Parley Info |
| Join the Crew! Rules & Guidelines Navigating Parley FAQ Introductions Latest News: Celebrating 3 Years! Joinable Groups |
"Mother's love, Jack! You should know better than to wake a man when he's sleeping. It's bad luck."- Joshamee Gibbs, Curse of the Black Pearl |
PotC 4 Pics Pirates of the Caribbean 4 Johnny Depp Joe Pancake What's the Last Movie You Saw? The Person Below Me Game Ask a Pirate | |
Our Button:![]() |
|||
| Avast, ye maties! We welcome you to Parley with us! Currently, you be a guest on our ship. This means you can only see certain room on board our ship. If you join our crew, you'll be able to access crewmember-only sections, and use many crew-only features such as customizing yer profile, sending personal messages by messenger pigeon, and votin' in polls. Joinin' us is quick, free, and as painless as it can get! Make yer mark here! If ye be already a crew member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Cube; The Walls Are Closing In | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 22 2007, 02:43 AM (308 Views) | |
| will_k_williams | Feb 22 2007, 02:43 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Miscreant
|
I love this film. I only watch it every now and then to keep it as fresh as I can. As much as I love watching films until I can recite the entire script I've probably only watched this film three times in the last five years and I'm watching it again tomorrow. Partly because it's nice to have one film I don't inside out, partly because I think the nature of the film requires you to not quite know what's coming. I love the fact there is no bad guy other than those within the imprisoned group. I love the fact that the 'prisoners' have the names of prisons (Quentin, Holloway, Leaven and Worth). It's like the Breakfast Club meets Battle Royale in a giant, boobytrapped Rubik's cube! David Hewlett was awesome as always. Will |
![]() |
|
| Explosive Calm | Feb 22 2007, 09:34 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Scallywag
|
"It's not us who are going round in circles, it's the rooms." Yeah, I love it too, it holds a spot in my top ten movies ever because it's just so darn tense and creative with a whole lot of originality, good script too since the characters are all so interesting. Can't say the same for the sequels, the second one sucked and the third was good but explained all the original in a series of twists which I might have not wanted explained, but the original is awesome, must have seen it close to ten times now. |
![]() |
|
| will_k_williams | Feb 22 2007, 09:43 AM Post #3 |
![]()
Miscreant
|
I saw the second one and Almighty Christus it was awful. I haven't seen Cube 0 yet as the second one sucked so hard I was concerned a third installment might create a vacuum. The original was dark and whilst the fact that they were in there for no real reason didn't make a whole lot of sense it was good. There was no one to point a finger at, no one to wear the black hat which I think led to the breakdown of the group. In all it was an interesting social comment as well as being a creepy sci-fi horror film. Plus David Hewlett was awesome. Will |
![]() |
|
| Explosive Calm | Feb 22 2007, 09:58 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Scallywag
|
The second one made my eyes bleed, third was more of a thriller, quite fast paced, I liked it, it's just how everything is explained which might be bad if you like it better with mystery. The original is one of those few films which I'd like to see special features for, my copy has nothing. |
![]() |
|
| will_k_williams | Feb 22 2007, 10:06 AM Post #5 |
![]()
Miscreant
|
Hastily reading the back of my copy I note that my copy is equipped with director's commentary, production photos and a trailer. What? No interactive menus? For shame! Now you've told me the third one doesn't suck mightily I might give it a go. I do like the mystery of the first one but at the same time the lack of reason in it is totally illogical. Why go through all the trouble of kidnapping people from their homes in the dead of night, putting them in jumpsuits and sticking them inside the highly pointless death cube if it's as pointless and meaningless as Worth claims? Argh! David Hewlett is awesome though. Will |
![]() |
|
| Explosive Calm | Feb 22 2007, 10:36 AM Post #6 |
![]()
Scallywag
|
Oh, that's the one I have since I checked, I did see another version once but I think it had even less stuff on it, and cost more. ![]() It was meaningless, but the idea of what that meaning might have been intrigued me, oh well, I did like the explaination given, shocked me a bit really when it came. |
![]() |
|
| will_k_williams | Feb 22 2007, 10:50 AM Post #7 |
![]()
Miscreant
|
Now I'm really intrigued and will have to watch it. If I buy it that means I might have to buy the God awful Cube 2: Hypercube to fit with the rest of my compulsive completist issues. I bought the original before Hypercube came out so I have an excuse for that. Why must you do this to me? Seriously though I'd like to watch Zero now. Even though the awesome David Hewlett isn't in it. Will |
![]() |
|
| Explosive Calm | Feb 22 2007, 12:14 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Scallywag
|
But the reason it's called Zero is so you can skip the mind destroyingly bad second one, it's a prequel, I'm happy that I've somehow pushed all but one of the Hypercube scenes out of my head, and that one serves as a reminder to never watch it again, you should follow my example.
|
![]() |
|
| will_k_williams | Feb 22 2007, 12:42 PM Post #9 |
![]()
Miscreant
|
It is a shining example and one I shall try and follow. Prequels are different anyway I've been looking it up on the IMDb and while it doesn't seem to be liked the original film didn't fare much better (especially by Saw fans). I have noticed that a lot of people have attacked the acting (although everyone seems to agree that David Hewlett was awesome). Whilst it was a little OTT in places I can't think of many low budget sci-fi or horror films where this wasn't the case. Personally I disliked the characters rather than the acting. I thought Holloway was just annoying and opinionated, Quentin was a mentally unstable thug, Worth should have been unlikeable but I think something in the grim sarcasm and resignation just made me root for him. I always viewed Worth as being the almost prototype McKay character for David 'Awesome' Hewlett just without the drive and ego he has in Stargate from being mentally superior to everyone ese. When he first appeared on that show I said 'Hey it's that loser guy from Cube' and he's just impressed me more ever since. Will |
![]() |
|
| Explosive Calm | Feb 22 2007, 05:52 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Scallywag
|
Good, because the second film doesn't deserve to be bought, unless you were planning on buying the world's supply of it so no one else has to sit through that thing, and then I might see a reason to owning it. The prequel wasn't as good as the original, Saw was what it reminded me of most I think, it was more of a twisty thriller than the original but it didn't have the same class to it, and there was this one guy with only one eye who's one the most insanely over the top nasty people to step on screen, he was cheesy, but that kind of fitted as it was fun in a way, and is the only prequel I've seen which added anything of relevance while twisting what we already know about the original, it might not be brilliant but that at least deserves a bit of praise. Low budget films usually do have bad acting, but I couldn't really fault it in Cube, since it added to the bizarreness of it all in a way, the whole film had this crazy kind of feel to it and if it was superbly acted then it might not have worked the same, and the characters were better written than in most films so it really didn't matter anyway, but I totally agree on Worth's sarcasm, I think it was in the sometimes over the top acting from people which helped keep the characters interesting, the whole film's set in similar looking rooms, they needed to stand out from that and not blend into the background, and they sure did a good job at that. |
![]() |
|
| Coldmetal | Feb 22 2007, 09:12 PM Post #11 |
|
Rogue
|
Cube's just another good Canadian film, I guess. I saw the second one, and it compeled me to watch the first one. I guess I went in with a little to high of expectations. It was good, just not as good as the hype made me expect... |
![]() |
|
| xiggy01x | Feb 22 2007, 09:18 PM Post #12 |
|
Swabbie
|
I haven't seen this movie in so long. Not since it aired on the Scifi network. But I remember loving it. And then going out and renting the sequels. Which were really good too. I loved the premise of the movie. Very clever. |
![]() |
|
| Coldmetal | Feb 22 2007, 09:21 PM Post #13 |
|
Rogue
|
The premise of the movie is clever, no doubt. I love it. Don't exactly get it, but I love it. The rooms switching I never got, though. I guess they only out that in for a specail twist, to make the movie more suspensful. Never understood how the girl figured all the stuff out in the first one, though. I don't even think it's possilbe, considering the info she had. |
![]() |
|
| will_k_williams | Feb 25 2007, 06:29 AM Post #14 |
![]()
Miscreant
|
Having watched it again on Thursday I noticed a huge problem with the maths in it. When Leaven is whinging that the numbers are astronomical and they find out that Kazan is a mathematical genius she askes him how many factors to each number. What she should have asked was how many prime factors there were and even that doesn't make sense. With some he replies four so it seems pointless to be asking. Numbers like 545 (which was mentioned) couldn't possibly only have 2 factors. It might, however, have two prime factors. One would assume from this that there should be a prime number of prime factors (otherwise it renders the entire prime idea useless). I hope it's not just me that thinks this. There's certainly something that doesn't quite make sense in that system. I'm utterly appalling at maths so please forgive me if I've got it all wrong. Will |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The Graveyard · Next Topic » |


"Mother's love, Jack! You should know better than to wake a man when he's sleeping. It's bad luck."





8:23 AM Jul 11