rest of the populace they are able to make money off from.

What i think of this movie?
Like all 3 D movie it looks so lame , oh sunglasses and debris flying towards the screen OH NOES!

The number of games you release does not a good series make.

The quality of the games, however, does.
Look at the Heroes of Might & Magic series or the Command and Conquer series for an example.

Kanluwen wrote:The number of games you release does not a good series make.

The quality of the games, however, does.
Look at the Heroes of Might & Magic series or the Command and Conquer series for an example.

I think the point Luna is making is that obviously there are plenty of people who like the game for it to warrant 26 sequels.

Heh.

Funny, because it seems every time they release a new sequel the sales figures go down outside of everywhere except Japan.

Oh right yes. So that would of course be people realising the games are shyte all of a sudden, rather than the possibility that the sequels aren't living up to the standards of their predecessors?

Pop quiz.
Two girls, two guys, on a double date in a pub somewhere, sometime.
Conversation about the Resident evil games props up all of a sudden.
Now the girls both like/dislike(pick one) the games, and believe them to be good/terrible.
However the guys both share the opposite opinion of the games.
Now Guy A surmises the issue of whether the games are good or terrible is highly subjective, therefore considers any argument pointless and stays quiet.
Guy B on the other hand, surmises he of course has to be right and argues that his point of view has to be correct.
Who gets laid?

And if you actually understand how game textures work, and how they are applied to the environments and models, yes, those walls and textures are very photorealistic for the times, please, have a knowledge base before you argue something you know nothing about.

Just for reference I work in graphic design and have done a pretty good amount of 3d animation.

You should probably learn what a pre rendered environment is, since it's pretty clear that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

for 14 years ago that's pretty badass.

Sure they were. Muddy texture work and unrecognizable monsters were pretty commonplace but unlike parasite eve, legacy of kain, banjoe kazooi, and quite a few other games it didn't really have a noteable visual flair. It was just boring looking.

Now, if you had read my post you would note that I thought the horror genre in general had pretty poor graphics, but that the RE series in particular suffered from attempts at realism during a generation of consoles that were physically incapable of such. Thus they lost artistic visual flair and gained.... Nothing! Their competitors, several of which ALSO survive to this day (such as silent hill) had much better visual aesthetics.

as far as the plot, show me something the predates this storyline that makes this utterly generic?...it is NOW, because people have stolen it...

and glancing at people playing the game and then taking your loose knowledge of the movies and formulating a plot synopses is pretty lame...

You are reeeeaaally bad at identifying what an original plot is. Evil corporations, zombies, and bio weapons have been a staple of science fiction for half a century, likely longer. Even when taken together you basically have captain planet except remove the planeteers and throw in gunwielding supercops.

But considering its still popular since 1996?
And 26 games released onto multiple platforms?
4 and soon to be 5th movie?

Actually until four the games average ratings in media have been getting categorically lower with every sequel. They hit a high point with 2 that they didn't reach again until four over a decade later. They then lost it again.

Funny, because it seems every time they release a new sequel the sales figures go down outside of everywhere except Japan.

Resident evil four is the best selling RE game to date, with five trailing immediately behind.

Oh right yes. So that would of course be people realising the games are shyte all of a sudden, rather than the possibility that the sequels aren't living up to the standards of their predecessors?

Well they didn't until four. They stayed exactly the same over and over again (when every other genre got better). That said, four was the interesting plot and the good game, they actually took some chances and made a good RE game there. Just don't look to the Wii for innovation in an RE game and you can see that they're trying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

whatwhat wrote:Oh right yes. So that would of course be people realising the games are shyte all of a sudden, rather than the possibility that the sequels aren't living up to the standards of their predecessors?

Pop quiz.
Two girls, two guys, on a double date in a pub somewhere, sometime.
Conversation about the Resident evil games props up all of a sudden.
Now the girls both like/dislike(pick one) the games, and believe them to be good/terrible.
However the guys both share the opposite opinion of the games.
Now Guy A surmises the issue of whether the games are good or terrible is highly subjective, therefore considers any argument pointless and stays quiet.
Guy B on the other hand, surmises he of course has to be right and argues that his point of view has to be correct.
Who gets laid?

The interesting thing is that this is a forum dedicated to plastic toy men, and you're example is painfully ironic.

ShumaGorath wrote:

whatwhat wrote:Oh right yes. So that would of course be people realising the games are shyte all of a sudden, rather than the possibility that the sequels aren't living up to the standards of their predecessors?

Pop quiz.
Two girls, two guys, on a double date in a pub somewhere, sometime.
Conversation about the Resident evil games props up all of a sudden.
Now the girls both like/dislike(pick one) the games, and believe them to be good/terrible.
However the guys both share the opposite opinion of the games.
Now Guy A surmises the issue of whether the games are good or terrible is highly subjective, therefore considers any argument pointless and stays quiet.
Guy B on the other hand, surmises he of course has to be right and argues that his point of view has to be correct.
Who gets laid?

The interesting thing is that this is a forum dedicated to plastic toy men, and you're example is painfully ironic.

Only if you believe being into "plastic toy men" therefore means you can't get laid. Me, I don't. ymmv

Shuma , i bet you like FF Spirits Within

LunaHound wrote:Shuma , i bet you like FF Spirits Within

No, that movie sucked pretty bad. Better than the final fantasy VII movie though. By a long shot. A really long shot.

ShumaGorath wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Shuma , i bet you like FF Spirits Within

No, that movie sucked pretty bad. Better than the final fantasy VII movie though. By a long shot. A really long shot.

How about compared to RE movies? I think Spirits is better? they didnt slack off on the quality and the story.