T Nation

The Ruins

Off Topic
#1


Spoiler Alert(do NOT read this if you plan on watching this movie and want to be surprised at all)…and excuse the run on sentence.

If you can get past the same set up to get a few recent college grads into a secluded area as always happens in scary movies…and if you can get past the fact that most of us probably wouldn’t have gone there in the first place due to the fact that you would have to be an idiot to think that you can’t get lost, maimed, raped or robbed while visiting other countries…you just may enjoy a movie about flesh eating screaming moving plants that are hinted at as being the reason the Mayan culture in that area disappeared.

No naked titties
Strike.

No deeper plot.
Strike.

No truly standout performances (as in, I doubt there will be any Oscars).
Strike.

However, the acting was “enough” (as you never had a moment where you thought the acting sucked) and the special effects were better than I thought they were going to be. These actors have all been in several other movies and tv shows so I do give them credit for it. Gun shots to the head and appendage removal all looked very very real.

This wasn’t Aliens…even though I am betting there will be a sequal.

That’s my opinion anyway. Anyone else?

#2 
    X!!!

oh nooooooooo I hated the BOOK!!!

did you like the story?

I was so disappointed.

I’m going to PM you with what I would have done so I don’t spoil the movie

I just think I may wait and netflix this movie…

you really liked it?

#3

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

    X!!!

oh nooooooooo I hated the BOOK!!!

did you like the story?

I was so disappointed.

I’m going to PM you with what I would have done so I don’t spoil the movie

I just think I may wait and netflix this movie…

you really liked it?[/quote]

I like movies, period. It was entertaining if nothing else. It was not a blockbuster movie. The acting was decent for what it was and they did succeed at making those plants into a villain all by themselves. However, they could have actually given this much more of a story and it could have been great. They narrowed it down to:

Get kids to the place…have them get trapped there, scare them, kill them, eat them, roll credits.

#4

The setting looks pretty amazing. I would be one of the kids wandering into the ruins to look around.

but then I am a clutz so I would also be the chick in the horror movie that is running from the monster/killer and trips.

#5

Well,

Pretty pathetic I’m afraid. X, you’re right about the marginal acting skills being better than most with the B acting in this genre, but overall it was stupid as hell.

I was surprised because I almost thought it might have been a winner from the looks of the trailers, but alas, it was as dumb as can be. Ferocious man eating fucking plants…

Give me a break. The only high point was the gun shots to the head of a few people, which were highly accurate and lifelike. The appendage deal, I’ll give that a 7 on a 1-10.

Still waiting for a decent flick in this, my favorite genre. Unfortunately I really only like it when they’re brilliant, and that’s far and few in the genre as you know.

          Sorry, but the Bone gives it a D+.

                    ToneBone
#6

I was entertained and thought it was good , not great. I don’t expect from from horror movies except entertainment, so I was happy with it.

#7

[quote]Professor X wrote:

No naked titties
Strike.
[/quote]
Haven’t seen it, really not interested. I am disturbed though by this trend of tittyless movies. What the fuck happened? In the 80’s every movie rated PG> had titties. I can understand leaving tits out of a serious drama, especially those “period” movies that are all set in 18th century England and star Kiera Knightly. She doesn’t have any tits anyway. But this is a horror movie. I would label this as proof that American Cinema is in decline.

#8

[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
Professor X wrote:

No naked titties
Strike.

Haven’t seen it, really not interested. I am disturbed though by this trend of tittyless movies. What the fuck happened? In the 80’s every movie rated PG> had titties. I can understand leaving tits out of a serious drama, especially those “period” movies that are all set in 18th century England and star Kiera Knightly. She doesn’t have any tits anyway. But this is a horror movie. I would label this as proof that American Cinema is in decline.
[/quote]

The one with the blond hair did walk around in nothing but a tight tank top t-shirt most of the movie and she definitely had the goods so I wasn’t completely disappointed, but I do agree…there seems to be a dangerous trend developing.

I am worried for the future of titties.

#9

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I am worried for the future of titties.[/quote]

Having seen the pic of OG’s, I am not.

Anyone a devotee of Joe Bob Briggs?

#10

[quote]sdspeedracer wrote:

Having seen the pic of OG’s, I am not.

