If I were to run down a checklist grading this movie here's what it would look like: Acting: exaggerated version of all the characters in part one, all more terrible. They tried to give us a little more information while still leaving us guessing. I know that CGI was still a relatively new toy in 2002 but it cheapened the movie and made it less likable. Now it moved silently and had a bunch of cartoonish ways of killing the cube members. It may look shinier and newer but it doesn't hold the same value. It was like the classic car that's stripped of its original parts and replaced with a bunch of gaudy upgrades. The cube itself was a suped up version of its predecessor and it wasn't any better. Ten cube captives in all and ten terrible actors. There were a few other ancillary characters thrown in there but their purposes were insignificant and more-or-less a diversion. I think that covers the very same characters that were in the first version. Two engineer types, Max (Matthew Ferguson) and Jerry (Neil Crone), both whom were unwitting participants in the creation of the cube. Paley (Barbara Gordon), both whom were typical burdens until their function was revealed. Two handicapped persons, Sasha (Grace Lynn Kung) and Mrs. The ultra-protective nurturing doctor, Kate (Kari Matchett), who's there to help everybody. There was the misplaced alpha male, Simon (Geraint Wyn Davies), who is only there to create conflict. This time there were ten people in the cube except they only focused on six of them. All of the things that made "Cube" endearing were totally lacking in "Hypercube". So, if "Cube" was good then "Hypercube" should be great. It has a common meaning of the extreme of a thing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |