Please would fans explain why they enjoyed this movie
-
The-Road-Warrior — 15 years ago(July 09, 2010 06:25 PM)
i only watched it a few minutes ago and i love sci-fi
its pretty good but still i feel it had a great concept just well the movie wasnt as good
the performances were mixed
yes kurt russel is very cool in this but his performance is annoying. he whispers half the time.
another thing is that while it was an action movie there wasnt much action sequences (the rest were just kills)
i give it 7/10
worth watching if you like sci-fi and have the time
i was once dkchewy -
ThrashGordon88 — 15 years ago(July 13, 2010 06:20 PM)
Atmosphere, Kurt Russell, plot, retro-cool factor (weapons, gadgets, MUSIC and 'future 1997' scenario). If I'm going to be honest I'd give this film 8/10 (I'd much rather be ' oh, what the hell!' and give it a 10/10), but its still awesome. On a serious note I felt this film has more in common with the action films of the 70s rather than 80s, cause ya know, there are some interesting contrasts between those two eras of film-making for the Action genre
Btw this film was released 8 years before my birth, so you can politely do away with a 'my generation' speech.
Anyway, essential viewing for any fan of 'alternative history', dystopian sci-fi, and people who wants to know why a certain famous computer game character was dedicated to the main protaganist in this film (I'll give you a hint whispers 'Because he's awesome')
Oh and don't get me started on people who call films like this 'dated' just, don't. -
SPaS — 14 years ago(January 29, 2012 02:32 PM)
I just watched the movie (again!), decided to check the IMDB page, followed this thread and here I am.
This thread started well from the get-go, the lost its tracks and now got back on.
TG88, you nailed it. It's just like you say it.
In order to understand, you have to realize how much ahead of his time John Carpenter relly was. This came a year before Blade Runner and three years before the first Terminator (btw. James Cameron worked as a matte painter on this one). John Carpenter capitalised with cyberpunk property (William Gibson ("Mona Lisa overdrive") credits this as an influence) much like George Lucas capitalised on comic-book/sci-fi property with "Star Wars".
With this movie Kurt Russell also VERY succesfully shed his Disney - skin.
To fully realize this, picture Selena Gomez winning a Bafta award. Not impossible, just extremely unlikely.
Actually I think the movie is "only" three and a half stars out of five, and the Snake Plissken character is five plus stars out of five. One of the few badasses on screen I buy despite what comes out of their mouths. Because if I don't, they come out of the screen and bang my head against my keyboarosieggnlkbgjbafkdfibdf-klndfvknldbv0griorenwjg. b-odbpodb -nkgr-nlgw-ngrn -
seth_bouldin — 15 years ago(July 30, 2010 11:20 AM)
The most important reason: The character of Solid Snake was developed from Snake Plissken. He even uses the last name of "Plissken" when going under cover in MGS2
Though I think Kurt's acting in this film is horrible, though I like most of his other movies. -
Lolballs — 15 years ago(August 01, 2010 05:46 AM)
Spoilers and sorry for all the text.. four cups of coffee.
I first saw this movie when I was ten years old and have loved it ever since. I notice details now that I didn't think about back then however. Most of those only serve to make me like it more! Like when early on in the film Snake gets shot in the leg by a crossbow. It says Snake may be a very experienced killer but in the first real confrontation with the badguys, realistically bad luck still applies to him. He's wounded and spends the rest of the film limping around. Shortly after that he's captured and goes unconsious and when he wakes up it is suddenly daylight. He's lost his wrist watch (that counts down to his death) and isn't sure exactly how long he was out. The sun could be setting again in thirty minutes for all he knows.
There's an unspoken desperation throughout the movie that really creeps up on you, or me atleast. His choice to rip up the tape at the end just shows that Snake truly has no loyalties, he's not "the bigger man" and it's just so plain badass as it can get. He may even be something of a psychopath, well maybe not, but his behaviour is so unpredictable and self serving. Interesting nonetheless to have this character be the "hero" of the film. A true antihero.
Also the atmosphere is just really dark and gritty without overdoing it, the camerawork and use of light and shadows is beautiful. The soundtrack is one of the coolest ever and the use of old synthesizers are popular these days so it doesn't feel as odd now as it perhaps did ten years ago.
I was born the same year "Escape.." came out so I guess I'm pretty young for a die hard fan of this film. I CAN however see why teens today don't go crazy for this movie as it is almost thirty years old, it was low budget even then and there is no unrealistic spectacular action. It has aged, but not as badly as most films from around it's time. -
ccr1633 — 15 years ago(August 13, 2010 09:34 AM)
Hi samuel-84. I feel I am missing something when I see a semi-trollish character such as yourself fishing for explanations as to why people like a movie, without offering up even a single opinion of your own about the film. Please can I get some feedback as to what you did not enjoy about escape from NY.
-
brushfyr — 15 years ago(August 28, 2010 09:00 PM)
Alot of people have summed up alot of things nicely, many I agree with. But really, I hate to say it, it's one of those things where if you have to ask you wouldnt understand it. I know that's an ass of answer but that's a big part of it.
