Gamer

Discussion in 'Movies and Television' started by Orion_Prime48, May 22, 2009.

  1. Orion_Prime48

    Orion_Prime48 Super Sentai Purist

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Posts:
    8,355
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +3
  2. Socialvegetable

    Socialvegetable Wrecker

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Posts:
    752
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +1
    Hmm, interesting premise, despite its obvious ties to The Running Man (and several other similar plots) this seems like an entertaining take. The thing that bugged me most about the trailer was John Leguizamo's line, which itself was pretty cliche, but the delivery made me cringe.
     
  3. inferno4565

    inferno4565 Master of Mudkips

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    76
    Likes:
    +0
    Michael C. Hall as the villan? Not bad. Looks alright.
     
  4. Insane Galvatron

    Insane Galvatron is not insane. Really!

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2002
    Posts:
    15,601
    News Credits:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +34
    Wow, this thread is short and old. I just watched this on Netflix for the fist time. It was pretty good, and went much further than I expected as far as plot goes. Anybody else catch this?
     
  5. Coeloptera

    Coeloptera Big, bad beetle-bot

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Posts:
    2,613
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    It's garbage. It foists a ludicrous premise on us and then doesn't have the guts to follow through. It also tries to eat its cake and have it, too.

    Really, look at it for a moment. The society in this film condones what are, in essence, crimes against humanity. There is a small "revolutionary" group, but the whole of this society is absolutely okay with bloodsports (with contestants who can't even control their own bodies) and sanctioned sex slavery. "Consent" is a rough excuse when people have little other choice than to starve.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but Simon is a murderer. He has, by proxy, happily butchered other human beings for a game and prizes. He is a monster and a sociopath.

    But then the film tries to turn around and make Ken Castle "the villain" because he has plans beyond the carnival or horrors he already heads up. Ken's being conquer-happy in no way exonerates Simon or his society from the monstrous acts they happily allowed and participated in. Are we to imagine that Ken's death will somehow end that staggering devaluation of life and freedom that society is totally okay with? Bullshit.

    That isn't even a particularly deep analysis. That's all on the surface.

    Frankly, I'd be more amused to have seen a film like this as a slapstick comedy, with the controlled players acting like you see in real games; bunny-hopping, circle-strafing, tea-bagging zaniness.

    - Coeloptera
     

Share This Page