Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
UNDERWATER (2020) - Kristen Stewart
(05-09-2021, 07:03 PM)Nooj Wrote: I'm with brad on this

I mean, it's telling when people talk about their favorite "characters" in the movie, but when they do, they use the actor's name, not the character's name.
Reply
You guys keep acting like this movie wants to be ALIEN, but I don't think that's the fair comparison point. It's FORBIDDEN WORLD or GALAXY OF TERROR with the sleaze removed and a higher budget.

And I think that's fine!
If we can dream it, then we can do it.
Reply
Yeah, but when you take the sleaze out, what's left is a snooze.

And isn't Kristen Stewart, the iconic character, in her underwear a bunch?
Reply
did anyone see the director's previous film, THE SIGNAL?

I saw it as a part of a film festival, I think

I didn't like it

but like UNDERWATER, it had some cool stuff in it
Reply
He's doing the next Paranormal Activity, so that won't be a slow burn
Reply
(05-09-2021, 07:24 PM)bradito Wrote: And isn't Kristen Stewart, the iconic character, in her underwear a bunch?

That's extremely chaste by Roger Corman's standards.
If we can dream it, then we can do it.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 07:40 PM)bradito Wrote: He's doing the next Paranormal Activity, so that won't be a slow burn

Ugh, this is a bummer. Finding out they are still making these AND that the director of UNDERWATER is stuck doing the 7th one.
Reply
I think it's a reboot if that helps.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 07:22 PM)Belloq87 Wrote: You guys keep acting like this movie wants to be ALIEN, but I don't think that's the fair comparison point.  It's FORBIDDEN WORLD or GALAXY OF TERROR with the sleaze removed and a higher budget.

And I think that's fine!

That turned out to be my take watching it today-- if you have the idea that it's a Corman-style B knockoff, it is indeed fine. And like a lot of Corman pictures it has some grace notes in there, sleaze or no sleaze (although, yeah, could've used some sleaze).

There's good suspense, and I don't mind that the characters are just sketched in if the situations are intense enough. It's nothing to write home about, but a good to-the-point creature movie to watch on a Sunday afternoon.

You guys say it's no LEVIATHAN-- but I say it's no DEEPSTAR SIX!
Our sanitariums are full of men who think they're Napoleon... Or God.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 07:24 PM)bradito Wrote: Yeah, but when you take the sleaze out, what's left is a snooze.

And isn't Kristen Stewart, the iconic character, in her underwear a bunch?

Only answering because there's a halfway serious implication we like the movie mostly for her:

Stewart's looks aren't really a big attraction for me. Before we delve into a lot of gross shit there, let me say: I don't think she's ugly or anything. Just not someone who's looks are enough - FOR ME - to really dig a film and watch it repeatedly.

I happen to think Stewart does good work here, but I honestly don't give a shit that she's in her skivvies at the beginning. I wouldn't feel any differently about the movie if she'd been in a jumpsuit from the get-go.

The ONLY thing her being down to her skivvies does is emphasize vulnerability and danger.

I'm sure snark will follow/"protest too much" but I'm being real here. She's good in the role. I don't find her super appealing, physically, but that's not a hindrance for me to enjoy the movie.
"Nooj's true feelings on any given subject are unknown and unknowable. He is the butterfly flapping its wings in Peking. He is chaos and destruction and you shall never see his true form." - Merriweather

My Steam ID: yizashigreyspear
Reply
I think she's hot and the short hair is cute.

I also don't love that they tried to officially say this was a Lovecraft movie. So little about it feels like that, it just becomes a distraction at a certain point to say that.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 08:17 PM)MichaelM Wrote: The ONLY thing her being down to her skivvies does is emphasize vulnerability and danger.

I'm sure that's the director's justification. You just never see the male equivalent of this idea.