Anyone a devotee of Joe Bob Briggs?[/quote]

I used to watch Joe Bob’s show on TNT even when I didn’t give a damn about the movie he was showing. He is funny as shit, and though he plays the dumb hick he is pretty damn smart too. Is he still on TV?

#11

I scrolled all the way down to post without reading (Thanks for the spoiler alert X)

Now, could someone tell me if this is a good movie? I used to be a big movie buff but now I don’t bother unless I’m damn sure it’ll be worth my time.

#12

[quote]Natural Nate wrote:
I scrolled all the way down to post without reading (Thanks for the spoiler alert X)

Now, could someone tell me if this is a good movie? I used to be a big movie buff but now I don’t bother unless I’m damn sure it’ll be worth my time.[/quote]

It is entertaining. I don’t feel like I wasted my time…BUT, this again was not like some movie that I’m sure everyone will like. If you read the responses on yahoo movies, the majority seem to like it but some still hate it. I thought the ending sucked but they left it wide open for a sequel. The story was very one dimensional. There was no deeper plot. If you go in just trying to have fun, you will probably enjoy it.

#13

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Professor X wrote:

No naked titties
Strike.

Haven’t seen it, really not interested. I am disturbed though by this trend of tittyless movies. What the fuck happened? In the 80’s every movie rated PG> had titties. I can understand leaving tits out of a serious drama, especially those “period” movies that are all set in 18th century England and star Kiera Knightly. She doesn’t have any tits anyway. But this is a horror movie. I would label this as proof that American Cinema is in decline.

The one with the blond hair did walk around in nothing but a tight tank top t-shirt most of the movie and she definitely had the goods so I wasn’t completely disappointed, but I do agree…there seems to be a dangerous trend developing.

I am worried for the future of titties.[/quote]

Dont you guys remember when TC was talking about how the collarbone is the new sexy body part. This is probably our super, awesome shitty deal that happens because of it.

#14

Damn, I thought you were talking about the Japanese prog-rock band. But then again, they just go by Ruins, the The should have tipped me off.

#15

[quote]Scrotus wrote:
Dont you guys remember when TC was talking about how the collarbone is the new sexy body part. This is probably our super, awesome shitty deal that happens because of it.[/quote]

What? How do I fuck a collarbone? That makes no sense.

#16

[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
Scrotus wrote:
Dont you guys remember when TC was talking about how the collarbone is the new sexy body part. This is probably our super, awesome shitty deal that happens because of it.

What? How do I fuck a collarbone? That makes no sense.[/quote]

I dont fucking know, thats what Im saying. Some pants makers got together and said lets say the collarbone is sexy or something, read TC’s article. It is one of the Atomic Dog ones from a while back. I dont remember how long ago or the title so if someone does, post a link.

#17

[quote]Scrotus wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Scrotus wrote:
Dont you guys remember when TC was talking about how the collarbone is the new sexy body part. This is probably our super, awesome shitty deal that happens because of it.

What? How do I fuck a collarbone? That makes no sense.

I dont fucking know, thats what Im saying. Some pants makers got together and said lets say the collarbone is sexy or something, read TC’s article. It is one of the Atomic Dog ones from a while back. I dont remember how long ago or the title so if someone does, post a link.[/quote]

LOL. I didn’t see any sexy collarbones in the movie.

#18

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Scrotus wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Scrotus wrote:
Dont you guys remember when TC was talking about how the collarbone is the new sexy body part. This is probably our super, awesome shitty deal that happens because of it.

What? How do I fuck a collarbone? That makes no sense.

I dont fucking know, thats what Im saying. Some pants makers got together and said lets say the collarbone is sexy or something, read TC’s article. It is one of the Atomic Dog ones from a while back. I dont remember how long ago or the title so if someone does, post a link.

LOL. I didn’t see any sexy collarbones in the movie. [/quote]

Maybe if one girl was making out with another girl and her tits were rubbing on the other ones collarbone, That sounds sexy to me. The collarbone part could be ommited so Does it matter then? I say no, so now we are back where we started, thanks.

#19

Just an update…

I saw this movie the other night and there was 1 naked titty shot. When the blonde girl was getting dressed at the hotel before they left for the ruins. Not that this really redeems the movie, just wanted to give the movie some credit.

#20

only ONE tittie shot?

fuck that noise.