I think the fact that it did work to scare you but didn't work to scare me is the difference in expectation. Because I was expecting gore and horrifying death and then it wasn't really there, it resulted in a subdued reaction. Also, I had read previously an interview with I think David Hayter and Zack Snyder saying that they basically had to change it because of 9/11 and I .... kind of think that's unnecessary. It just feels wimpy. Just because it's New York getting blown up and destroyed doesn't automatically remind me of that because frankly New York has a big history of getting destroyed in movies. Maybe I'm just sort of heartless, but if the context is far enough removed from what 9/11 was, I don't automatically make an emotional connection to it.
Throughout the whole movie there was cringe-worthy gore everywhere, even when the novel wasn't all that graphically gory (bloody sure, but not visible bone arm breakage gory). Then at the end there was just nothing. It's arguable that they were trying to set up a contrast between the ridiculous gore and people simply getting erased, but I can only speak for my own reaction and it did nothing to me.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2009-03-07 06:45 pm (UTC)Throughout the whole movie there was cringe-worthy gore everywhere, even when the novel wasn't all that graphically gory (bloody sure, but not visible bone arm breakage gory). Then at the end there was just nothing. It's arguable that they were trying to set up a contrast between the ridiculous gore and people simply getting erased, but I can only speak for my own reaction and it did nothing to me.