Support NeoGAF

[Veidt]

GAF will never be able to use spoilers correctly it seems :lol

 

[Gary Whitta]

Final box-office for The Book of Eli over the holiday weekend: $38.4m

Thanks to EVERYONE who turned out to support the film and help make it a big hit!

 

[The Interrobanger]

I will also say it didn't feel overly original at all, but I think that's more due to the visual style than the script.

It felt like I Am Legend (visuals, plot elements) mixed with Shoot 'Em Up (action, plot elements, villain) mixed with Leon (oldman's villain, glorified babysitting/training/romancing of useless girl) mixed with The Matrix (story/prophecies, some visuals/cinematography).

 

[Veidt]

Final box-office for The Book of Eli over the holiday weekend: $38.4m

Thanks to EVERYONE who turned out to support the film and help make it a big hit!

Worldwide numbers will be at least double that. So thank us foreigners when that's made public.

Eli budget was 80 mill right?
Damn. This film is doing great even being under the shadow of the godzilla that is Avatar.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

I'll be seeing it tomorrow.

 

[hednik4am]

Final box-office for The Book of Eli over the holiday weekend: $38.4m

Thanks to EVERYONE who turned out to support the film and help make it a big hit!

Gary,

I had this discussion with my wife after we saw it when she asked how i thought it would do. I told her in my estimation it would do about 20 million but I wasn't completly sure because Avatar and holmes seem to be really hanging on this season and are really getting people back out to the movies.

My second point is far too often the press tells us that movies released in mid Jannuary to late february are movies that are usually being sent out to die. It could be something that they couldn't market well or something that just died on the editing floor. Seems like quite a notorious habit of studios. Did this ever pop up in your mind or was it ever mentioned to you ? (nothing about the quality of the movie, i loved it)

I ask this also because you do come from the gaming press background where game shave been sent out to die and you know when such things happen i.e. ultima IX or recently Borderlands. In the case of borderlands I assume it went beyond anyone's expectations.

 

[hsin]

$300 Dr. Dre Beats are "relatable?"

I bought a pair of those during a lunch break at work because I left my both my Shures and UltimateEars at home and I really needed to tune out the distractions in my office. They're about $150.

Also, don't tell me you don't see any branding when you look around your bedroom/home/office/school. If an apocalypse were to happen and you survived and happened to find a stash of canned food and bottle drinks (assuming you're in North America), chances are likely that you'll be having Spam and Hunt's for dinner and washing it down with some Evian water with a side of Coca-Cola. Why? Because that's what existed before.

And let's say you survived the apocalypse and you happened to have your backpack with you (chances are that the backpack itself is also branded) and one of the items in your backpack is a device for listening to music. Again, almost improbable that your device is without branding. It's MUCH more believable that you have an iPod or a Zune or even something from Sony/Panasonic/Logitech/etc. than having a generic device.

Anyway, I find the "product placement" complaint a bit nit picky. It's not so much that the Beats by Dre themselves are relatable as much as it is the fact that it's a brand from our present time. I mean, I do believe that product placement can become excessive and detract from a film but with the right amount, it can be quite effective in creating a relatable setting.

Here's an article from BrandChannel talking about the product placement that was complained about in "The Road", specifically, the Coke can scene:

"The Road": Post-Apocalyptic Product Placement

Audiences are eagerly awaiting the release of the film adaptation of the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel The Road, opening November 25. And fans want adherence to the bleak, original Cormac McCarthy novel.

But not really.

Reports from early screenings are surfacing that scenes including "product placements" in the film, especially one with a can of Coca-Cola, are drawing groans. But as the film's director John Hilcoat explains, he was just being loyal to the source:

There’s some people who don’t know the book and have picked up on this in the film and say, Why did they go for such a blatant product placement?

Hilcoat is referring to this passage from McCarthy's novel:

He withdrew his hand slowly and sat looking at a Coca Cola.

What is it, Papa?

It's a treat. For you.

He'd hooked up a small gas heater and they drank Coca Cola out of plastic mugs and after a while he went back to the house and wrung water out of the jeans and brought them back...

Novelist McCarthy explained his choice of Coke:

Well, it just struck me. It’s the iconic American product. The one thing that everybody knows about America, the one thing above cowboys and Indians, above everything else that you can think of, is Coca-Cola. You can’t go to a village of 18 people in the remotest part of Africa that they don’t know about Coca-Cola.

Coke is also a product placement icon, appearing in films that vary in age and quality from Die Hard, Boyz 'N the Hood, and The Parent Trap to Ghostbusters, Juno, and From Here to Eternity.

Placing products in a film such as The Road is tricky. As a moody, heavy drama audiences will demand "reality," and generic or fake-branded products would undermine that perception. But real, recognizable brands would detract from the film and make it "commercial."

