THE PACK Message Boards

Here is some interesting info about Hellboy 2


http://www.killermovies.com/h/hellboy2/ ... /5293.html

A nightmare come true......
I dont understand why thier making a sequel, the first one ws terrible.

Actually I thought the first film was one of the better Comic-book to movie adaptations around. I hear that some people felt it was, too blatently Christian themed or whatnot but, I'm quite big on that stuff so it worked well in my view.

WolvenOne wrote:Actually I thought the first film was one of the better Comic-book to movie adaptations around. I hear that some people felt it was, too blatently Christian themed or whatnot but, I'm quite big on that stuff so it worked well in my view.

the punisher was on of the best comic movies

Never saw it, personally I never thought the Punisher was that interesting of a character, so it just held no appeal to me.

Besides that's really not a fair comparison, Punisher is, semi-realistic non-scifi or fantasy style action, whilst Hellboy is a fantasy/sci-fi style popcorn flick. It's apples and oranges, the comics the movies were based on simply are too dis-similer to expect a direct comparison.

WolvenOne wrote:Never saw it, personally I never thought the Punisher was that interesting of a character, so it just held no appeal to me.

Besides that's really not a fair comparison, Punisher is, semi-realistic non-scifi or fantasy style action, whilst Hellboy is a fantasy/sci-fi style popcorn flick. It's apples and oranges, the comics the movies were based on simply are too dis-similer to expect a direct comparison.

ok then, Spiderman 2. but regardless, there probaly gonna lose money, the first one did bad at the box office and on dvd. and theres a good reason for it.

Hellboy grossed 59Million in the American Box Office within 2 weeks and if I remember correctly it had a strong showing in the international scene as well. Look I know you don't like the movie but it did well and critically was very well liked. There's a reason why the movie studio behind it green-lighted a sequal within a week of it hitting the theatres.

And just to back up my statement that the film was critically well recieved, I have the score it got off Rotten Tomatoes, which compiles ALL profesional movie reviews.

Hellboy recieved a 79% Fresh Rating, Batman Begins got 83%, Spiderman got 89%. Now Hellboy certainly wasn't the biggest critical success out there but on the scale of things that's still a darn good score.

you know why it got 59 million dollars at the first 2 weeks, cause alot of people went to see it and had high hopes, but a majority of them came out disapointed, plus the last boss scene ended to quickly.

Ugh, okay, look "YOU" don't like the film, that's fine, everybody has thier own sense of taste. However, by all accounts the film did well, and I know plenty of people who absolutely loved the film. Not everybody did of course, but everybodies taste is different so that's fine.

I'm sorry to get a little cross here but I get annoyed when people presume to A: Speak for the masses, or B: Make blanket statments about the quality of, well, anything. Unfortunetly you're doing both here so I apoligize if I'm having a hard time hiding my annoyence.

Anyhow, saying that "most of the money was made within the first few weeks," is a poor argument. Most movies now make the vast majority of thier gross within the first 2 weeks now, afterward, they tend to completly drop off the radar. Occasionally there are films that'll last significantly longer then that, however it's growing increasingly rare.

WolvenOne wrote: Most movies now make the vast majority of thier gross within the first 2 weeks now, afterward, they tend to completly drop off the radar. Occasionally there are films that'll last significantly longer then that, however it's growing increasingly rare.

It's not even that anymore. Most of the movies right now are making most of their money in the opening weekend.

I attribute this to the fact that the amount of people going to movies is shrinking "but" those still going to movies tend to be very reguler customers. They head to the theatre once a week, watch whatever opening film catches thier eye, then forget about the rest of the films that oppened that week unless there's nothing better opening the following week.

WolvenOne wrote:Ugh, okay, look "YOU" don't like the film, that's fine, everybody has thier own sense of taste. However, by all accounts the film did well, and I know plenty of people who absolutely loved the film. Not everybody did of course, but everybodies taste is different so that's fine.

I'm sorry to get a little cross here but I get annoyed when people presume to A: Speak for the masses, or B: Make blanket statments about the quality of, well, anything. Unfortunetly you're doing both here so I apoligize if I'm having a hard time hiding my annoyence.

Anyhow, saying that "most of the money was made within the first few weeks," is a poor argument. Most movies now make the vast majority of thier gross within the first 2 weeks now, afterward, they tend to completly drop off the radar. Occasionally there are films that'll last significantly longer then that, however it's growing increasingly rare.

well im sorry i had to show my anger wolvenone, to be honest I didnt hate the film, I was just disapointed, especialy that last fight sene, it only lasted a minute and a half.

Lupin wrote:

WolvenOne wrote: Most movies now make the vast majority of thier gross within the first 2 weeks now, afterward, they tend to completly drop off the radar. Occasionally there are films that'll last significantly longer then that, however it's growing increasingly rare.

It's not even that anymore. Most of the movies right now are making most of their money in the opening weekend.

the reason why movies arent as making much money right now is because their usually coming out with some crappy ones, we need more directors like steven spilberg. As hollywood continues to make movies that dont meat to the people expectation, they will eventually lose money.

Ugh, you're being kinda cynical here I think.

As for the last fight scene... if it were live action and simple speciel effects I would agree, but that scene was very heavy CG and was probably by far the most expensive scene in the film. Yeah they could've made it longer but that would've required a larger budget, and from what I've read, this wasn't a film with a "TERRIBLY," large budget... at least in comparison with similer movies.

Besides, the main character was wrestling with a mass of giant squid tentecles. You really couldn't have made that go much longer without it getting boring....

I mean.... "Grab wriggle crush, grab punch wriggle, wriggle wriggle grab," there's not exactly a ton of room for varience in action there.

a minute or 2 in that scene is all i would have saked for,h ecan try to put several slugs into it before exploding it.

i to was dissapointed by the movie. i liked the characters(except that blue fire girl), and the story was intresting. but the monsters werent any cool if you ask me. however i kinda liked that mummy/zombie nazi.

i give the movie 6 out of 10.

if they make better villians, then mabe the sequeal will be great.(like with spider-man)

people give the movie directors a break here, all of you

because really, I would like to see any of you do better

Yeah, people DO need to give movie makers a break. It's easy to criticize, but when put in thier positions most people wouldn't have the first clue how to direct a movie.

So my rule is, to always pretend the person who made the movie is right in front of you. It's a heck a lot more easy to remain respectable, even when talking about films you don't like, if you're forcing yourself to remember that real people are involved.

WolvenOne wrote:Yeah, people DO need to give movie makers a break. It's easy to criticize, but when put in thier positions most people wouldn't have the first clue how to direct a movie.

So my rule is, to always pretend the person who made the movie is right in front of you. It's a heck a lot more easy to remain respectable, even when talking about films you don't like, if you're forcing yourself to remember that real people are involved.

Movie makers doesn't know whats on the people's mind. The only way to find out what the people want in a film is to ask them.

Figarou wrote:

WolvenOne wrote:Yeah, people DO need to give movie makers a break. It's easy to criticize, but when put in thier positions most people wouldn't have the first clue how to direct a movie.

So my rule is, to always pretend the person who made the movie is right in front of you. It's a heck a lot more easy to remain respectable, even when talking about films you don't like, if you're forcing yourself to remember that real people are involved.

Movie makers doesn't know whats on the people's mind. The only way to find out what the people want in a film is to ask them.

thats true but I bet even abrownrigg will have trouble directing this film, but ill just be quite now