Question:
"- How much would it cost to build it in 3 months?
__ Fifteen billion dollars... hehehe...
- Will you take a check?
-- Why don't you use a credit card, free air miles."
*Sigh* I really wanted this movie to be good, I really wanted to enjoy it. It's as cheesy as it gets, and while I have respect for all the talented actors assembled and the excellence of special effects people, The Core is just not a good movie.
It's probably fine enough to watch once while munching on a sandwich, but it wasn't worth the money or the time of everyone involved.
The opening scenes build awe and suspense, the destructions that come later on are masterfuly done, yet you can see that they were added later because they end abruptly with just after-effects overseeing shot of a destroyed city here and there. But actualy the whole movie is like that, it's all "fast-paced" but transitions are non existent. It jumps all over the place, trying to pack a lot, ending up long, yet with no substance or a good story to tell, so you're wondering where the time went.
There are some enjoyable scenes due to great acting and unusual situations, but it's all so predictable you never feel for the characters and almost never feel excitement that was in the first 15-20 minutes. I was rather bored.
The geek fries his diskettes in a toaster, microwaves CDRs, destroys hard drives, you see he was convicted twice and cannot touch a computer for the rest of his life, so he is brought in and given an obvious choice, to which he replies "I'll need tapes of Xena and hot pockets." :rolleyes: Changed from "tapes of Star Trek" btw, what they couldn't get the rights, or is that he's a supposed "virgin" and is more attracted to Xena. The whole movie is like that, it makes almost no sense, all over the place, you see a ship, you see a title card "16 hours later", then 30 seconds of ship doing something, another title card "4 hours later", etc etc. It was just very stupid, yet there really wasn't any other way to portray that particular time consuming sequence. So I suppose everyone did their best job with the material given, even editors.
I don't know what I'm talking about already... I lost myself, but it's a clear reflection of The Core.
Yet it's way better than Armageddon. I mean, stupid bleeping animal crackers, under a tree, or singing while everyone stands around and listens or applauds, I mean if you compare the two, The Core is a damn masterpiece and not cheesy at all. So I don't know what to think. I will get the DVD just because it's a good disaster flick and an "OK" movie. Nothing special. Meaning you HAVE to see Equilibrium. You HAVE to see Femme Fatale. But whether you do or don't see The Core, no matter, it's inconsequential. It's a bit different, something not seen in other movies, intriguing, but yet boring and ordinary.
I do like that geek though, he's the "comic relief" that doesn't die because he isn't the sidekick.
Anyway, while I was driving home, this guy in a Ford Expedition with LCDs showing some porn swerved around and in front of me, and then ran the red light I would have if he hasn't been in front, and hit a guy, he flew halfway across the intersection. All I know is I'm happy I survived The Core and am not arrested right now. :noid:
Answer:

Is this writtin in American Slang or are you drunk ;)
I mean, stupid bleeping animal crackers, under a tree, or singing while everyone stands around and listens or applauds
after reading a review I imagined it was another Armageddon flick, US saves the world and all that rubbish. :suspect:
Answer:

Originally posted by Goblin
after reading a review I imagined it was another Armageddon flick, US saves the world and all that rubbish. :suspect:
No actualy US is to blame for all the world's disasters and its military strategies are made fun of and portrayed negatively, but then their team does save the world so... maybe.
The whole operation is also kept a secret and one of the NASA characters even mentions "No cheering or photographers, kind of strange", before going down.
Answer:

No actualy US is to blame for all the world's disasters
Wow the americans finally make a film that is historically accurate :D
Answer:

Er you say its not a good movie, its an OK movie and you'll buy the DVD because it was a good disaster movie. Does this mean that you've seen very few good disaster movies or that you need to join DVD collectors anonymous.
Anyway given your claims of your reviewing skills in the earlier thread , your rep for liking action movies and despite that the poor review of the film I think i'll give The Core a miss and go see Take Care of My Cat instead :thumbs:
Answer:

i generally agree with lenny nero's review, but i felt it was less entertaining than armageddon becos it was covering the same old grounds. :oh-hum:
Answer:

Originally posted by ian turner
Er you say its not a good movie, its an OK movie and you'll buy the DVD because it was a good disaster movie. Does this mean that you've seen very few good disaster movies or that you need to join DVD collectors anonymous.