Yet, seriously, what is more real than people surviving in a post-apocalyptic world by foraging for food such as Cheetos and Coke?

The Road also features products not in the book, such as Spam, Vitaminwater and aforementioned Cheetos. The Road isn't the only spooky film with noteworthy snack product placements this year. Twinkies played a prominent role in Zombieland.

In contrast, the zombie film Dawn of the Dead, which takes place in a mall, could not get Starbucks to sign off on a huge role in the film. But brands are increasingly willing to appear in such bleak material. Some are even partnering up to campaign for roles in such films, as BMW did a couple years ago in Resident Evil: Extinction – a film based on a video game series.

Apparently, book readers are much harder to please.

http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2009/11/16/The-Road-Post-Apocalyptic-Product-Placement.aspx

Edit: Just to conclude- I felt the product placement in BoE was done fairly well and even tied into the plot. For instance, when

Spoiler

Eli is explaining to Solara about the world before and he mentions that people "had more than they needed", the iPod and the Beats, the issue of "O" are just a few things that came to mind.

Also, question for Gary about the 3rd Gen iPod. Was that specifically chosen because

Spoiler

of the navigational buttons which would make it easy for Eli to shuffle through his music - another subtle hint that he's blind?

 

[Darko]

Final box-office for The Book of Eli over the holiday weekend: $38.4m

Thanks to EVERYONE who turned out to support the film and help make it a big hit!

congrats

 

[mrkgoo]

I bought a pair of those during a lunch break at work because I left my both my Shures and UltimateEars at home and I really needed to tune out the distractions in my office. They're about $150.

Also, don't tell me you don't see any branding when you look around your bedroom/home/office/school. If an apocalypse were to happen and you survived and happened to find a stash of canned food and bottle drinks (assuming you're in North America). Chances are likely that you'll be having Spam and Hunt's for dinner and washing it down with some Evian water with a side of Coca-Cola. Why? Because that's what existed before.

And let's say you survived the apocalypse and you happened to have your backpack with you (chances are that the backpack itself is also branded) and one of the items in your backpack is a device for listening to music. Again, almost improbable that your device is without branding. It's MUCH more believable that you have an iPod or a Zune or even something from Sony/Panasonic/Logitech/etc. than having a generic device.

Anyway, I find the "product placement" complaint a bit nit picky. It's not so much that the Beats by Dre themselves are relatable as much as it is the fact that it's a brand from our present time. I mean, I do believe that product placement can become excessive and detract from a film but with the right amount, it can be quite effective in creating a relatable setting.

Here's an article from BrandChannel talking about the product placement that was complained about in "The Road", specifically, the Coke can scene:



http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2009/11/16/The-Road-Post-Apocalyptic-Product-Placement.aspx

Exactly. Perhaps people are too sensitive and distrusting about it these days. After all I never once thought it was product placement to have a coke bottle in "the gods must be crazy".

 

[mrkgoo]

I actually want to see this again because of the ending.

The thing about what makes Carnegie so compelling as a villain is that his motivations themselves aren't necessarily evil. He wants to rebuild civilisation too, but he wants to be he head of it and the means by which he goes about it is what makes him a villain.

As they say, the best villains in a story are those that are like the protagonist only they go a different path.

 

[StoOgE]

Exactly. Perhaps people are too sensitive and distrusting about it these days. After all I never once thought it was product placement to have a coke bottle in "the gods must be crazy".

It really isn't nitpicky.

I get that there is branding all over the place in the real world. I had no problem with some of the branding (store fronts in the town, etc). I also don't have an issue with things like KFC wet naps or even Dre beats.

However, when the logo is shot in such a way that it dominates the screen it takes me out of the movie. GMC logo on the truck, dre beats logo, KFC logo taking up the screen.

The logos of the companies (for the most part) also seemed less gritty than the rest of the film. The Busch beer truck had more color than almost anything else in the film.

the Motorola bull horn not only focuses on the Motorola logo, but the logo takes up the entire side of the bullhorn. Bullhorns don't even look like that.

I normally don't remember product placements. I can name pretty much every single one in this movie because it is way to over the top. It's also not nit picky if it took me out of the film. I wasn't looking for them, they just dominated the screen at times.

 

[mikeybwright]

Final box-office for The Book of Eli over the holiday weekend: $38.4m

Thanks to EVERYONE who turned out to support the film and help make it a big hit!

Going to see it today with 5 other people, looks fantastic congrats!!!

 

[mrkgoo]

It really isn't nitpicky.

I get that there is branding all over the place in the real world. I had no problem with some of the branding (store fronts in the town, etc). I also don't have an issue with things like KFC wet naps or even Dre beats.

