underexposed movies: sunshine

[Vehn]

I thought it was good until it randomly turned into event horizon 2. Definitely wouldn't recommend it.

[MaxWeiss]

For those who have seen it, any ideas on WTF is up with the flash-quick semi-subliminal inserted pictures about half way through the movie, when they first board the other ship??? I thought they might be pics of that other crew, but not really sure...

Awesome movie though. Probly gonna see it again/

[themandude]

^collegekid, yes I found those subliminal messages weird as well, but I think it was worked in nicely. I am quite sure the images were of the deceased crew.

I just finished the movie, it was quite good, but like the other comments, I believe the first 70% of the movie was very good. Then this new plot line about this mutant sun burned human hating killer on there ship trying to sabotage everything just came way out from left field. It looked like it was turning into a bad horror movie.

One other issue to point out is that I found some of the action scenes way too over edited and produced. I understand the intensity that the film makers were trying to convey, but the hyperactive 3 shots a second gave me more of a feeling of jittery nervousness.

Even though it lost speed near the end, I think it's a quality film that everyone should give a look see.

[HonestRyan]

I cant believe no one noticed the Stanley Kubrick reference at the end of the movie. There are 3 stonehenge-like stones out in the snow, 2 are giant rocks and 1 is a perfectly square black monolith ala space odyssey. I thought the movie was great, neat ideas, nice camera work, nice interactions between the characters. I would watch it again, and if you stay while the credits roll they show a compressed version of the movie that is like 3 mins long.

[CharlieDontSurf]

In the 2nd to last scene...is what happens with the new star/fire a result of time slowing down or whatever cuz they are so deep into the sun or is it simply the last moment of Cillian's life prior to death somwhat frozen in time

[JackAll]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
best movie i've seen since children of men.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you tell me what in particular you thought was good about children of men?

I found it severely lacking unless I missed something.

[/ QUOTE ]

-camera work was awesome, and hard to argue with. It definitely achieved its goal of putting the viewer "in the thick of the action".

-tension, action and pace of the film was very good and kept me gripped (helped by the camera work).

-the dystopian vision of a future england, whilst exaggerated (a standard sci-fi tool), it was interesting & coherent in a vaguely thought-provoking way.

-storyline was very very silly [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

I thoroughly enjoyed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I need it to have either a story line, be funny; action packed; or something more than camera-work by itself. I thought the action was not even close to making up for the crap story.

[EYEWHITES]

this movie should have been atleast 45 minutes longer, so they could go into the message of all of it i thought. I dont mind giving a movie 3 hours, but the ending in this one made me feel cheated, which i think soured the movie

[Yads]

[ QUOTE ]
In the 2nd to last scene...is what happens with the new star/fire a result of time slowing down or whatever cuz they are so deep into the sun or is it simply the last moment of Cillian's life prior to death somwhat frozen in time

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's the last moment of his life somewhat slowed down.
Overall I thought it was great. There was so much tension throughout the last hour I was shaking when I left that movie.

[CharlieDontSurf]

I must say that Cillian was perfectly cast in that role.

I get the feeling that a lot of "dialogue etc" that dealt more with the spiritual/religious aspect of the story/characters probably got cut to shorten the running time.

You simply can't make that type of movie when the studio thinks they are making a special effects laden disaster flick