Pixels
Pixels
A guy made this short film and put it online:
People thought it was cool, so now it's a real movie:
People thought it was cool, so now it's a real movie:
I didn't realize the origin of the idea, but I did see the trailer a while ago and thought that it looked like a terrible movie. It at least knows that it's a dumb movie, but that doesn't always make it better. But hey, you never know! Maybe it actually will be decent. But probably not.
- Samantha14
- All That Is Sam.
- Posts: 833
- Joined: November 2012
- Location: Wandering.
Am I the only one who was actually interested in this movie? It kind of made me geek out~Bit-Games were my childhood, you know. And probably apart from some gruff language, I actually think it looks like it might be a pretty good movie. Maybe not incredibly great, but not terrible by any means. Plus, I mean, Josh Gad :Love: Olaf is beautiful in whatever role he plays, otay? Otay.
Also, haha xD "Don't tell anyone I killed a smurf". *Quickly goes to share this news on many social media sites*
Also, haha xD "Don't tell anyone I killed a smurf". *Quickly goes to share this news on many social media sites*
merp.
I am definitely interested. I don't expect it to be 'great' as in a classic, but I certainly think it will be fun.Samantha14 wrote:Am I the only one who was actually interested in this movie?
Adam Sandler has me slightly concerned; I've never seen anything with him but by reputation I doubt I'd be a fan. But I'm hoping this isn't an 'Adam Sandler movie' just a movie he's in.
Terrible is pretty strong, what made it look that way?Catspaw wrote:I did see the trailer a while ago and thought that it looked like a terrible movie.
It knows it's not a 'serious' movie, but that doesn't make it 'dumb'. (Sometimes the two are the same, but not always.)Catspaw wrote:It at least knows that it's a dumb movie
You really don't see any fun in this premise? Video games coming to life, but instead of being nostalgic they're a destructive force that need fought?
Adam Sandler's presence was definitely a factor (and also connected to why I called it a dumb movie) because that seems to be key describing words for a lot of the films that he is in, though of course it doesn't mean that it has to be. By terrible, I mean it looks like it will not be particularly interesting or clever, or have other redeeming factors that would make me like it. That doesn't mean that other people won't enjoy it, but I don't think I that really would.bookworm wrote:Terrible is pretty strong, what made it look that way?Catspaw wrote:I did see the trailer a while ago and thought that it looked like a terrible movie.
I never said that I didn't think that there would be no fun potential for the film. Dumb movies can have fun stuff in them....they're just still dumb. The trailer made me think that this movie goes far beyond just "not serious" and into, for the lack of a better word, being dumb. I can see humour in the premise of the movie, and I expect that there will be funny parts in it, but that doesn't make it clever.bookworm wrote:It knows it's not a 'serious' movie, but that doesn't make it 'dumb'. (Sometimes the two are the same, but not always.)Catspaw wrote:It at least knows that it's a dumb movie
You really don't see any fun in this premise? Video games coming to life, but instead of being nostalgic they're a destructive force that need fought?
Sometimes a trailer perfectly gives an impression of a movie (though of course everybody still seems things differently) and other times a movie is way better or worse than a trailer made it look. Maybe this will be a wonderful film...but I would be surprised.
Fair enough; I misinterpreted your level of critique.
To me, calling a movie dumb is extremely dismissive. It's saying it's a meritless waste. You didn't mean it that strongly I guess, you meant like 'dumb silly', that it wasn't going to be very 'substantial' for lack of a better term.
Which I don't disagree with. Clearly this is not a serious movie as I said, but as I also said that doesn't mean it can't be fun, and I fully expect it will be. I could very well be wrong, it certainly could be terrible as you said, but I personally have seen nothing so far that indicates such an expectation is warranted.
We're sort of on opposite ends; you're expecting it to be bad with the possibility it's better, I'm expecting it to be entirely decent with the possibility it's worse.
Either way we agree that the chance it will be what would be called 'good' is minimal. That's okay though. It doesn't have to be amazing, not every movie is a classic, all this has to be for me to be satisfied is something you don't regret watching. If it's enjoyable, even in a so called 'dumb' way, I'll be happy. I just want it to be entertaining.
To me, calling a movie dumb is extremely dismissive. It's saying it's a meritless waste. You didn't mean it that strongly I guess, you meant like 'dumb silly', that it wasn't going to be very 'substantial' for lack of a better term.
Which I don't disagree with. Clearly this is not a serious movie as I said, but as I also said that doesn't mean it can't be fun, and I fully expect it will be. I could very well be wrong, it certainly could be terrible as you said, but I personally have seen nothing so far that indicates such an expectation is warranted.
We're sort of on opposite ends; you're expecting it to be bad with the possibility it's better, I'm expecting it to be entirely decent with the possibility it's worse.