However, when the logo is shot in such a way that it dominates the screen it takes me out of the movie. GMC logo on the truck, dre beats logo, KFC logo taking up the screen.

The logos of the companies (for the most part) also seemed less gritty than the rest of the film. The Busch beer truck had more color than almost anything else in the film.

the Motorola bull horn not only focuses on the Motorola logo, but the logo takes up the entire side of the bullhorn. Bullhorns don't even look like that.

I normally don't remember product placements. I can name pretty much every single one in this movie because it is way to over the top. It's also not nit picky if it took me out of the film. I wasn't looking for them, they just dominated the screen at times.

I get what you mean. I don't disagree with you, but I guess I accept it as a fact of some movies. If product placement is part of what it takes to get a movie, I'll take it.

 

[hsin]

I normally don't remember product placements. I can name pretty much every single one in this movie because it is way to over the top. It's also not nit picky if it took me out of the film. I wasn't looking for them, they just dominated the screen at times.

It could also have been because the brands were contrasted against a desolate setting that they stood out more. If some of the same items appeared in a movie taking place in modern day NYC, they would blend in easier.

 

[The Interrobanger]

I bought a pair of those during a lunch break at work because I left my both my Shures and UltimateEars at home and I really needed to tune out the distractions in my office. They're about $150.

Also, don't tell me you don't see any branding when you look around your bedroom/home/office/school. If an apocalypse were to happen and you survived and happened to find a stash of canned food and bottle drinks (assuming you're in North America). Chances are likely that you'll be having Spam and Hunt's for dinner and washing it down with some Evian water with a side of Coca-Cola. Why? Because that's what existed before.

And let's say you survived the apocalypse and you happened to have your backpack with you (chances are that the backpack itself is also branded) and one of the items in your backpack is a device for listening to music. Again, almost improbable that your device is without branding. It's MUCH more believable that you have an iPod or a Zune or even something from Sony/Panasonic/Logitech/etc. than having a generic device.

Anyway, I find the "product placement" complaint a bit nit picky. It's not so much that the Beats by Dre themselves are relatable as much as it is the fact that it's a brand from our present time. I mean, I do believe that product placement can become excessive and detract from a film but with the right amount, it can be quite effective in creating a relatable setting.

Here's an article from BrandChannel talking about the product placement that was complained about in "The Road", specifically, the Coke can scene:



http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2009/11/16/The-Road-Post-Apocalyptic-Product-Placement.aspx

Edit: Just to conclude- I felt the product placement in BoE was done fairly well and even tied into the plot. For instance, when

Spoiler

Eli is explaining to Solara about the world before and he mentions that people "had more than they needed", the iPod and the Beats, the issue of "O" are just a few things that came to mind.

Also, question for Gary about the 3rd Gen iPod. Was that specifically chosen because

Spoiler

of the navigational buttons which would make it easy for Eli to shuffle through his music - another subtle hint that he's blind?

It wasn't the fact that they were simply in the film that irked me, it's the fact that the camera spent a decent amount of time with them dead center in frame when it was completely unnecessary.

Busch truck = at least 5 seconds, your eye is drawn to the color rather than the destruction in the wasteland.
Motorola megaphone = 3-5 seconds (took me out of a crucial, tense scene)
Dre Beats = bright red, shiny new headphones pretty much all over the movie...what the fuck
iPod = Duh.

 

[hednik4am]

It wasn't the fact that they were simply in the film that irked me, it's the fact that the camera spent a decent amount of time with them dead center in frame when it was completely unnecessary.

Busch truck = at least 5 seconds, your eye is drawn to the color rather than the destruction in the wasteland.
Motorola megaphone = 3-5 seconds (took me out of a crucial, tense scene)
Dre Beats = bright red, shiny new headphones pretty much all over the movie...what the fuck
iPod = Duh.

Average viewer says:

Dre beats - what the are those ?
Busch Truck - hrmm a crappy beer no one admits they drink
ipod - yep something thats inevitably part of our culture
Motorola megaphone - huh i was too busy paying attention to what he was saying...

like ive said before... have you seen transformers and i,Robot... those are far worse

 

[The Interrobanger]

Average viewer says:

Dre beats - what the are those ?
Busch Truck - hrmm a crappy beer no one admits they drink
ipod - yep something thats inevitably part of our culture
Motorola megaphone - huh i was too busy paying attention to what he was saying...

like ive said before... have you seen transformers and i,Robot... those are far worse

You're an idiot.

bustling societies with talking robots =/= post apocalyptic wastelands where material things are a commodity

 

[mrkgoo]

It wasn't the fact that they were simply in the film that irked me, it's the fact that the camera spent a decent amount of time with them dead center in frame when it was completely unnecessary.

Busch truck = at least 5 seconds, your eye is drawn to the color rather than the destruction in the wasteland.
Motorola megaphone = 3-5 seconds (took me out of a crucial, tense scene)
Dre Beats = bright red, shiny new headphones pretty much all over the movie...what the fuck
iPod = Duh.

I'm going to have to say that you're the one with the issue here, as opposed to it being a major problem.

I don't even know what Busch truck is to get distracted by it, so I don't even know what you're referring to.

Motorola was obviously stronger, but I didn't let it dominate the scene for me.

Dre beats were a little distracting, mostly in how clean they seamed to be, but like the iPod, they didn't so much come across as product placement as just items from the previous time. They're only distracting if you let them be.

But you know what's probably more distracting to me? Anti-porudct placement. You know, when they have a bunch of items, such as a MacBook Pro, or a particular type of cellphone, but they remove the company logos. Or a world filled with generic unbranded crap.

 

[hsin]

It wasn't the fact that they were simply in the film that irked me, it's the fact that the camera spent a decent amount of time with them dead center in frame when it was completely unnecessary.

Busch truck = at least 5 seconds, your eye is drawn to the color rather than the destruction in the wasteland.
Motorola megaphone = 3-5 seconds (took me out of a crucial, tense scene)
Dre Beats = bright red, shiny new headphones pretty much all over the movie...what the fuck
iPod = Duh.

Well, to each his own. Personally, I feel the placements were done pretty well and I can rationalize with most of them.

The Busch truck I hadn't even noticed because I guess I don't see those often where I live.

Dre Beats - I can see how the seemed to be "glammed" up but if you own a pair, they're naturally shiny. I guess the man really enjoys his music?? Anyway, even though they stood out, I didn't find them distracting.

iPod - I believe Gary has said that he had wrote the iPod into his first script for artistic direction purposes, not product placement.

The Motorola megaphone I will agree with you, though. That was a bit big.

 

[Vinci]

I liked the movie, Gary. Nicely done. The product placement didn't phase me though I was aware of it. But it certainly didn't detract from watching all the awesome Denzel stuff.

 

[hsin]

Dre beats were a little distracting, mostly in how clean they seamed to be, but like the iPod, they didn't so much come across as product placement as just items from the previous time. They're only distracting if you let them be.

Yeah, exactly. It's like an audible ticking clock - if your mind is elsewhere, you wouldn't hear any ticking. But once you notice it and focus on it, it's all you hear.

 

[hednik4am]

You're an idiot.

bustling societies with talking robots =/= post apocalyptic wastelands where material things are a commodity

wonderful response, I can see you thought that one out... do you have anymore wonderful insight beyond the insult mentality of a six yearold ? I'll give you some time

The Full GM product line turns into robots ?

Will smith drives and Audi with a huge emblem in your face the whole time, the olf school converse chuck taylors in your face ?

as opposed to an old ipod (not even close to new gen)
crappy beer
head phones that the majority of the public have never heard of
ill give you the megaphone (just barely)

 

[Vinci]

To be fair, I think there'd be less of the KFC moist towelettes and more hand sanitizer lotion. That shit is everywhere.

 

[StoOgE]

Transformers product placement were far far worse (Nokie Phone monster, Mountain Dew monster, Xbox Monster). But that was just a crappy summer action movie.

Eli is a better movie and they felt out of place.

I expect my 100 million dollar blockbusters to have obvious product placement. I expect more artistic endevours to be a little more subtle with that kind of stuff..

Having product placement is one thing. Putting it in the center of the frame is another.

You could have had a GMC truck in this movie without having a shot of pretty much just the GMC logo on screen for several seconds.

If it didn't bother you, fine. But it got a few chuckles in my theater when it happened and yanked me out of the films story.

 

[The Interrobanger]

wonderful response, I can see you thought that one out... do you have anymore wonderful insight beyond the insult mentality of a six yearold ? I'll give you some time

The Full GM product line turns into robots ?

Will smith drives and Audi with a huge emblem in your face the whole time, the olf school converse chuck taylors in your face ?

as opposed to an old ipod (not even close to new gen)
crappy beer
head phones that the majority of the public have never heard of
ill give you the megaphone (just barely)

:lol :lol :lol

 

[hednik4am]

i do see where this pulls people out of things but I think that when I watch a movie these aren't things that go through my head. I'm at a movie I go to enjoy them not nitpick and if it's bad movie I'll notice it. Beyond that I feel if it pulls you out of the story then your attention span can't handle much but thats just me.

Budget of 80 million isn't really an artsy movie...