Not in this economy.
Reply
I had so much trouble seeing some of the creature stuff (middle of the day was not ideal for watching something this dark) I couldn't make out that the big damn monster was supposed to be literally Cthulhu. Only learned that on Wikipedia after... Yeah, does seem an unnecessary wrinkle.
Our sanitariums are full of men who think they're Napoleon... Or God.
Reply
I've seen Cthulhu in person and he looked way different.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 08:36 PM)bradito Wrote:
(05-09-2021, 08:17 PM)MichaelM Wrote: The ONLY thing her being down to her skivvies does is emphasize vulnerability and danger.

I'm sure that's the director's justification. You just never see the male equivalent of this idea.

Not in this economy.

That's one way to see Kristen Stewart looking vulnerable and in danger.

The other is to watch her Actors on Actors episode with Shia LaBoeuf.
Reply
Some interesting looks at creature design ideas along the way.
[Image: underwater-2-scaled.jpeg?ssl=1]
[Image: behemoth.png]
[Image: underwater-4-scaled.jpeg]

I STILL think this movie needed a setup, and to skip it right for the inciting incident instantly was a mistake.
Reply
Cthulhu's shorter than you'd think. Dude totally wears lifts.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 01:48 PM)bradito Wrote: So, there's that scene early into "Underwater" where Kristen Stewart is crawling through a tight space and finds a dead (or nearly dead) person, but since there's no setup, we don't understand what their relationship was like before this tragedy struck. So we don't know how to feel. I guess it sucks at any rate, and that's the impression we're left with. The movie seems to be actively trying not to draw you into the characters by refusing to introduce them prior to the catastrophe. You don't how how they relate to one another and you don't feel any strong connection to any of them. It's just an "and then" script.

And then... this happens.
And then... this happens.
And then... this happens.

It's a diverting film but even "Leviathan" does this type of thing better.

So...I needed none of that.  Because the acting told me what I needed to feel.  I didn’t need Exposition or a scene in which we totally found out that Stewart and dead girl were total besties for me to care.  I cared because of the little moments the actors imbued into their characters.


Basically I didn’t need plotplotplotplotplotplot
"God moves in mysterious ways," they said. Maybe he is on your side, the way it all worked out. Remembering other Christmases, wishing for something, something important, something special. And this is it, baby boy Frankie Bono. You're alone now. All alone. The scream is dead. There's no pain. You're home again, back in the cold, black silence
Reply
I think you mean setup instead of plot, but okay.
Reply
Yeah you're referring to Setup, Ska.  USUALLY, the first 10 or so pages of any given script is used to orient us in the world and the characters before the inciting incident kicks things off, or opens the road towards kicking off what the story will become when the second act officially begins.

It's just interesting is all.  I'm not saying it's wrong for Underwater to jump directly to page 10.  It's just...  Interesting.  Fascinating choice.  I would never ever do that.  But to each their own. As a point of comparison, the 10 or so pageish revelation in Alien is Dallas learning why Mother pulled them all out of sleep.  The midpoint is the chestbursting scene.  The fucking Alien isn't active until the mid point.
Reply
My way is the only correct way.
Reply
Which way is your way?
Reply
(05-09-2021, 10:33 PM)bradito Wrote: I think you mean setup instead of plot, but okay.

when I say that I'm usually talking about exposition or "setup"

The fact is I didn' tneed it because the point of Underwater was not about evil Cthulu monsters (which I didn't even think about until you guys mentioned it) but rather these people in a really bad situation.  

All that setup is just window dressing but isn't really all that important.  And I prefer this type of storytelling anyways.
"God moves in mysterious ways," they said. Maybe he is on your side, the way it all worked out. Remembering other Christmases, wishing for something, something important, something special. And this is it, baby boy Frankie Bono. You're alone now. All alone. The scream is dead. There's no pain. You're home again, back in the cold, black silence
Reply
You mean you prefer to learn about characters during urgency vs being exposited about what they are all about?

