AC10 said:
I don't have a car right now and the movie theater is across town so I had to walk. I forgot all characters names by the time I was a quarter of the way home. I remember the black guy wanted to be Nick Fury and and had a few cool lines. The two research guys had good chemistry, but I don't know there names.
I saw the movie last week and I remember all of the characters names... except for the Russians because they had too many consonants
This next part is not directed at anyone in particular:
I absolutely reject the criticism of, "Oh the story was weak, or the characters were one dimensional" in this movies case. First off: no the characters were not one dimensional, if you want an example of one dimensional characterization a good example would be Megan Fox's character in Transformers... or any Michael Bay character in any of his movies generally. A lot of people are used to characters "dimensions" being forced down there throats with really heavy handed dialogue that's not particularly subtle, but is often mistaken for being subtle depending on the skill of the writer. For instance: The Dark Knight Rises Bane, also the Joker but he himself isn't subtle and Batman himself, has his characters "dimensions" constantly being pointed to by his incessant, though effective, monologues, constantly screaming, "LOOK! I look like a brute, but I'm actually an uber-intelligent maniac. Doesn't that making me interesting and deep?!" His every waking moment on screen almost seems to take time out to point out that he's got depth. Pacific Rim on the other hand, approaches its character dimensions in a more subtle fashion. Pentecost (Idris Elba) is most noticeably portrayed as the stoic, all-business military commander, literally saying, "I serve as a fixed point for all of you to look towards", but in addition is a genuinely caring individual, who can be wrong, and also uses that stoicism to hide his actual frailties from the people that need him to be rock-solid. Another good example, and a character a lot of people accuse of being one-note, are the two australians Herc and Chuck who have trouble connecting as father and son and actually communicate their relationship through their dog. That's why when Chuck tells his father to take care of him when he leaves it's a highly emotional scene, it's that recognition of trust and connection that they were unable to figure out how to voice.
As for the story: I think a lot of people have a problem separating simple from stupid. A stupid movie tends to be incredibly unfocused and also treat its audience as stupid or just hold them in contempt in general. Once again the Transformers are great examples of this and so are most of Sandlers films. They have no respect for the audiences intelligence, evident in how they constantly take time out to explain why things are happening and how despite the fact that their plot elements are neither complex enough nor strong enough to support the shallow "lore, for lack of a better word... backstory might be more appropriate, and as such makes the movies out to the audience as dumb. Pacific Rim tackles this by using an expositional prologue, in much the same way LOTR used for explaining the creation of the Ring and the backstory behind the conflict between Sauron and the rest of the world. It establishes its rules early and never deviates from them without giving compelling reason, and as such gives the viewers a preset basis in which to judge the events that happen in the film. Its plot is simple, but it's executed really well, with some really solid acting, and assumes the viewer is intelligent enough to grasp the fundamentals it laid out in advance. There are no loose ends or dangling plot threads or holes, except for the sword, and it doesn't resort to cheap methods of distraction, like racist robots, to try to hide the plots shortcomings. I can guarantee that if anyone has a question about something in the movie, minus the sword, that there is an answer for it that was elaborated on in the movie. Now the story might not be everyones cup of tea, and that's more than fine/ to each their own, but it's not stupid... it's simple and well executed. The Lord of the Rings were simple and that didn't detract from them.
Ultimately, whether you like the movie or not isn't my concern. Everyone's free to their own opinions. But these points however are not opinion and had to be addressed. To me Pacific Rim knew what it was trying to be and was exceptional because it went above and beyond what it actually needed to do to just be good. Sorry this was so long.