-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Craven's MY SOUL TO TAKE aka Paying $ For No 3-D


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
8 replies to this topic

#1 of 9 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor

  • 7,129 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted October 08 2010 - 07:41 AM

My Soul to Take (2010) Posted ImagePosted Image


Wes Craven


Wes Craven's return to the horror genre hits with a major thud and turns out to be his most disappointing film since VAMPIRE IN BROOKLYN.  The story is a pretty interesting one as a serial killer murders his pregnant wife as well as six other people but after being shot and stabbed he's involved in an ambulance crash.  His body is never discovered but it's pretty clear he's probably dead so the community moves on.  Sixteen years later the seven kids who were born on the day he died are know dropping like flies so is it a copycat killer, the dead man's son, the killer himself or perhaps just his ghost?  There are many, many good ideas floating around this film but in the end it's just way too uneven, confusing and at times laughable to really work.  I'll start with the screenplay that has a few interesting ideas including the fact that souls can jump from one body to the next.  This is an interesting idea and they do a few nice things with it but it really seems like this psychological idea was nixed at some level and some executive cut in saying this was a horror film and needed more murders.  The movie, for the most part, deals with the fears of these seven kids and then we have more psychological stuff about them being haunted and cursed.  Then, out of no where, the film seems to switch on a dime to turn into some crazy slasher where the victims are being torn apart.  The psychological stuff begins to wear thin as the story grows more and more out of whack and while the screenplay gets a lot of the blame you can also point the finger at Craven.  The first sequence on the bridge actually contains some of that Craven magic where your pulse goes from zero to sixty in a matter of seconds and this expands to an earlier scene where you just know the killer is going to come back to life and although you're expecting it when it does finally happen it makes for a good jump.  The problem is that Craven really doesn't handle the psychological stuff too well and this is where the movie really loses its way and in the end crashes and burns.  I'd be willing to bet that we're going to get a couple alternate endings when we finally get a DVD release because the ending has so much going on you can't help but feel things could have ended in a dozen different ways.  One of the worst sequences in the film is perhaps the most bizarre and it's a big chase sequence in the woods.  We start off with a possible sexual assault before things changing up and we're seeing the killer chase two different victims.  This scene really doesn't make too much sense and in many ways what starts it seems out of place but not a single frame of this long sequence has any suspense to it, which is shocking since we're talking about a Wes Craven film.  The performances are about on par for this type of movie so no complaints there.  MY SOUL TO TAKE seems to have a lot of interesting ideas floating around but the ideas never really come together and in the end you can't help but feel disappointed.  This isn't a horrible movie but at the same time you expect a lot more when Wes Craven is involved.


You pretty much have to give this a second review in terms of the 3-D.  I must admit that I didn't want to watch a Craven film in 3-D but that's all that was playing around me.  Those expecting stuff to jump off the screen are going to be disappointed and those who put down $12 or more dollars (like I did) for the 3-D are going to be extremely mad because there isn't any 3-D.  Well, there are two small things that jump out at you in the entire movie and the rest of the thing is simply flat.  In fact, during the movie you can take your glasses off and it's a 2-D print being shown.  There was one other person in the theater with me and he actually watched the movie without the glasses on.  I'm not sure how the studio is promoting this thing but there's no question this wasn't shot for 3-D but instead converted to it.  This isn't a bad thing but to charge extra money for just a couple quick scenes is a major rip off so for this reason alone I'd recommend people to save their money and wait for DVD or try and catch a 2-D screening.



#2 of 9 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,001 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted October 08 2010 - 07:57 AM

I'll be checking this out tomorrow morning but since it's a 3-D conversion, I didn't expect much from the 3-D (and now I expect even less). It's all 3-D screens for this movie near me so I've got no choice between 2-D and 3-D but fortunately, the AMC has the $5 weekend matinees plus the $3 we-wanna-charge-extra-money-for-3-D fee so at least, I'll only have to pay $8 rather than the regular $13 price for a 3-D ticket.



#3 of 9 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor

  • 7,129 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted October 08 2010 - 08:09 AM

I always keep my glasses so I'm really starting to think about not buying tickets to 3-D movies, just take my glasses and go into them on another film's ticket.  I don't mind 3-D but when it's a joke like this here just to get extra money then I can't put up with that.  I'm interested in what others think because I'm actually thinking about going back to the theater and getting my money back.

