Pacific Rim (2013)

To me it felt like a computer game with levels to clock and the boss at the end. Great visuals but it seems like Del Toro's kid wrote the story.
 
Looks like Power Rangers for grown ups:D

That is literally, word for word, exactly what I told my friend who phoned me while I was watching it last year!

I sort of enjoyed it in a sunday evening lying on the sofa with a beer kind of way though.
 
I think Del Toro obviously capitalised on the idea of everyone loves giant robots and giant monsters, now you make them box each other and you have a hit, don't worry about the plot.
 
I actually like Pacific Rim quite a lot - brought out the 10-year-old kid in me and the small girl who sat next to me at the cinema was bouncing up and down throwing air punches.
 
I watched this yesterday, taking care to switch on the "summer blockbuster" part of my brain.

It's good in parts -- the non-action bits of the film are hit and miss, but I can't fault the action scenes -- and, overall, okay (though no better than that).
 
I love giant robots, and love giant monsters, and I had such hope for a good story, and good acting, since it was a Del Toro film. I was disappointed on my first viewing, in large part because the acting seemed so poor (and there were so many examples of actors speaking with horribly unbelievable accents). But after that first impression, and remembering that bad acting and bad accents were a large part of the charm of the English-dubbed Godzilla movies I love so much, I watched the film again, and found it to be a lot of fun. Yes it was really bad in some ways (I agree that the two scientists just really did not work that well), but the monsters and the robots and the fighting were so crazy over the top, that it was truly a lot of fun to experience. Hoping there might be a sequel someday...?
 
To be honest, I didn't really like pacific rim. To me it was just a bunch of massive robots fighting a bunch of massive interdimensional lizards... Transformers meets godzilla.
I really thought 'Everything wrong with Pacific rim in 9 mins or less' was better than the movie.
 
It was ok as long as you ignored the script, the acting, the plot and anything that didn't involve giant robots punching giat monsters.

The only good line of script was the bit about having an analogue nuclear robot, it took me righrt back to the days of crappy VHS rentals.
 
I expected an average, cheesy film.

It had some good detail at times, and I laughed a few times.

But for me it never managed to become anything more than a slight above average, cheesy film.
 
While the movie itself wasn't terrible, the Australian accents made me want to hurt anyone who thought they would be a good idea. Maybe I'm biased, but I really don't think Australian's sound quite that awful.
 
My take on it, from my SFF blog: http://sciencefictionfantasy.blogspot.co.uk

Pacific Rim had received some negative comments so I watched this one with low expectations, but was pleasantly surprised. There is nothing original in the plot, concerning mankind's battle with huge monsters – Kaijus – emerging from a portal in the Pacific ocean floor which connects to another world. Conventional weaponry proving ineffective, Jaegers – enormous humanoid robots, controlled by a pair of pilots stationed in their heads – seem to be the answer, until the Kaijus evolve to become bigger and more powerful. The hero is pilot Raleigh Becket (Charlie Hunnam) who pairs up with Mako Mori (Rinko Kikuchi) in a final attempt to end the Kaiju menace. Idris Elba and Ron Perlman also feature.

While we may have seen this kind of thing many times before, Pacific Rim (written and directed by Guillermo del Toro) is a particularly competent example. It doesn't march Battle: Los Angeles for gritty realism, but is leagues ahead of the risible Battleship (both reviewed on this blog). The script is well structured, providing a good blend of tension, action, humour and other emotions, the acting is fine, while the Kaijus and the Jaegers are impressive creations and their battles are spectacular.

It is of course necessary to work a little harder than usual to suspend disbelief, not because of the Kaijus (as SFF fans, we expect this sort of thing) but because of the Jaegers. Is the best way of dealing with enormous monsters really to beat them to death with giant fists or shove a huge sword through them? There are plenty of weapons in today's arsenals which would deal with them very easily. It was a bit silly seeing the latest jet fighters attacking with their little cannon, when they have laser-guided bombs and missiles which would handily convert the monsters into pet food from a safe distance. If that's not enough, then station a warship over the portal and revive the Cold War Subroc rockets, which carried a small nuclear depth charge to deal with Soviet missile subs. One of those fired at the portal whenever a Kaiju was detected coming through, and job done. It wouldn't be so much fun, though!
 
Could someone tell me why there were so many bad reviews on Pacific Rim?

I mean, I get that it's a little over-the-top for those unfamiliar with the mecha genre, but for me, there really wasn't anything with the story that I saw that would be considered a deal-breaker.

But then again, I'm a bit of an amateur when it comes to writing, and have never reviewed a movie before in my life, so...
 
I liked it. Giant mecha. Giant monsters. What's not to like? Not as though they went out to win any Oscars. It did exactly what it meant to do. Entertain.
 
Nice to see I'm not the only one here who liked it!

Admittedly, it's always been confusing to me when I end up really liking a movie, yet I can hardly find 1 good review on it on a review site.
 
I end up really liking a movie, yet I can hardly find 1 good review on it on a review site

I've resigned myself to this fact, also (and for the record I enjoyed Pacific Rim, too). I often read reviews and think did we watch the same movie?

Thing is, what I find more irritating is people who don't know what to think about a film, so they digest The Guardian or Time Out's review (which is often contrary in itself) and recycle it, at times verbatim.

There's a perfect example of this (okay, maybe not) in Family Guy where Peter Griffin says this (31 seconds in) of The Godfather. That's the kind of thing that makes me irrationally furious when for-really people say similar :D.

pH
 
I could never get into Transformers and watch, at least one of them, until the end. Instead, I really enjoyed Pacific Rim. We had it passed several times on our channels and I watch it again with pleasure, if not completely, at least for my favorite parts. I suppose this is just a mattter of taste for everyone.
 
There are too many things in the Transformers universe that just make you think that the whole thing is silly, and they're all placed up front. For instance, an enemy called the Decepticons?! In a non-silly film, that would be used as a stepping stone to the realisation that the Autobots (another silly name) are not exactly being truthful about their previous history with their foes and are, basically, using spin. (Yes, I know the script writers didn't come up with these names, but they didn't have to go along with them either. "Show not tell" would have been their friend here.)

Pacific Rim benefitted from:
  • the viewer having no more idea what the enemy is about than do the protagonists;
  • whatever decisions led to the creation of the giant robots were taken way back in the past (so no one has to justify them to the audience by saying something silly about them);
  • we don't get to see the thought processes of those who decided that building a huge wall potentially circling the Pacific Ocean was a good one (though we do get to see just how wrong they were).
So, basically, Pacific Rim kept more of a straight face than the Transformers films and benefitted (though not necessarily at the box office) from this.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top