Showing 1 - 7 of 7 Reviews
Posted on 6/28/11 11:39 PM
Michael Bay really pisses me the f**k off!! Not because Dark of the Moon is bad. It acually might be the best of the trilogy. He pisses me off because you can actually tell that he doesn't give a damn about the characters, the acting, or the dialogue. And yeah, I know anyone who goes to see a Transformers movie doesn't care about any of that stuff either, but if all of that stuff where actually GOOD this would have been a summer movie event that would rival Dark Knight and Spider-man! Instead we get a half-assed action movie with some REALLY nice explosions.
How can someone get the action SOOOO right and absolutely EVERYTHING ELSE so wrong in the same movie is beyond me! I literally had know idea why any character in the movie does or says what they do or say, but by the last hour I really didn't care because the mayhem that was happening to Chicago was unbelievable!
Yes it was the best of the 3, but Revenge of the Sith was the best of the prequels too. Doesn't mean it couldn't have been alot better.
Posted on 6/19/11 07:56 PM
This movie is proof why you can't go into a movie being prejudiced by other peoples opinions. I went to this movie expecting it to be bad, but what was I going to do? Not go see a GREEN LANTERN movie?! Turns out that it was pretty good.
I will admit that the tidbit during the credits is OUT OF NOWHERE! It feels like something got cut from the movie that would explain why the character does what he does.
I also think that had they kept Hal on Oa to train instead of opting to have him go back to earth and doubt himself as a GL for a quarter of the movie, it would have made it a lot more exciting. But that's just me.
As a whole I think the action was great! The constructs were right out of the comic books! Reynolds did a good job of playing Hal Jordan. Bring on GL 2 I say!
Posted on 6/04/11 08:55 PM
Good movie. Very good balance of action and drama. January Jones is taking a beating for her dry acting but I think it suits the role of Emma Frost pretty good in this movie. McAvoy and Fassbender are pitch perfect in there roles. It was just a very good movie, but.....
I understand that this is Erik and Charles' story, but I wish they had fleshed out the other team members a little better. Banshee, Havoc, and especially Darwin, have no reason to be in this movie. Angel is only here to show how thin the ideology line is between Charles and Erik, but even that is well established with Mystique.
I will admit that I wish that the continuity between this and the other X films was more consistant. In X3 there was a flashback to Charles and Erik meeting Jean Grey for the 1st time as allies. At the end of this film they part ways and it's 1962 meaning Jean from X3 would be in her early to mid 50's. It's a very minor quibble , but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't thinking about it.
I also wish that Vaughn and Singer would have had confidence that the movie they were making was good enough for a sequel and saved Erik's turn into Magneto for another film. The ending felt rushed. I don't believe that Mystique would leave Charles THAT easily or that Erik would do the same. It felt like the director didn't think he was going to get another shot at this so he closed all the loose ends to quickly.
But again, these were MINOR things. Short of The Dark Knight, and possibly X2, this is the best funny books movie ever made!
Posted on 5/31/11 09:35 PM
I'm a huge comic book movie fan, and Thor did not disappoint me! I do think that it suffered a little bit by trying to tie itself to the Avengers movie coming out next year. Hopefully Captain America doesn't suffer the same problem. That's just a minor issue thought.
Hemsworth owns the role of Thor and Hiddleston was pretty close to perfect as Loki. Don't know how much of an audience it will draw outside of fans of the genre, but who cares! I'm happy!
Posted on 5/31/11 09:26 PM
The best thing I could say about this movie is that there is nothing bad about it. The acting, story, and directing was pretty much note perfect. It was also funnier than I was expecting, but I wasn't expecting it to be funny at all.
The problem I had with it was that the movie did absolutely nothing for me. I wasn't moved at all by the story.
To me for a movie to be "Best Picture" it has to be more than the sum of it's parts. No Country For Old Men, Brokeback Mountain, and even Shakespear in Love, (all movies I normally wouldn't think about watching except for the fact that they won Oscars) all won me over in the end and I understood what the fuss was about.
I think this would be GREAT as an HBO oringinal movie, but not worthy of an Oscar.
Posted on 5/31/11 09:09 PM
This was FAR better than I was expecting. Similar to "The Hangover" the Pub for this movie did not prepare me for just how funny this was!
I know alot of people are probably not going to go see this because it is thought of as a "chick flick", but that's doing this movie a dis-service. Bridesmades is the funniest MOVIE I've seen in years! Better than Hangover and destroys Hangover 2.
You can't go wrong if you go see this one!
Posted on 5/31/11 08:57 PM
Can't say I didn't laugh at all, because ultimately I did. Even heartly a couple of times! I just didn't do it as often as the movie was expecting me to, and no where near as much as I wanted to.
The movie was note for note exactly like the original. Instead of Vegas it was Bangkok, instead of stealing a tiger they steal a monkey, instead of a missing tooth it was a tatoo. Even Stu had another one of his songs about their adventure! It was better than the 1st one, but quite frankly the fact that they even did another one had me rolling my eyes.
The ending was terrible. In the original you could see how they figured out where there missing friend was, but this was a real reach!
Again there were parts that were "LOL" funny. Mostly in the 1st half of the movie. There just were not enough to call the movie good in my opinion. Wait until it comes out on video or better yet go and rent the original!