HIGHLA-L Digest - 28 Dec 2001 to 29 Dec 2001 (#2001-328)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@LISTS.PSU.EDU)
Sat, 29 Dec 2001 22:00:01 -0500
There are 5 messages totalling 295 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Endgame (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:10:39 -0500
From: Karla Julian <julkm@home.com>
Subject: Endgame
Seems they are still beating up on the movie. I was surprised to see
this review on the front page of the Cox.com Simply Connecticut page.
When I saw Highlander Endgame, I was intrigued enough to click on it. I
was sorry I did after reading this horrid review. Read on if you dare.
:-)
Karla
See What's New From Cox
Highlander: Endgame
Main movies page
Verdict: 'Highlander' series can't be killed
by
normal means.
Details: Starring Christopher Lambert and
Adrian Paul. Rated R for violence.
Review: At one point the young immortal looks
up at his older immortal mentor and asks,
"Connor, what the hell is going on?"
People who pay to see Highlander: Endgame
probably will be asking one another the same question. The fourth movie
in the series that began with Highlander in 1986 ends essentially the
same way as the first three movies.
But there are so many confusing turns, plot
deadends, red herrings, interminable flashbacks
and special-effects-muddled fight scenes along
the way that you'll need a color-coded flow
chart to follow the story to its familiar
climax.
Highlander: Endgame is not a continuation of a
story line begun with Highlander and advanced
in its two movie sequels. In fact, the
sequels--the atrocious Highlander II: The Quickening from
1991 and the boring Highlander: The Final
Dimension from 1994--are completely ignored.
Endgame instead melds the story line from the
original movie with the plots from the Highlander
television series that ran from 1993 to 1999.
The Highlander mythology involves a group of
immortal beings who have been living among
humans for thousands of years. They can't be
killed by normal means, but they duel with one
another with swords and if one immortal cuts
off the head of the other, the winner gains the
strength and knowledge of the loser.
Ultimately, according to the Highlander
legend, "There can be only one," and the last immortal
standing wins the Prize, which is never
explained.
Endgame begins with the immortal hero of the
first movie, Connor MacLeod (Christopher
Lambert), dropping out of sight after a woman
he loves is killed in an explosion. Constantly
outliving his loved ones has finally broken
Connor's will, and he retires to the Sanctuary where
worn-out immortals are held in drug-induced
suspended animation.
A group of renegade immortals led by
arch-villain Jacob Kell (Bruce Payne) invades the
Sanctuary and kills the dormant immortals.
Duncan MacLeod (Adrian Paul), the hero of the
Highlander television series, refuses to believe
his old friend Connor was killed in the
attack. But when Duncan starts investigating Connor's
whereabouts, he's attacked by Kell and his
henchmen.
There are subplots about a woman Duncan once
loved who now hates him, an honorable Asian
warrior now enslaved to Kell, a group of
mortal "Watchers" who keep tabs on the endless
immortal duels, a priest who tries to burn
Connor's mother at the stake and lots of other
reasons why everybody wants to cut everybody
else's head off.
But, of course, it all comes down to the
bravest, most resourceful good guy facing off against
the strongest, most depraved bad guy in a
fight to the death.
The first Highlander was not a particularly
good movie, but it had style and was based on an
interesting idea.
Highlander: Endgame starts promisingly with
magnificent footage, shot in Romania, of Connor
MacLeod riding through hills representing
Scotland, where he lived his first lifetime.
But it quickly goes astray with fight scenes
laden with too many bullets, too many explosions,
too many sparks, lightning bolts and weird
lights--and too many impalings. The martial-arts
choreography is rendered unimpressive by the
fact camera tricks were obviously used to speed
up the action.
The middle of the movie drags along with the
characters stopping every five minutes to explain
the rules of the immortal game and why some
characters follow the rules while others don't.
And then it ends, as Highlander stories
generally do, with a beheading.
The third Highlander movie was subtitled Final
Dimension, and this one is subtitled Endgame,
but don't expect it to be over.
There can be only one immortal, and apparently
a few are still kicking.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:10:39 -1000
From: Geiger <geiger@maui.net>
Subject: Re: Endgame
Karla wrote--
> Seems they are still beating up on the movie.
Well, it sucked--for largely the very reasons specified in this review.
Actually, this reviewer gets point from me for knowing about the Highlander
universe, _watching_ this flick, & paying close enough attention to figure
out the details--all despite the MANY factors conspiring to convolute.
> I was intrigued enough to click on it. I was sorry I did after reading
this horrid review
Why? Was it "horrid" just because the reviewer panned the film, or because
you disagreed w/ specific points the reviewer made?
Nina (BAD editing)
geiger@maui.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:29:50 +0000
From: John Mosby <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Endgame
Apart from a few slip-ups in accuracy, the reviewer has at least tried to give a full picture of what they thought. As I've said in the past, a film reviewer may be able to write a 'better' review if he's familiar with other facets of a frachise, but essentially his/her job is to judge the hour/two hour that he views on the day. Most reviews I saw of Endgame, were fair if not pleasant reading.