 

[mrkgoo]

Transformers product placement were far far worse (Nokie Phone monster, Mountain Dew monster, Xbox Monster). But that was just a crappy summer action movie.

Eli is a better movie and they felt out of place.

I expect my 100 million dollar blockbusters to have obvious product placement. I expect more artistic endevours to be a little more subtle with that kind of stuff..

Having product placement is one thing. Putting it in the center of the frame is another.

You could have had a GMC truck in this movie without having a shot of pretty much just the GMC logo on screen for several seconds.

If it didn't bother you, fine. But it got a few chuckles in my theater when it happened and yanked me out of the films story.

I know what you're arguing against - the use of logos that actually dictate the composition of the film. And fair enough. But isn't having to change your shot so that a company logo isn't in centre the same thing? Let's face it the position of a gmc logo on the radiator grill is going to be in centre of the frame if you want a head on shot.

That said did you have a problem with the oakleys which was probably THE biggest branding in the movie.

This debate is a little pointless. It bothers people to different degrees depending on whether they even know the brand.

It likely got a few chuckles not because it's blatantly obvious, but that we've been told to look out and hate it.

 

[StoOgE]

i do see where this pulls people out of things but I think that when I watch a movie these aren't things that go through my head. I'm at a movie I go to enjoy them not nitpick and if it's bad movie I'll notice it. Beyond that I feel if it pulls you out of the story then your attention span can't handle much but thats just me.

Budget of 80 million isn't really an artsy movie...

So wait.. do I have a lack of attention span or is it that I am nitpicking because it can't be both.

My favorite movie of the last 5 years is there will be blodd and Godfather 2 is my favorite film of all time. Attention span isn't the problem here.

It is jarring out of place shots of products. They clearly spent a lot of effort on constructinga well thought out world for this movie to take place in. And for me at least, took the viewer out of it with out of place product placement.

 

[StoOgE]

I know what you're arguing against - the use of logos that actually dictate the composition of the film. And fair enough. But isn't having to change your shot so that a company logo isn't in centre the same thing? Let's face it the position of a gmc logo on the radiator grill is going to be in centre of the frame if you want a head on shot.

That said did you have a problem with the oakleys which was probably THE biggest branding in the movie.

I didn't have an issue with the Oakley's. The glasses made sense in the context of the film and they had a logo. No big deal. I didn't have a real problem with the Dre Beats other than the fact that they looked to be in much better shape than the other stuff. I also don't have complaints about the ipod. In fact, I'm not even convinced that was a product placement deal.

My problem was with logos dominating the screen for several shots. Maybe that was artistic direction that they wanted to frame an entire shot around the company logo. I have my doubts that is the case.

The motorola logo is one of the worst offenders I've seen in a "good" movie in a while.

 

[The Interrobanger]

I didn't have an issue with the Oakley's. The glasses made sense in the context of the film and they had a logo. No big deal. I didn't have a real problem with the Dre Beats other than the fact that they looked to be in much better shape than the other stuff. I also don't have complaints about the ipod. In fact, I'm not even convinced that was a product placement deal.

My problem was with logos dominating the screen for several shots. Maybe that was artistic direction that they wanted to frame an entire shot around the company logo. I have my doubts that is the case.

The motorola logo is one of the worst offenders I've seen in a "good" movie in a while.

I was OK with the Oakleys, iPod and GMC trucks, because they made sense. Hell, even the KFC wet naps were fine.

- There's no way you can have headphones that new and shiny when you've been running around in the dust for 30 years.
- The Motorola and Busch shots killed me for the same reasons as you. The camera is literally focusing on them exclusively for several seconds at a time.

 

[mrkgoo]

I think I'm going to have to see it again just to see the supposed several seconds focussing on the logo :lol.

 

[hednik4am]

I was OK with the Oakleys, iPod and GMC trucks, because they made sense. Hell, even the KFC wet naps were fine.

- There's no way you can have headphones that new and shiny when you've been running around in the dust for 30 years.
- The Motorola and Busch shots killed me for the same reasons as you. The camera is literally focusing on them exclusively for several seconds at a time.

That and this tuesday is never a good day for me argue anything...im tired, spousal arguements, and co-workers.... wife said we needed a good pissed off arguement today, since we hardly do lmao.

I saw it in a crappy theater so i really couldnt make out the headphones and I hate busch beer so i blocked it out i think.

on a side note do you think michael bay would sell a tattoo on a no name stars arm for product placement if he could ?

 

[StoOgE]

on a side note do you think michael bay would sell a tattoo on a no name stars arm for product placement if he could ?

He turned products into transformers that served exactly no purpose at all.. and evidintly they didn't even deal with these new tranformer Xbox, Soda Machine or SUV.

No shame.

 

[hsin]

I was OK with the Oakleys, iPod and GMC trucks, because they made sense. Hell, even the KFC wet naps were fine.

- There's no way you can have headphones that new and shiny when you've been running around in the dust for 30 years.
- The Motorola and Busch shots killed me for the same reasons as you. The camera is literally focusing on them exclusively for several seconds at a time.

Oh hai gais

They are pretty shiny though!

 

[hednik4am]

He turned products into transformers that served exactly no purpose at all.. and evidintly they didn't even deal with these new tranformer Xbox, Soda Machine or SUV.

No shame.

it s shame the worst offender or all time... i, Robot was directed by a guy who's previous movie was completely uncommercialized and still "mainstream".... ill never get it

 

[boredJonathan]

I didn't have an issue with the Oakley's. The glasses made sense in the context of the film and they had a logo. No big deal. I didn't have a real problem with the Dre Beats other than the fact that they looked to be in much better shape than the other stuff. I also don't have complaints about the ipod. In fact, I'm not even convinced that was a product placement deal.

My problem was with logos dominating the screen for several shots. Maybe that was artistic direction that they wanted to frame an entire shot around the company logo. I have my doubts that is the case.

The motorola logo is one of the worst offenders I've seen in a "good" movie in a while.

I didn't even know the Dre Beats were 'Dre Beats'. I thought they were just headphones, there didn't seem to be any lingering loving shots of the headphones to clue me in as a product placement. Which perhaps because I didn't recognize them as a product placement, I didn't notice the condition of them. I think its one of those things that if you recognized the prodcut it became something you focused on more due to the setting of the film.

The iPod, while being obvious, was so beat up and not the current gen that it didn't seem like a product placement. The trucks/cars, again - normal stuff. In fact I thought it was neat how the vehicles were completely armored over - I didn't even notice a logo since they were so armored.

The only thing that I would call obvious product placement, is the Motorola megaphone. It was absolutely dead center, and while the logo was worn, it was HUGE. With Gary Oldman's character being pushed to the side of the frame. Granted it was only a few seconds of screen time, but I was taken out of the film right then. Not a huge deal, as it was a big action scene and it was easy to be taken back into the setting.

In general I just think the product placement thing is being blown out of proportion.

 

[mrkgoo]

Oh hai gais

They are pretty shiny though!

Sure, but an iPod's also pretty shiny, but it was sufficiently beat up (though knowing harddrives, the likelihood of it actually working are probably nil). Would the earphones stay shiny after thirty years? Moot point though. Who knows maybe he found them unopened.

Incidentally, are they any good? They look ridiculous to me, so I'd probably never get them. And I'm not so fond of the monster branding.

 

[Veidt]

Question for Gary:
Did you have a Samurai sword in mind at first?
Would have been amazing.

Why was it changed to a dual mini-swords thing?

 

[hsin]

Sure, but an iPod's also pretty shiny, but it was sufficiently beat up (though knowing harddrives, the likelihood of it actually working are probably nil). Would the earphones stay shiny after thirty years? Moot point though. Who knows maybe he found them unopened.

Incidentally, are they any good? They look ridiculous to me, so I'd probably never get them. And I'm not so fond of the monster branding.

They're not too bad...a bit overpriced like most Monster products but it could be worse. The earphones themselves have a good, sturdy feel. The flat cord minimizes tangling, which is definitely a plus, and they're pretty light.

The sound quality is decent -- however, unlike the Dre Beats headphones, the bass is pretty minimal, surprising since the bass was pretty much the primary selling feature of the big headphones. The mids and highs are pretty clear and crisp.

Comes with a variety of interchangeable rubber eartips, depending on your ear canal size and sound preference...pretty standard package for most earphones in the >$150 price range. Physically, the eartips don't feel as sturdy as the ones provided by Shure or Ultimate Ears...definitely a cheaper feel. Despite this, they do a good job of blocking out outside noise with your music on mid volume.

The packaging is pretty sleek and the carrying case seems pretty durable.

So in summary:

PROS:
-Crisp and clear mids and highs
-Good sound isolation
-Well designed (subjective, I know)
-"Tangle free" cord (more or less)
-Good for just casual, on-the-go listening

CONS:
-Bass is lacking (unless your music isn't bass heavy)
-Pricing. I'd definitely spend $50 more to get something better from UE or Shure for primary earphones.

 

[mrkgoo]

They're not too bad...a bit overpriced like most Monster products but it could be worse. The earphones themselves have a good, sturdy feel. The flat cord minimizes tangling, which is definitely a plus, and they're pretty light.

The sound quality is decent -- however, unlike the Dre Beats headphones, the bass is pretty minimal, surprising since the bass was pretty much the primary selling feature of the big headphones. The mids and highs are pretty clear and crisp.