I don't expect EVERYTHING to be in 3-D but when you can watch pretty much the entire movie without glasses then there's an issue and an even bigger one when you have to pay extra.  As with you, there isn't a theater near me playing the 2-D version. Considering there were only two people in the screens, I'd say this will be on DVD before too long.


Of course, I'm sure the manager would say the 3-D prices covered the three trailers, all of which actually featured stuff coming from the screen.



#4 of 9 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,001 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted October 08 2010 - 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Michael Elliott 

I always keep my glasses so I'm really starting to think about not buying tickets to 3-D movies, just take my glasses and go into them on another film's ticket.



That thought has certainly crossed my mind before. Since it's Wes Craven, I want to show some support for him and R rated horror movies in general so I'll buy my ticket. It's not like my $8 is going to be the difference between 6th place and 1st for the movie but whatever. Posted Image



#5 of 9 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 22,001 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted October 09 2010 - 05:42 AM

Surprisingly, I only had to pay $5 to see it so I can't complain about the price of the 3-D ticket.


The movie isn't terrible but it's definitely not that good either. I was surpised how much like a slasher movie that it felt like with all the stereotype characters getting picked off one by one. For Craven, it's a rebound from Cursed but it's not exactly tough to top that movie. Overall, it's a dissapointment.



#6 of 9 OFFLINE   Michael Elliott

Michael Elliott

    Lead Actor

  • 7,129 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 2003
  • Real Name:Michael Elliott
  • LocationKY

Posted October 12 2010 - 06:10 PM

Call me shocked at how much a Craven flick is bombing at the box office.  I visit quite a few horror boards and several of them don't even have a topic on this film, which is just shocking to me.

It's funny but I went to see WALL STREET: MNS tonight at the same theater I watched this one earlier.  There was a "warning" up that there wasn't much 3-D in the picture but no one seemed to mind since tickets were just $5 tonight.  I'll certainly be waiting for a Tuesday next time.



#7 of 9 OFFLINE   Paul D G

Paul D G

    Screenwriter

  • 1,610 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 24 2001

Posted October 12 2010 - 10:22 PM



This isn't a bad thing but to charge extra money for just a couple quick scenes is a major rip off so for this reason alone I'd recommend people to save their money and wait for DVD or try and catch a 2-D screening.


This is the kind of crap which is going to kill 3D (hopefully).


Then again, I'm reminded now of the scam book publishers are doing.  They're issuing popular author's paperbacks in 'deluxe' editions - which means the book is slightly taller.  They clam this extra height allows for more space between the lines which equals less eyestrain and a more pleasureable reading experience.  And they charge you an extra $2 for it.


And since they are doing this to expected best sellers they can then claim these deluxe editions are successful when the reality is you don't have a choice in the matter.



#8 of 9 OFFLINE   Malcolm R

Malcolm R

    Executive Producer

  • 11,604 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 2002
  • LocationVermont

Posted October 13 2010 - 05:02 AM



Originally Posted by Paul D G 




This is the kind of crap which is going to kill 3D (hopefully).


Then again, I'm reminded now of the scam book publishers are doing.  They're issuing popular author's paperbacks in 'deluxe' editions - which means the book is slightly taller.  They clam this extra height allows for more space between the lines which equals less eyestrain and a more pleasureable reading experience.  And they charge you an extra $2 for it.


And since they are doing this to expected best sellers they can then claim these deluxe editions are successful when the reality is you don't have a choice in the matter.


Do like I do and buy all your books at yard sales, charity shops, and used book stores. Publishers are killing their legitimate sales with these types of games. I have boxes and bags of books I've purchased this year for about 25-50 cents per book, $1-$3 for hardcovers. We also have a free book swap at my office where we all trade books for free.


There's no need to pay $10 for a paperback.


I also agree that films like this are going to kill the 3D golden goose for the studios. It's bad enough to pay the premium price for a decent film. Bad films, or films with bad 3D effects, will not be tolerated for very long before people start really thinking twice before paying for that 3D ticket.


The purpose of an education is to replace an empty mind with an open mind.

#9 of 9 OFFLINE   hanshotfirst1138

hanshotfirst1138

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 134 posts
  • Join Date: May 25 2007
  • Real Name:Mike

Posted October 13 2010 - 02:00 PM

This is currently undergoing critical and even largely audience evisceration. I'm disappointed. I was hoping that Craven might be back on form with a smart new horror film. Sound like I'll be more than a little disappointed.