Resident Evil: Extinction

Blackmagik said:
yup... /drool... and wtf with all the worlds importent monuments in 1 place (stat of lib, sphynix etc..)?

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/residentevilextinction/medium.html
Click to expand...

It takes place in Nevada. Vegas has all of those things as Casino's or Hotels.

However, that begs the question: WTF happened to the Vegas to make it look like that? You never hear about the Great Wall of Vegas holding back the rustling sand of the desert.

Come on now people, please chant the mantra: pleasedonoletthissuckpleasedonotletthissuck
 
If it's as good as it looks i'll be happy.
 
Those are all Vegas casinos. From what i've read the T-Virus has spread worldwide and this caravan is making it's way to Alaska, hence the "extinction" of the title. If just happens to take place in the ruins of vegas after everyone is zombified.
Just think of it as a the bastard child of Road Warrior and Dawn of the Dead :/
 
I loved the first two... this one looks great. /joins in the manthra's chant.
 
I was a little disappointed with the preview, the first half was all focused on showing where it takes place, and it wasn't until the very end that you got to see any of the characters and action... I've always been one who likes having as much revealed in a movie trailer as possible >_>


And I was wondering the same thing Aly. I hope they give a little intro to explain things at the start of the movie.
 
It's going to suck. The first one was good and it fit in the Resident Evil storyline. Apocalypse went "Hey! Resident Evil 3 never happened! Let's just partially listen to the story of the games and add our own characters in the mix." I mean come on. In RE2/3 there were only five(?) known S.T.A.R.S. survivors, yet Nemesis counts like 13 or so in the movie. Plus his main objective in 3 was to kill all surviving S.T.A.R.S. members because they knew the whole truth of Umbrella. Yet in Apocalypse, he's programmed for whatever the hell. And then there's the end of the movie which could sort of follow the games, but still... no.

Main reason I don't like video games movies most of the time is because they don't follow the story of the actual games they're based on.
 
Swishiee said:
In RE2/3 there were only five(?) known S.T.A.R.S. survivors, yet Nemesis counts like 13 or so in the movie. Plus his main objective in 3 was to kill all surviving S.T.A.R.S. members because they knew the whole truth of Umbrella. Yet in Apocalypse, he's programmed for whatever the hell. And then there's the end of the movie which could sort of follow the games, but still... no.
Click to expand...

which did you not do, finish Nemises on PS1 or finish the second movie?
 
im not looking foward to it at all...the last two movies where crap

their gonna butcher claire's character just like they butchered jill's character

and ill get up and walk out of the theater if they butcher wesker (i heard he was in it)

i absolutly hate that alice character with a passion

worst fucking thing to happen to resident evil since outbreak

but of course i will be seeing it just to prove that its gonna be horrible movie
 
The first wasn't really accurate to the story either :P I don't really care though. Whenever I see a movie made about a video game I just treat it like an alternate dimension of the game or so. Like.. here's what happened if this and this went like this.
 
Elemmire said:
The first wasn't really accurate to the story either :P I don't really care though. Whenever I see a movie made about a video game I just treat it like an alternate dimension of the game or so. Like.. here's what happened if this and this went like this.
Click to expand...

It wasn't 100% accurate, but it was still close. The mansion Alice lived in and that was connected to the Umbrella HQ was the mansion RE0 and 1 took place in. And it explains how the zombies got in the mansion in the first place. At least that's my theory.
 
I wanna know how over the course of the Raccoon City incident, none of the crows or other animals spread the virus outside the city.
 
Swishiee said:
It's going to suck. The first one was good and it fit in the Resident Evil storyline. Apocalypse went "Hey! Resident Evil 3 never happened! Let's just partially listen to the story of the games and add our own characters in the mix." I mean come on. In RE2/3 there were only five(?) known S.T.A.R.S. survivors, yet Nemesis counts like 13 or so in the movie. Plus his main objective in 3 was to kill all surviving S.T.A.R.S. members because they knew the whole truth of Umbrella. Yet in Apocalypse, he's programmed for whatever the hell. And then there's the end of the movie which could sort of follow the games, but still... no.

Main reason I don't like video games movies most of the time is because they don't follow the story of the actual games they're based on.
Click to expand...

Swishiee you're silly. The first one is completely and utterly not part of the games storyline. It takes pieces (mansion, zombies, virus) and then just runs with it. There is no Hive in the game series. The labs were strictly underneath the mansion, and the underground labs at Raccoon were developing something completely different than the mansion labs.

It was a decent film, but not part of the RE Storyline whatsoever. They tried to retcon the film and fit it into the storyline, but RE: Apoc just completely ruined it.

Besides, where is Wesker?
 
I didn't like the second one because the only zombie they -show- is Nemesis. The rest of the zombies in the movie are in camera shake-scenes that make it look like some kids are trying to make a $20 budget movie for their acting classes.

That and, yeah, they don't follow the plot too well. First one was decent, second one...so-so. I'm hoping this'll be good but movies based on games/comics rarely start good, and if they do, the sequels staying good is all but legendary.

And that preview is, needless to say, one of the biggest derails of a plot I've ever seen.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah Aly, that's right. To tell you the truth, I've never played through RE0/1 100% through. I just know the main story of what's going on. So yeah, it's not quite right, but I'd say it's still kind of close. Second one was ass whether it followed the story or not anyway.
 
First movie was pretty good, should have used some different actors for certain characters.

Apocolypse was mostly crap, especially Alice and her motorcycle through the church window and becoming friends with Nemisis bullshit.
 
Pastry said:
First movie was pretty good, should have used some different actors for certain characters.

Apocolypse was mostly crap,[cut out], becoming friends with Nemisis bullshit.
Click to expand...

How is it bullshit? Do you understand why?
 
You have to play RE1: Directors Cut to really appreciate it. It was close, but was lacking something important: WESKER!

The first movie was close enough for me, but the second movie, if it was trying to follow RE3 in anyway, completely butchered it. Nemesis was supposed to be along the lines of the Tyrant; a mindless bioweapon hellbent on death and destruction.

I understand how it played into the movie, but the movie itself could have been better fit to the game.

When doing a game to movie, you either follow the game as closely as possible or you create something completely parallel/different.

None of this hybrid shit. (ala RE: Apocalypse)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top