A great movie doesn't need baggage or familiarity. Lord of the Rings is a (trilogy of) books that I haven't picked up in twenty years. That actually allowed some ability to judge the film, rather than see it strictly as an adaptation. Sometimes that's good, sometimes not.
I found Highlander: Endgame, as we've discussed for over a year, to be a film that had some solid foundations and ideas but was scuppered by a confusing plot, appalling inconsistent editing and a blatantly misleading advertsing campaign. It did extremely bad opening business in a week when a half decent film should have excelled.
The reviewer makes some valid comments, in some cases being kind. I love Highlander and it has brought me many happy hours, friends and moments of joy. Endgame wasn't one of them and my review was hardly more positive...and I KNOW the franchise inside-out. But I think the debates we've had here are maybe one good thing to come out of it. Whether we agree or disagree on some of the fundenmental choices made by those who own the Highlander franchise....it endures in us.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:09:53 -0500
From: Elaine Nicol <ElaineN@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Endgame
>> Seems they are still beating up on the movie. I was surprised to see
this review on the front page of the Cox.com Simply Connecticut page.
When I saw Highlander Endgame, I was intrigued enough to click on it. I
was sorry I did after reading this horrid review. Read on if you dare. <<
I did read on, and at least the person who wrote this has watched the
movies and the TV and has some knowledge of the immortals and the
Highlander universe, so I think they are entitled to their opinion.
Personally I think Endgame is the poorest of all the movies, but it wasn't
that bad but then I am biased and declare that from the outset. The movie
did Adrian no favours it could have been a great movie, in fact from what
we see it looks as though the bits that would have made it great finished
up on the cutting room floor simply as a sacrifice to time constraints as
opposed to artistic reasons.
I have to agree about too many bullets and explosions and yes to someone
who doesn't know Highlander inside out the way we do it would be confusing,
I know people who do know it well who thought it was confusing.
What would I have liked - cut Kate out that relationship was a waste of
time and the only real purpose it seemed to serve was to give a sex scene.
The scene with Connor's mother was important and it should have been made
clearer about Kell's involvement there. Many people I know had a problem
with that.
Methos should have been in there a little more and explained more.
Something should have been done to explain the Joe and Methos relationship
more.
I'm certain there are any number of us here who could have done better or
knows where it could have been better. I'm also betting that those
responsible for it know exactly what we know and are every bit as annoyed
as we are.
I've just watched the director's cut of the second one now just don't get
me started on that. I thought the original was bad. ;-/
Elaine.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:33:46 -0500
From: Miracle <kad82987@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: Endgame
someone wrote:
> When I saw Highlander Endgame, I was intrigued enough to click on it. I
> was sorry I did after reading this horrid review. Read on if you dare. <<
If someone still has the URL handy, could they please e-mail it me
OFFLIST, so we don't clog the list up? Danke.
And seeing as how I missed the discussion of HL4 the first time around,
I'm going to jump in this time.
Elaine Nichol wrote:
> Personally I think Endgame is the poorest of all the movies
I dunno...HL2, Cheesy Zeist Version(tm) may still have that dubious
distinction. However, there were fewer plot holes. Just general bad plot.
:)
> in fact from what we see it looks as though the bits that would have
> made it great finished up on the cutting room floor simply as a
> sacrifice to time constraints as opposed to artistic reasons.
In writing workshops, I see authors cutting things that may not have been
relevant to the plot, but would have helped the plot make more sense. I
haven't really seen any of this cutting room material, but it seems to me
this could be some of what was missing.
I think what the film suffered from overall was flat characters. *We* all
know the depth these characters have. I don't think it came out in the
movie. Methos and Joe seemed almost extraneous. ("Hi, I'm Methos. I
explain a few things, then I leave." "I'm Joe. I drive the car.")
> I know people who do know it well who thought it was confusing.
::raises hand::
But I did like it. Partially I think it was the experience (I went with
some very good friends, all HL fans). It was nice to see Connor again. The
sword-work was excellent.
> I've just watched the director's cut of the second one now just don't get
> me started on that. I thought the original was bad. ;-/
I've actually come to love Cheesy Zeist Version (tm) and here's how you
all can too. Get a bunch of friends, lots of sugar and/or caffeine, and
have your own Mystery Science Theatre 3000 version!!
--Miracle (also, if you can find the fan MST3K--at cons and
such--it's worth a look)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"An extremely good-looking man was sitting in my lap, in just his
underwear, and I was focused on the inadequacy of my students' writings. I
needed to reprioritize." --Domino: Heads or Tails?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minor Major Miracle: Time Lady, Jedi Knight, Occasional Grad Student
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 28 Dec 2001 to 29 Dec 2001 (#2001-328)
***************************************************************