Comes with a variety of interchangeable rubber eartips, depending on your ear canal size and sound preference...pretty standard package for most earphones in the >$150 price range. Physically, the eartips don't feel as sturdy as the ones provided by Shure or Ultimate Ears...definitely a cheaper feel. Despite this, they do a good job of blocking out outside noise with your music on mid volume.

The packaging is pretty sleek and the carrying case seems pretty durable.

So in summary:

PROS:
-Crisp and clear mids and highs
-Good sound isolation
-Well designed (subjective, I know)
-"Tangle free" cord (more or less)
-Good for just casual, on-the-go listening

CONS:
-Bass is lacking (unless your music isn't bass heavy)
-Pricing. I'd definitely spend $50 more to get something better from UE or Shure for primary earphones.

I wasn't really interested in actually getting any, but was curious how they were. Thanks.

I have Shure Se210s and Etymotic HF2s.

 

[Buckethead]

Excellent flick.
Has Gary Oldman ever acted badly in his life? Methinks not.

Would have liked to see more out of Denzel to try to rival Oldman and create a bit of an emotional climax between the two, but I guess that's a nice contrast and the calm/collected/quiet thing suits the character better.

The Beats by Dre were easily my least favorite part. Everything else felt right at home.
Also one wardrobe gripe is that Eli's digs were too clean. I know he's swapping in and out, but yeah.

 

[Gary Whitta]

Question for Gary:
Did you have a Samurai sword in mind at first?
Would have been amazing.

Why was it changed to a dual mini-swords thing?

Yeah it was originally written as a samurai sword but we later decided that it was too obvious a reference plus we've seen that a million times before in movies. I think the custom sword/machete we gave him in the end is much cooler.

 

[Veidt]

Yeah it was originally written as a samurai sword but we later decided that it was too obvious a reference plus we've seen that a million times before in movies. I think the custom sword/machete we gave him in the end is much cooler.

Very valid reason.

 

[koam]

I'm really sorry GAF (and Gary), but this is one of the worst movies I've seen in a long time.

I didn't know if I was supposed to take it seriously or to treat it like a B-Movie. There were so many moments that made absolutely no sense or were just too ridiculous to believe.

1) How the fuck does Mila Kunis know how to drive considering that she's been a slave forever.
2) If the whole movie revolves around the bible and its message, why is Eli killing everyone in his path?
3) The iPod was stupid; as was the rest of the product placement
4) Maybe I missed it but when did Denzel learn to be like Blade?

There's more but I'm going to refrain. Now I know GAF is going to list my questions/comments and try to answer them but it doesn't change the fact that I hated this movie and so did everyone I saw it with and the people who were talking while walking out of theater. It's not a case of not "getting it".

 

[Count Dookkake]

2) If the whole movie revolves around the bible and its message, why is Eli killing everyone in his path?

Because art imitates life.

Haven't seen the film yet, so I can't comment on your other complaints, but this one is just poorly thought out.

 

[mrkgoo]

I'm really sorry GAF (and Gary), but this is one of the worst movies I've seen in a long time.

I didn't know if I was supposed to take it seriously or to treat it like a B-Movie. There were so many moments that made absolutely no sense or were just too ridiculous to believe.

1) How the fuck does Mila Kunis know how to drive considering that she's been a slave forever.
2) If the whole movie revolves around the bible and its message, why is Eli killing everyone in his path?
3) The iPod was stupid
4) Maybe I missed it but when did Denzel learn to be like Blade?

There's more but I'm going to refrain. Now I know GAF is going to list my questions/comments and try to answer them but it doesn't change the fact that I hated this movie and so did everyone I saw it with and the people who were talking while walking out of theater. It's not a case of not "getting it".

I see your complaints, and I can't really argue against them, but that didn't stop me from enjoying the movie. Except the iPod. I liked that.

In short, inane complaints can be answered by equally inane replies, so it's not worth it. In the end, you just take it for what it is. You can always argue when did Blade become like Blade?

So some questions were unanswered or the situation was beyond belief. No kidding, it's a movie. I just went with the flow, and enjoyed myself. Yeah, movies can be realistic, but that doesn't mean every movie has to be.

It's ironic, or I'm a hypocrite or something, because I'd probably complain about these very things in any other movie if I didn't enjoy it, but I did enjoy this one enough.


Anyway, define 'long time'. I've seen tons of movies this past year that pretend to be a lot more and aren't even entertaining enough to get past it:

Aliens vs Predator REquiem
Friday the 13th
Angels and Demons
Transformers 2
X-Men Origins

All are worse than:
Surrogates
Terminator Salvation
G.I.Joe

Which don't get anywhere near the top movies:
Avatar
Watchmen
District 9
Star Trek


I'd probably put Book of Eli somewhere in that middle group, but perhaps higher up in it, just because.

