Post by cvor on Jun 16, 2008 8:38:56 GMT -5
I am a casual fan and I love the original Phantasm and have for some time. It is one of the best horror movies ever. I recently rewatched Phantasm 2 and 3 and was very disappointed. Allow me to explain at a high level in the hopes that these things I personally were disappointed with will not be repeated.
Phantasm 2
Casting of Mike was horrible. It seemed they pulled him out of the high school football team. I'm more concerned with why they went in this direction because there is an underlying thing that rears it's head as an underlying approach to the film. It seems they are looking for this Ramboesque element and it just comes off as corny and is a departure from the original. I understand that there is an inherent plot shift in the sequels that shifts the hunted to the hunter -- in other words, they are actually tracking and hunting this thing that originally found them in the first movie. I would just like this macho Rambo type A downplayed or at least executed much differently.
Phantasm 3
I have essentially the same criticism. I enjoyed this much more than II but found the same problem. Instead of Mike being the Rambo type, they got new lame characters to fill these roles. They got the sharpshooter little kid and the kung fu tough girl Rocky. Really annoying and empty superficial characters. The 3 villains were also kind of corny. It just seem forced and fake. The stuff with tall man, Mike and his brother were great though.
The movie seems to work best with the dynamics present in the original. When there is a newness experienced by the central characters. Chaos and crumbling of reality. When they are truly afraid and not actually chasing it (and especially when they are going through a montage assembling weapons and acting like tough guys in II). It is great also to learn about the evils and their world and motives also.
I just want to see V to be more cerebral and less the good going after evil motif with flashy characters and be more "earthy". I would love to see a new beginning for the franchise after V. I plan on rewatching IV tonight and it''s been a long time since I've seen that one.
Phantasm 2
Casting of Mike was horrible. It seemed they pulled him out of the high school football team. I'm more concerned with why they went in this direction because there is an underlying thing that rears it's head as an underlying approach to the film. It seems they are looking for this Ramboesque element and it just comes off as corny and is a departure from the original. I understand that there is an inherent plot shift in the sequels that shifts the hunted to the hunter -- in other words, they are actually tracking and hunting this thing that originally found them in the first movie. I would just like this macho Rambo type A downplayed or at least executed much differently.
Phantasm 3
I have essentially the same criticism. I enjoyed this much more than II but found the same problem. Instead of Mike being the Rambo type, they got new lame characters to fill these roles. They got the sharpshooter little kid and the kung fu tough girl Rocky. Really annoying and empty superficial characters. The 3 villains were also kind of corny. It just seem forced and fake. The stuff with tall man, Mike and his brother were great though.
The movie seems to work best with the dynamics present in the original. When there is a newness experienced by the central characters. Chaos and crumbling of reality. When they are truly afraid and not actually chasing it (and especially when they are going through a montage assembling weapons and acting like tough guys in II). It is great also to learn about the evils and their world and motives also.
I just want to see V to be more cerebral and less the good going after evil motif with flashy characters and be more "earthy". I would love to see a new beginning for the franchise after V. I plan on rewatching IV tonight and it''s been a long time since I've seen that one.