First off, this movie came out in 1981, before the vhs explosion of the 80s. When video chains and mom and pop stores started to rent vhs tapes, it created an entire industry of direct to video low budget cheapies. Movies noone intended to be released like in theaters, but just for people to rent. If you've already rent Star Wars, and it cost the same to rent Escape From The Bronx (a real italian movie) you may rent Bronx. And it cost a fraction of what Star Wars did to make. So after 30 years there have been countless movies with a post apocolyptic world and leather clad anti heroes fighting for survival. But it many ways it was a more novel idea in 1981.
BTW - I know westerns had alot of anti heroes, but I'm saying alot of science fiction were a little more good vs evil at the time, alot less of the Vin Diesel guy just doing a mercenary job thing at the time.
So the characters, setting, and costumes were all amazingly novel. I've read that the movie was the first to have the concept of customizing cars. Not sure if it's true, but cant recall a movie that had similar messed up cars before 1981. Sure, a ton after but not before.
So it was a very original and well done move at the time. Since then, a ton of movies and ripped the tone and atmosphere of this and Blade Runner to death. So it looks hacky, when really it's where the hacks were stealing it from. -
wildpeckinpah — 15 years ago(October 12, 2010 07:13 PM)
Another reason for the appeal of Escape from NY is that at the time of its release the events of the film were 16 years in the future. 1981 was a time ripe with urban decay and high crime and fearful murder rates. Along with Detriot, NYC was the most hellish hole in the States and as the city was 13 years away from being rescued by Giuliani. In 1981 it was no stretch of the imagination to think that Carpenter's distopia could actually happen.
I was looking forward to this exciting future and was disappointed when the (real) calendar rolled to 1997 and Manhattan hadn't become a walled prison. But during the 80's thoughts of this literally happening gave the movie added punch. -
jamiekincaid — 15 years ago(October 22, 2010 08:48 AM)
Carpenter has a way of telling a story that hmmmhow do you describe it? He has a certain "flow" that I guess you either love or don't get. And I don't mean don't get in a condescending/dismissive way. It either works for you or it doesn't. For me, his movies have an almost poetic way of creeping up on you until all of a sudden you realize you are completely immersed in this world and it's fantastic. I think EFNY and The Thing are perfect examples but Big Trouble does it in it's own way too. Even EFLA has "it" just to a a lesser extent. For Escape, there is something about the combination of the lighting, the music, Plissken, and the story that just works.
I won't even begin to try to explain the appeal of Plissken. Aside from the fact that I am a woman and Plissken is 100% aesthetically pleasing, there is something so untouchably cool and smooth about him that you route for him from the first second. He is the bad-ass other bad-asses want to be but not in an over-the-top way. He just kind of quietly goes about doing what he needs to do. They never relent and have him doing typical heroic stunts. He's not out to save the world or the damsel in distress. He's just doing what he can to get himself out of a bad situation. You put everything Carpenter is a master of together with what Kurt did with Plissken and - BAM - you have a legend.
Do yourself a favor. Erase any and all preconceived notions you have about the film. Try not to worry about what differences would be apparent because 30 years has passed. Don't worry about lack of action in an action movie. Try to forget what you think you already know about the film. Go in with no expectations and just let it kind of wash over you. I don't mean that to sound preachy. It's just such a great movie. If you go in expecting it to be The Matrix you are going to miss some great stuff.
Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle. -
Zoomorph — 15 years ago(October 26, 2010 08:40 PM)
I wonder the same thing really.
I gave this movie 1/10, it's got to be one of the worst I've ever seen! (I try to avoid them.) I can always find at least something positive to appreciate about films, but this one is complete crap except the DVD menu and perhaps the soundtrack!
~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~ -
ksmail-1 — 15 years ago(November 26, 2010 09:29 AM)
I agree with OP. This movie was horrible and I find it hard to believe that so many people enjoy it. It was more of a comedy for me, especially the music, just notice the music during the "intense action sequences", and you'll just start laughing. Snake Plissken might have been a little cool, but the acting was pretty bad. The way Kurt Russell talks, trying to be all cool, that was pretty funny too.
I gave it a 2/10, 2 instead of 1 because it was unintentionally funny. I'm 19 years old by the way, perhaps you need to have experienced the 70s/80s and been part of the ridiculous trends to fully enjoy this movie.
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything. -
franzkabuki — 15 years ago(December 03, 2010 01:01 AM)
The score is absolutely great and Snake Plissken is obviously about as cool as human beings get. Then theres also this uniquely somber and trashy scenery, the most ludicrous pimpmobile ever conceived, planes flying to the World Trade Center, Harry Dean Stanton what more do you need? I wouldnt call it a masterpiece, but it sure has character and a bad attitude. 7,5/10.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan -
reynardtfox — 15 years ago(January 14, 2011 11:18 PM)
Eventually, when you are older, some know-it-all kid is going to be dismissive of the era of your formative years and lacking in perspective and experience of your beloved pop-culture touchstones, and then you'll truly understand the breadth of your hateful foolishness