Either way we agree that the chance it will be what would be called 'good' is minimal. That's okay though. It doesn't have to be amazing, not every movie is a classic, all this has to be for me to be satisfied is something you don't regret watching. If it's enjoyable, even in a so called 'dumb' way, I'll be happy. I just want it to be entertaining.
Yeah, there are lots of movies that I really enjoy that would never be critically acclaimed - they're just fun. There's definitely a place for movies that fit that category. I just still expect a certain level of acting and writing and so on...but that's all subjective to whether I like it enough to care as much as to how cheesy it is or whatever. I think the line for whether something is "silly fun" or "silly waste of time" is really just whether the individual watching the movie likes it or not. I doubt that I'll see Pixels in theatres, but just talking about it so much in this thread makes me want to see it more, just so I can decide for myself which one I think it is!
Absolutely. It can generally be agreed when a movie is ‘just silly’, but whether that’s a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ thing depends on the individual viewer.Catspaw wrote:I think the line for whether something is "silly fun" or "silly waste of time" is really just whether the individual watching the movie likes it or not.
I am fairly certain my movie group is going to make an effort to theater this one, for exactly that reason. We all think it looks like it should be fun, but for various reasons (most involving Adam Sandler ) we hold various levels of uncertainty. We need to see it just so we know!Catspaw wrote:I doubt that I'll see Pixels in theatres, but just talking about it so much in this thread makes me want to see it more, just so I can decide for myself which one I think it is!
I can let you know what the consensus is to help those here with similar concerns get a better feeling for it.
Sounds good! I enjoy the ToO for lots of reasons, but one of the benefits is movie reviews from people that I know I have some things in common with!
- The Top Crusader
- Hammer Bro
- Posts: 22635
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: A drawbridge over a lava pit with an axe conveniently off to the side
Promising, yes, but we won't really know if it's good until PluggedIn posts a review.bookworm wrote:This review sounds promising.
It looks entertaining. I'll probably see it because I like to support anything Q*Bert is in since he doesn't get much work these days.
I have my report.
This is not a good movie. The acting isn't great and the writing could have been better. But we knew it wasn't going to be good, the question is was it bad. I wouldn't say I liked this movie, but I definitely enjoyed it. It was a fun time. The measure I said I was putting to it was would you regret watching it. We didn't. I think it's worth checking out, as long as you are aware you aren't in for an Oscar winner.
The actual fight scenes, what you're watching this movie for, we all agreed were really fun. If the movie was more of that it would have been better. The problem was the scenes in between those that tried to introduce the story. Those could have been better, and been done better.
We had a fun time, we just wished it had been something more substantial. It's such a fun idea, but they did the bare minimum with it.
It does have one of the best credits sequences ever though.
So this definitely isn't a must see in the theater, either because it's a great visual on the big screen or it's such a great movie you should want to see it as soon as possible. You'll lose nothing by waiting for a rental or library borrow. When it does come to those venues though, I would say it is worth a watch sometime. Don't put many expectations on it and you shouldn't be let down, just be looking to experience some fun moments of this neat concept.
And if the reason you were hesitant was concern about crudity, that shouldn't be an issue. There were some moments, but they weren't constant or too terrible. There was a bit of language, but also not terrible.
This is not a good movie. The acting isn't great and the writing could have been better. But we knew it wasn't going to be good, the question is was it bad. I wouldn't say I liked this movie, but I definitely enjoyed it. It was a fun time. The measure I said I was putting to it was would you regret watching it. We didn't. I think it's worth checking out, as long as you are aware you aren't in for an Oscar winner.
The actual fight scenes, what you're watching this movie for, we all agreed were really fun. If the movie was more of that it would have been better. The problem was the scenes in between those that tried to introduce the story. Those could have been better, and been done better.
We had a fun time, we just wished it had been something more substantial. It's such a fun idea, but they did the bare minimum with it.
It does have one of the best credits sequences ever though.
So this definitely isn't a must see in the theater, either because it's a great visual on the big screen or it's such a great movie you should want to see it as soon as possible. You'll lose nothing by waiting for a rental or library borrow. When it does come to those venues though, I would say it is worth a watch sometime. Don't put many expectations on it and you shouldn't be let down, just be looking to experience some fun moments of this neat concept.
And if the reason you were hesitant was concern about crudity, that shouldn't be an issue. There were some moments, but they weren't constant or too terrible. There was a bit of language, but also not terrible.
- The Top Crusader
- Hammer Bro
- Posts: 22635
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: A drawbridge over a lava pit with an axe conveniently off to the side
Bookworm summed it up pretty well. I went in with appropriate expectations for an Adam Sandler film and enjoyed it for what it was. All the old video game cameos made it all worthwhile, even if the plot was dumb. I'm always a staunch advocate of anything Q*Bert is involved in, but the end with him was kind of disturbing. >_>