 

[rac]

1) How the fuck does Mila Kunis know how to drive considering that she's been a slave forever.

Your really nitpicking if that is one of your problems with the movie. Its not like she has to worry about any other drivers or traffic laws. Not like its precision driving or anything.

 

[mrkgoo]

Your really nitpicking if that is one of your problems with the movie. Its not like she has to worry about any other drivers or traffic laws. Not like its precision driving or anything.

I did question the exact same thing when it came to it. And I also asked at the very end when she was boldy striding into the dessert on her own, despite the film telling us that she was incapable of making it on her own (then again, maybe that's the 'growth' of the character).

But each time, I just shrugged it off and went, "meh". I can do that in some movies. Others I can't.

 

[koam]

Your really nitpicking if that is one of your problems with the movie. Its not like she has to worry about any other drivers or traffic laws. Not like its precision driving or anything.

I'm not saying I hated the movie because of that, I'm just saying that I was annoyed at how the movie treats the audience like they're idiots some times.

This one irked me the most because I saw it coming a mile away and I was saying to myself "please don't magically know how to drive, please don't magically know how to drive" and then she gets in the GMC and drives naturally. The problem with it is that it came right after a scene where they explain that people don't even know what a TV is. The movie makes it pretty clear that the people born post-flash were not exposed to luxaries that we take for granted (did she even know what an ipod was when she saw it?).

Think about it, If you were born in 2000 BC and you were brought to modern times and placed in a car.. would you have any idea what to do? She was also a slave so there's no way she'd ever have been given the luxury of driving, let alone being in a car.

It's not nitpicking. Nitpicking would be wondering how in the little time they were in the house, how did he manage to disassemble a TV and place the book inside and close it. Or why was a song that was never released on vinyl playing on the record player :lol

All are worse than:
Surrogates
Terminator Salvation
G.I.Joe

I hated that movie so much :lol
Terminator Salvation was forgettable, I didn't bother with GIJOE cause I knew what to expect. I didn't see Transformers 2

 

[mrkgoo]

I'm not saying I hated the movie because of that, I'm just saying that I was annoyed at how the movie treats the audience like they're idiots some times.

This one irked me the most because I saw it coming a mile away and I was saying to myself "please don't magically know how to drive, please don't magically know how to drive" and then she gets in the GMC and drives naturally. The problem with it is that it came right after a scene where they explain that people don't even know what a TV is. The movie makes it pretty clear that the people born post-flash were not exposed to luxaries that we take for granted (did she even know what an ipod was when she saw it?).

Think about it, If you were born in 2000 BC and you were brought to modern times and placed in a car.. you would have no idea what to do? She was also a slave so there's no way she'd ever have been given the luxury of driving, let alone being in a car.

It's not nitpicking. Nitpicking would be wondering how in the little time they were in the house, how did he manage to disassemble a TV and place the book inside and close it. Or why was a song that was never released on vinyl playing on the record player :lol

In a string of other problems, that was the least of my issues is all.

Maybe we can lay it all out here:

Spoiler

How did Solara get out of the watering cave?
Was Solara a slave? If she was, why didn't she escape? If it was because of her mother, then why did she leave her?
How did Eli survive the bullets?
Why did the henchman decide not to shoot him again? (I know he maybe thought he was untouchable, but it came at an awkward moment)
For that matter, how was Eli able to drive?
How did Eli shoot those guys on the roof? (yeah, he heard them, but is he really THAT good?)
How did Solara know how to operate a grenade with such precision? (timing etc)
Carnegie was pretty dead bent on using the words in the Bible to become a king - but he failed. Or did he? Isn't the Bible being reprinted for distribution?
HOw the hell does an iPod survive 30 years? I can barely get one to survive 3 years.
and so on and so on

For whatever reason, I didn't really care all that much. I just absorbed what was given to me and sat back and enjoyed.


edit: res surrogates. to be SUPER fair, I can't even remember enough of Surrogates to make comment. I can't even remember if I liked it or hated it :lol. I THINK I enjoyed it enough. The motivation of the characters was suspect and it ended kind of stupid....but I'm just giving it the benefit of the doubt. It would no doubt be the bottom of that tier if it made it. :loll

Teriminator was forgettable, I agree. There were some great parts and some terrible parts (mostly to do with story and plot), so I guess it evens out. Transformers 2 is pretty great looking, and I knew what I was getting when I went in, but I still came out pretty dissatisfied. G.I Joe actually wasn't that bad. I think it sparked the inner child in me.