Probably the latter. I get every movie I've ever seen on DVD unless I absolutely hated it, just to have it, for the archives. So me getting something on DVD doesn't mean it's good. :p
Answer:

Gotta disagree with ya Lenny! ... I enjoyed "The Core" a lot.
Fast moving, rarely boring, reasonable acting, credible-sounding science & lots of cliched but good "disaster" action/scenarios.
My views though may be kinda biased as i love most Disaster movies, even the bad ones like "The Swarm" & "Volcano" ... oh and of course I absolutely LOVE "Armageddon".
A solid 7.5/10 Effort :thumbs:
Answer:

I think the film looks awful. I have seen three trailers for it, and each one explains the film differently. It looked they couldn't decide on how to market the film.
Answer:

If its better than armageddon it must be a fantastic film! Armageddon is one of my top ten films .:clap:
Answer:

Originally posted by Lenny Nero
I get every movie I've ever seen on DVD unless I absolutely hated it, just to have it, for the archives. So me getting something on DVD doesn't mean it's good. :p
:nuts:
Answer:

Just seen it. Deeply average. Very episodic as Lenny says... some nice acting though. Effects were fairly poor if you ask me. Rome was a series of models with barely any interaction with humans, London was a good tension builder but SF was a bit of a weak pay-off... nothing on the opening of Armageddon, if that's what they were going for.
But it's a much better film than Bay's trash :D Even though the burrowing scenes made little sense - "how's this thing being propelled" came to mind and it's something they really give up on explaining towards the end - there was still a definite sense of what was dangerous and why - something Armageddon never achieved for me, especially in the hideously dull drilling scenes.
The Core had a nicer sense of playfulness; an awareness of how ludicrous the whole thing was without being too knowing. Thank god for the actors - they raised it some way above what it deserved.
(Interestingly, they also cut some of the work the FX guys did on the Golden Gate Bridge bit - download the clip linked to on Coming Soon's news story for the full sequence with a nice pan through the water...)
Answer:

http://www.visibilitypr.com/video/core01.mov (also core02 and core03.mov for making of stuff)
www.computercafe.com
Answer:

Oh wait, maybe not all that different, but they cut to the underwater shot later...
Ahem. :oh-hum: :dork:
Answer:

I rather enjoyed Ebert's review: http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-core28f.html
Definitely mixed messages. :)
Wendelius
Answer:

I was looking forward to watching The Core, but was disappointed. As Lenny Nero said, the opening scenes were good, as well as the destruction scenes. But the rest of it was rather boring.
Answer:

I have to say I really enjoyed it. On a par with Armageddon and I was expecting nothing from it.
In fact the acting is actually top notch and characterisation pretty good. Bizarrely it's the special effects that let it down!
Answer:

Here's my review of The Core:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :nuts: :lol: :dork: :help:
Answer:

I adored every idiotic minute of it. Stanley Tucci is worth the price of admission on his own, especially for the scene where he goes raving mad and starts muttering curses.
Actually, I thought the acting was surprisingly good and the tension was strung out to a remarkable degree. But I'm still a bit puzzled that this could have been made by the director of "The Singing Detective".
Answer:

I found this film very entertaining. Nowhere near as insufferably pompous as Armageddon.
It was only in the ending that it went from stupid-fun to stupid-annoying.
The special effects looked cheap. I thought that was a plus. :thumbs:
Answer:

Haven't seen this yet but am slightly dissuaded by the faux-newspaper flyers in the local cinemas (from memory):"...blah blah blah any second now. That second is equivalent to one human year. Blah blah blah...(1) Possible suspense inherent in "any second now" is immediately nullified by the statement of a time frame.
(2) "One human year"?! We are talking about planet Earth here, aren't we, which is fundamental to the very definition of a "human" year?
I know that the marketing monkeys who wrote that (and I'm fairly convinced that they were actual monkeys in this case) do not necessarily reflect on the quality of the film, but it's not exactly an enticement to view...
Answer:

This movie was fantastic.
The effects.
The story.
The acting.
The script.
One of the funniest films I have sat through in recent times.
It was meant to be a comedy... wasn't it?
Wasn't it????
Answer:

Originally posted by Mike
I adored every idiotic minute of it. Stanley Tucci is worth the price of admission on his own, especially for the scene where he goes raving mad and starts muttering curses.
Actually, I thought the acting was surprisingly good and the tension was strung out to a remarkable degree. ...
Spot on... totally agree.
The "Plan C?! Plan C?!..." rant will be oft quoted when the dvd comes out.
I went expecting the worst and came out with a "must buy" recommendation. Great fun!
Answer:

hey, just seen this and its damn good.
tension, acting and a script in an action/disaster movie. It was also fairly plausable and well done. If more action movies bothered to hire decent actors and get a decent script written then we wouldn't have so much forgetable dross about.
Maybe not enough action for some but it was intellegent and clever.
Answer:

I liked it, but compared to the other Disaster films its not in the same league.
I think it was a little out there at times, as really its a lot of things we havent seen before, unlike waves, wind, meteors, nukes etc... :)
Answer:

i thought it was good - nothing outstanding
but i thought the space shuttles emergency landing was pretty amazing
Answer:

hey, just seen this and its damn good.
tension, acting and a script in an action/disaster movie. It was also fairly plausable and well done. If more action movies bothered to hire decent actors and get a decent script written then we wouldn't have so much forgetable dross about.
Maybe not enough action for some but it was intellegent and clever.
It was implausable, stupid...and almost 2 years ago.
:nuts:
Answer:

I found it watchable, nothing more, though it did have its moments. The 5.1 was what kept me entertained for the most part. The appallingly bad science was infuriating. Was actually voted as containing the Worst Physics in a Movie Ever over at "Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics":
http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/core.html (naturally, contains spoilers)
Answer:

Good cast though; Tucci's always watchable, even in dreck...
Answer:

Tucci has a great moment in this when he completely freaks out at the possibility of having to sacrifice his life. He's hilarous and it's such a believably human reaction that he winds up as the films (reluctant) hero.
I really like The Core. Yes it's cheesy, but in a good way. It it's much closer in tone to old fashioned sci-fi/adventure films like Fantastic Voyage, Crack in the World and Journey to the Center of the Earth much more than to monotonous CG spectacles like Armageddon or The Day After Tomorrow. Unlike a Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich Jon Amiel shows some interest in his characters and he knows when to slow down for a moment to create tension.
It's no masterpiece, just a fun rainy Sunday afternoon film for your inner 12 year old.
Answer:

I picked it up for £3 second-hand (precisely because it had Tucci in it) and was pleasantly surprised - as you say, Reno, I enjoyed it far more than Armageddon etc.
Answer:

The Core is classic tounge in cheek disaster movie action :thumbs:
I mean come on there's a magic element called unobtainium and you're worried about the physics not being correct? :)
Taq
Answer:

I have to say I lthought this movie was great. Sure it's hokey but then most (not all) disaster movies are..
I've been scouring the periodic table for unobtainium but to no avail.. must be one of these new elements they get by smashing up atoms. Pity.. would make for good DVD cases.
Question is.. if this unobtainium is so resistant to heat and pressure etc.. how did the ever manage to weld / drill the pieces to fit the ship together?? :thinking:
I wholeheartedly agree the science is WAY OFF and the actings not the best. But sometimes even bad films work.
Now if you excuse me.. I'm off to unobtainium plate my IPAQ.. :dork:
Answer:

I'd always written this off as Deep Impact/Armageddon-lite (if such a thing can be achieved) but I think I'll give it a watch now - sounds like it could be fun :)
Answer:

Go for it Mister Angel, you'll enjoy it.
Thoroughly enjoyable flick. Perfect matinee fodder. Sits nicely alongside Congo, Sphere, Dante's Peak etc, etc, etc, :thumbs:
Answer:

The only decent thing about Congo was that Bruce Campbell was in it. For ten seconds. And still his ten seconds outshone the remaining 90 minutes of cinematic dropsie.
Answer:

I have serious doubts that this can be better than Armageddon.
Answer:

I have serious doubts that this can be better than Armageddon.
It's not. Well I don't think so anyway. The first hr is quite enjoyable but when they begin to head towards the Core in the second half, it just goes downhill. :doh:
Worth a watch though (or purchase if you can get it for less than a Guyver).
Answer:

It wouldn't be hard, imho. I hate Armageddon with a passion. It's responsible for the death of articulate thought in the Occidental world...
A dismal portent of the mean shape of things to come. And, I can safely say, the very worst film Criterion have ever released a dvd of.
Answer:

Its worth getting for the Cast I think :)
fun, easy going and silly, and available cheap too. Go for it you know you want to see it!
Answer:

I have serious doubts that this can be better than Armageddon.
My parents' holiday snaps are better than Armageddon.
Answer:

It wouldn't be hard, imho. I hate Armageddon with a passion. It's responsible for the death of articulate thought in the Occidental world...
A dismal portent of the mean shape of things to come. And, I can safely say, the very worst film Criterion have ever released a dvd of.
Quell surprise. :|
:razz:
Answer:

i'm with anephric and charlie angel on Armageddon. Michael Bay is the devil.
Answer:

I have serious doubts that this can be better than Armageddon.
It's not. It's not even half as good.
Armageddon and Deep Impact are excellent :thumbs:
Answer:

Michael Bay is a GOD!!!! but Armageddon is far from his best film thats for sure, still Criterion have some reason for there dvd release, maybe he gave them lots of cash!
Answer:

Michael Bay is a GOD!!!! but Armageddon is far from his best film thats for sure, still Criterion have some reason for there dvd release, maybe he gave them lots of cash!
You're scarily accurate there...
Answer:

It wouldn't be hard, imho. I hate Armageddon with a passion. It's responsible for the death of articulate thought in the Occidental world...
A dismal portent of the mean shape of things to come. And, I can safely say, the very worst film Criterion have ever released a dvd of.
In English??
Answer:

'It's stupid'.
Answer:

When I first watched this it felt like I was sitting in the back seat of a slow motion car crash.
However (even though I haven't watched it since making all that 'first' stuff I wrote a bit redundant) my my memories of it are fond one, as I can't help laughing in my head about how stupid it is.
Man it's a terrible film, but if you can put that behind you I'm sure you could it watch it with a couple of beers and be entertained.
This and Mimic may be the two lamest films ever made (I haven't seen mimic 2 or 3, I don't think I could face it).
Answer:

I love Mimic! hahahaa
Mimic 2 and 3 are not too bad, you may even like them as they are nothing at all like part 1 :)
Answer:

mimic is pretty good, but then i do quite like del Toro ...
Answer:

As giant bug films go I think Mimic is pretty good. The script may be formulaic but the premise is clever, the monsters look cool and the direction by del Toro is very atmospheric.
Answer:

As an accomplished bit of crowd-pleasing entertainment, Armageddon is superior.
But The Core takes itself far less seriously, and has some refreshingly human characters in it, so for that it has to be applauded. It's only when it treads the same line that the big budget disaster movies go for that it fails to hit the mark really. Worth a watch, certainly. The beers would be a good idea.
Answer:

The Core was worth buying purely for the deleted scene commentary in which the director claims it is a character driven film, as opposed to a special effects fest.
Answer:

The most interesting character is Aaron Eckart's chin and Tucci. And Delroy "keep your pants on" Lindo of course. Silly but fun. It's like Armegeddeon, but in the other direction.
Answer:

mimic is pretty good, but then i do quite like del Toro ...
What the hooting heck are you all on about? are you on drugs? Mimic is beyond the outer limits of crap city Arizona!
And Del Toro, well he took a perfectly good comic book got together some great actors and neat film and then went "hey wait a minute, what was that film I made ages ago that was total balls? . . Oh yes 'mimic', I know I will take some of the most useless parts of that film and try to incorporate them into Hellboy to give it that authentic Del Toro fat stamp".
Nice one fatty.
Answer:

Del Toro has publically stated he hated Mimic. Miramax took over and tried to get it more mainstream, so that'll help explain the rubbishness of it. As for the scenes in the subway tunnels in Hellboy, how else are you going to film a labrynth of tunnels and not make it look like what it is? Del Toro is an excellent director, I've only just got The Devil's Backbone, loved it to bits. Blade 2 is fantastic fun too.
Answer:

What the hooting heck are you all on about? are you on drugs? Mimic is beyond the outer limits of crap city Arizona!
And Del Toro, well he took a perfectly good comic book got together some great actors and neat film and then went "hey wait a minute, what was that film I made ages ago that was total balls? . . Oh yes 'mimic', I know I will take some of the most useless parts of that film and try to incorporate them into Hellboy to give it that authentic Del Toro fat stamp".
Nice one fatty.
not a fan then? ;)
anyone who lists Ron Perlman as one of his muses is fine by me!
Answer:

Del Toro has publically stated he hated Mimic. Miramax took over and tried to get it more mainstream, so that'll help explain the rubbishness of it. As for the scenes in the subway tunnels in Hellboy, how else are you going to film a labrynth of tunnels and not make it look like what it is? Del Toro is an excellent director, I've only just got The Devil's Backbone, loved it to bits. Blade 2 is fantastic fun too.
Maybe I'm not being all that fair after all I've only seen hellboy and mimic (did he do blade 1 ? that was poop) and mimic was really really bad.
I'm sure they could have done something with those subway bits and that CG blob at the end - heavens to betsy!
I love Ron Perlman though, it's a shame there isn't a UK version of 'the city of lost children' with a french soundtrack and anamorphic picture.
Answer:

He didnt do Blade 1, just the best one Blade 2 :) tunnels in that film lots too, maybe he likes dark places.
Answer:

He didnt do Blade 1, just the best one Blade 2 :) tunnels in that film lots too, maybe he likes dark places.
On the Hellboy Directors Cut commentary you kind of get the impression he did, exploring all the tunnels and sewers in his home town. Facinating commentary in fact.