Good setup usually happens without a word of dialogue.
Reply
(05-09-2021, 10:59 PM)ska oreo Wrote:
(05-09-2021, 10:33 PM)bradito Wrote: I think you mean setup instead of plot, but okay.

when I say that I'm usually talking about exposition or "setup"

The fact is I didn' tneed it because the point of Underwater was not about evil Cthulu monsters (which I didn't even think about until you guys mentioned it) but rather these people in a really bad situation.  

All that setup is just window dressing but isn't really all that important.  And I prefer this type of storytelling anyways.

I still think we're talking across from each other. A movie like this needs a 25- to 30-minute first act for the following reasons:

- It's a science fiction movie that has an undersea complex that's unique to this motion picture. We don't get to tour the facility prior to it coming to grief, so we never really get a sense of how the place works and what a nightmare it would be if it started falling apart. There you have suspense...

- Everyone is under the misconception that Act I is just boring setup in movies, but we've namechecked three today alone with complete first acts that introduce all of the main and supporting characters, establish their relationships as well as their ordinary world, and all of this is performed through action. They're doing things, interacting, joking, ball-busting, flirting. We as viewers begin to develop relationships with these characters, liking some more than others.

- Once we've established the complex and the ragtag bunch of interesting characters who inhabit it, then we have an emotional investment in what we're watching. We are fully on board with seeing what special world these characters will be thrown into and how they'll navigate it.

This movie just recreates the experience of showing up a half-hour late for a movie. You can follow what's going on but the viewing experience still feels empty because it's just wet strangers doing things until they die.
Reply
Yes but, if you're going to be an average movie, is it not better to be a quicker paced average movie? There's no version of Underwater that competes with The Abyss. Maybe the First Act would have revealed the depth and charm TJ Miller and the girl from Iron Fist were bringing to their characterizations, but or maybe it just would have been boring and familiar. And I tend to think the smart money would be on boring and familiar.

It's a B movie! And that often imposes a ceiling on quality. There's the exceptions, but nine times out of ten I wish movies like this were shorter, because they tend to be, you know, not especially good. By being faster paced, Underwater rises above things like Deep Star Six.
Brigadier Cousins on PSN
Reply
Imagine if Predator started when the team arrive at the enemy camp.
There are weapons in my hands, my hands are weapons.
Reply
I don't understand the point of aiming low, in any context. Why not just make and write a great movie?

Brad send me one of your scripts I wanna read.
Reply
(05-10-2021, 12:01 AM)arjen rudd Wrote: Yes but, 

I stopped reading after this.
Reply
But I'm on your side!

Not about Underwater, just in general.
Brigadier Cousins on PSN
Reply
I should give this a rewatch.

I barely remember anything. TJ Miller. The creepy French guy was, to my shock, apparently a good person to the end instead of the Ash.
Reply
I wish the creatures were a little more visible. But this is a solid creature flick.

Any Deep Rising fans here?
Reply
Deep Rising is fantastic.  

Thinking more on your point Arjen, it's complete bullshit. A bad film faster does not make a good film.  John Carpenters The Thing "could" have been a bad forgettable B movie...  OR you could make one of the greatest creature features ever made.

Never ever ever would I recommend "yeah this is a b film so don't worry about making us care about the characters." A film that does that isn't a B movie, it's a bad movie.
Reply
Of course. But Leviathan would be better if it was shorter.

And Deep Rising is an example of someone putting in the work to make a good movie. Nothing in Underwater (deep) rises to its level. I'm just saying keeping it short and bereft of generic establishing scenes with obviously stock characters would be preferable to the two hour ten minute cut of Underwater. It's the difference between a movie I remember mildly enjoying once and I movie I remember getting bored during.
Brigadier Cousins on PSN
Reply
I'm struggling to understand why you're arguing to bring things down to decrease your suffering than to bring things up to make something genuinely enjoyable.

Do you need help? Do you need me to call someone?

BRAD SEND ME A SCRIPT! COOOOOOWARD!!!!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)