![]() But I found nothing unique or interesting about them, especially compared to the original gang in the first film. It's not that I overtly disliked any of the new characters we were introduced to, such as Jill Valentine, Carlos Olivera, Angie Ashford, L.J., or Terri. With 'Apocalypse', not only do you not know who's punching who, you honestly don't care where the punches are landing anyway. A lot of films in the mid-2000's fell victim to jump cut fight scenes where you don't actually know who's punching who, you just get caught up in the excitement. 'Apocalypse' has a ton of action and new set pieces, both of which may wow the casual filmgoer, but those sequences are constantly tied down by fast and lazy editing. ![]() It's quite laughable.įor whatever weaknesses the first film had, at least it felt original and grounded with reality. She initially finds herself estranged to her surroundings, she finds companions, punches are thrown, guns are shot, bad people try to take her and shake her world to the core, and then she revolts. Alice's character arc is the same as the first film. She's a talented actress, and quite good in the movies, but she's never given much to do besides wear inappropriate clothing (especially in an apocalypse) and throw some punches. It's unfortunate that Milla Jovovich got so tied up with the Resident Evil films for all those years. ![]() In fact, besides a slight setting change and some new faces, this is the exact same movie. ![]() Resident Evil Apocalypse adds nothing new to what the first film already established. Whether that entails expanding the scope and scale or just developing your characters to a new point of awakening is up to each film individually. No matter the genre, a second film in the franchise is always expected to up the ante. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |