A55 Velcro's Profile - Rotten Tomatoes

Want-to-See Movies

This user has no Want to See movie selections yet.

Want-to-See TV

This user has no Want to See TV selections yet.

Rating History

The Passion of the Christ
6 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes


but seriously this movie overlooks everything that was the teachings of Jesus Christ and only looks at his brutal death at the hands of people who weren't entirely at fault with a good helping of anti-semitism.

The Book of Eli
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

There are so many post apocalyptic movies that fail in the 3rd act. I Am Legend failed, Daybreakers failed (Though it's not really much of a post apocalyptic movie) and this movie failed, though this movie's failure is much less of a failure and therefor much less damaging than the other two.

Like both movies mentioned above this movie has a very well made set up that takes something that has been used many times before and adds a little something new to it along with many details (Chap stick and cleaning wipes being valuable and shampoo too). It's main story is very different from most post apocalyptic movies in that it's story revolves around a certain book, namely a King James Bible. When they first started mentioning the book I thought I was in for an overly preachy movie, but I was pleasantly surprised. The villain of the movie says some interesting things about the book, like how it can be used to influence the weak to do the bidding of men like himself, yet the hero knows that when put in evil hands the book can be used for no good.

The acting in the movie is decent and some of the characters couldn't get any more generic but the best part of the movie is the cinematography, showing the blasted landscape nearly devoid of life.

The violence in this movie is a heavy contrast to the aura the movie gives to the word of the book and very realistic for the setting, though I dislike how the hero claims to be a man who follows the word of the book yet still kills anyone who gets their hand on him. I mean he could have injured them or incapacitated them so they weren't a threat to him. This is mentioned briefly later on in the film and the character is a little sorry for what he has done though it is still a glaring flaw in the character and the tone of the movie.

Once the movie is fully set up and we know why certain things happen (shaking hands) the movie starts to wander around for a bit longer and almost doesn't know where to go even though it knows exactly what direction it's going in. The ending twists were decent but somewhat unbelievable. At the very end when he reaches his destination the movie picks up during the revelation of these twists but it slowly becomes what I feared it would be in the first place, preachy.

If it weren't for the preachy ending I would say this is a solid B movie, but because the writers didn't show restraint and turned what could have been an interesting twist into an unbelievable one, maybe because they didn't know where to go, this movie gets lowered a little. If this movie didn't pay as much attention to detail and didn't set up a very believable and desolate world I would give this a D but it's little things save it.

An uneven C movie, half D, almost half B, and A+ setup.

Daybreakers (2010)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

This movie reminds me a lot of I Am Legend.
It takes place in a world in the future where almost everyone is a vampire and there are very few humans left, the key difference being the type of vampirism (the type in I Am Legend is more like a zombie infection than the type in the book it's loosely based off of and this film.) It comes as no surprise to me that they both have around the same RT score. Both are movies that have a very good concept, good central characters (will smith is as good in that movie as all 5 or so central characters in this film put together) a very good First act and a pretty good middle act, but then turn to utter crap in the 3rd.
I Think the reason both movies have a really bad third act is because they wanted to keep the film under an hour, not necessarily the film makers themselves, I'm guessing it's the studios. It is my belief that studio businessmen are stuck in the olden days of the past, in the days after the glut of around 4 hour movies in the 50s and early 60s, when 1 hour and 30 minute movies were common. They underestimate people's attention spans and assume that because everyone can watch videos on youtube under 15 minutes they don't want to see 2 hour plus movies, when this has been disproved time and time again with some of the longest movies being at the top of the box office (in fact I can't think of one movie under 2 hours in the top 10 for box office, even adjusted for ticket price).
I honestly think this movie could have been much better if they had made the first and second acts a bit longer, and the 3rd act way longer than it was. But instead they chose to use a cop out near the end that didn't work very well and didn't even wrap up the loose ends, just simply cut them with characters' deaths.
Here, like I Am Legend, is a film that could have been a great film if the ending hadn't been rushed with bad plot decisions to keep the movie under 2 hours. The same goes for other movies like Last Airbender, except that entire movie was rushed. Studios need to realize that the public doesn't care about length as long as their interest in the movie is kept.

Predators (2010)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

I actually enjoyed this movie without feeling bad about it. From all the negative reviews I thought it would be worse than what I got, which was actually a pretty entertaining movie. Sure I don't like what they did near the end with Fishburne [SPOILER]Killed him off way to quick, I actually liked his character and wanted to see him kick some predator ass along with his... "friend"[/SPOILER] I also liked the whole 2 faction thing, and the combination of Jungle scenes with rocky and industrial metalic scenes in the middle. I did think it was sort of weird for Brody to have that mud on him when he didn't need it since he was using fire, and they did tend to use a little too much of the first movie near the end, but overall it was new enough and interesting enough to be enjoyable, although not as good as it could have been. I do not know why it is getting so panned especially by the top critics. Then again the top critics didn't favor the first one that much either.

Inception (2010)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

This movie is near perfection. I was on the edge of my seat half the time, and the other half I was either thinking hard trying to figure out what was going to happen or was in a complete dream state (this is the first movie about dreams that actually had dream sequences that seemed like real dreams, like limbo). There are a few minor flaws that I don't really want to get into, lets just say there were a few parts that seemed off once you started to really think about them, and those few parts prevent this from being a perfect 100%. All in all this is a movie YOU HAVE TO SEE! GO WATCH IT NOW AND PREPARE YOUR F*CK TO BE BRAINED, er... BE YOUR BRAINED TO F*CK... WHAT EVER JUST GO SEE IT!