I didn't really like all the CGI exploding train stuff in that super bowl commercial, but otherwise there's something very captivating about the footage. I'm very intrigued for this now

It's hard to get excited when I know absolutely nothing about the film.

RomanM wrote:It's hard to get excited when I know absolutely nothing about the film.

Why?

RomanM wrote:It's hard to get excited when I know absolutely nothing about the film.

No wonder you didn't like Inception

RomanM wrote:It's hard to get excited when I know absolutely nothing about the film.

Different strokes for different folks.

allstarr55js wrote:

RomanM wrote:It's hard to get excited when I know absolutely nothing about the film.

Different strokes for different folks.

No wonder you didn't like Inception

He has legitimate reasons for not turning into a 13 year old girl every time that film is mentioned.

But that still doesn't answer why not knowing about a film makes you less excited for it. Does he heavily research EVERY film he's going to see? And if so, how do you avoid spoilers cause that must be an absolute bitch. I mean one glance at IMDB and your movie's ruined.

RomanM wrote:It's hard to get excited when I know absolutely nothing about the film.

I just want to get this straight, is there some sort of connection between the amount of information you have on a film and your excitement for it? Because that would mean you'd hypothetically be more excited for say, a sequel to the Yogi Bear movie than TDKR if you had obtained more info on Yogi Bear 2. If that's true, then I find it very interesting, but I assume you're inclined to be more excited about TDKR, whether or not you know anything about the film.

It's hard for him to get excited for a film that doesn't have a plot synopsis and has thirty second of released footage that primarily consists of explosions. He's not saying that original work doesn't excite him, he's saying that he doesn't know enough (and by enough I mean anything) about the film, so he has no reason to be excited. And I tend to agree.

You can use Inception as an example if you want but that film had a completely different scenario. A broad synopsis was released early on, and as footage sprinkled out people became more and more excited. With Super 8 we know nothing about the film aside from it being a monster movie with a shit load of explosions, which isn't intriguing enough in and of itself to excite Roman and myself.

It's a fairly logical and simple stance; I'm surprised it's caused this much confusion.

Crazy Eight wrote:It's hard for him to get excited for a film that doesn't have plot synopsis and has thirty second of released footage that primarily consists of explosions. He's not saying that original work doesn't excite him, he's saying that he doesn't know enough (and by enough I mean anything) about the film, so he has no reason to be excited. And I tend to agree.

You can use Inception as an example if you want but that film had a completely different scenario. A broad synopsis was released early on, and as footage sprinkled out people became more and more excited. With Super 8 we know nothing about the film aside from it being a monster movie with a shit load of explosions, which isn't intriguing enough in and of itself to excite Roman and myself.

It's a fairly logical and simple stance; I'm surprised it's caused this much confusion.

Good point... but different strokes for different folks.