Sucker Punch (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> Sucker Punch (25/3/2011 6:33:56 PM)

Post your comments on this article




warren7355 -> (25/3/2011 6:33:56 PM)

So 50's or 60's then? Review says both...

Let's be honest though, this was never going to win any prizes for character development and plot, this is, much like 300, pure eye candy, and as such i think i will be going to watch it.




captainrentboy -> RE: Sucker Punch (25/3/2011 6:56:30 PM)

The US press are ripping this flick to shreds, I don't know if the sources over there tend to favour the more arty farty side of movies, but they definitely aint liking this one.
Which is why I was pleasantly surprised to see Empire and Total Film give it a 3/5, pretty much what I thought it would get. So hopefully it'll at least be a fun/exciting watch, if not the most mentally challanging of movies.
Can't be as God awful as Battle LA, surely.[&:]




Deviation -> RE: Sucker Punch (25/3/2011 7:04:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: captainrentboy

The US press are ripping this flick to shreds, I don't know if the sources over there tend to favour the more arty farty side of movies, but they definitely aint liking this one.
Which is why I was pleasantly surprised to see Empire and Total Film give it a 3/5, pretty much what I thought it would get. So hopefully it'll at least be a fun/exciting watch, if not the most mentally challanging of movies.
Can't be as God awful as Battle LA, surely.[&:]


what is this i don't even...


Anyways, they are ripping it for the script and the lack of any decent character writing apparently, which is a shame as I was really excited for it. Will watch on dvd then.




Judge -> (25/3/2011 8:27:27 PM)

A pretty-to-look Zack Snyder film that lacks emotion. Not the most shocked I've ever been I admit.




Bluehawk -> (26/3/2011 1:34:47 AM)

It looks bloody good. Like Scott Pilgrim vs The World an awesome film, only understood by gamers.




Jaredevans -> Better Visuals Than Avatar (26/3/2011 6:27:15 AM)

I attended the US premiere @ the Chinese Graumans and as a huge Zach Synder fan, I was bitterly dissapointed by Sucker Punch. It lacks any coherence and you really feel nothing for the characters. Empires review is accurate. Visually it's stunning, and definately not boring but a film should always be more than special effects. Watchmen is a perfect example of balancing sfx and plot, unfortunately Sucker Punch didnt live up to Zach Synders previous works.
It does however make me very excited about Synders Man Of Steel.




andy12 -> (26/3/2011 7:13:31 AM)

Its a pretty entertaining film it has great visual effects and its worth some serious watching, the action sequences are well put together (i mean it IS Zack Snyder) but i do agree that the emotional core is not at its fullest it could have been better but at the end you dont walk outside completely dissapointed.




Notmyrealusername -> From the same people who gave attack of the clones 5 stars! (26/3/2011 9:00:36 AM)

Sucker punch has a 20% rating on rotten tomatoes.

No offense Empire, its not that I dont trust your reviews (ok it is a bit like that)

its just that sometimes you give a film that is pretty much buried by every other reviewer a pass. And it makes me question your credibility and consistency.

What are the chances youll drop this down to a 2 star on the blu ray release?




Wozza31 -> Text to Star inconsistency (26/3/2011 11:45:50 AM)

Now I haven't seen this yet so I am not judging the film (although I'm convinced it'll be nothing more than vaccuous nonsense with nice images and bland performances: basically everything Snyder's made) , but that review reads like a 2 star (at best) review. Basically you say it looks nice, makes no sense, has no characters to relate to and it's confused. Nothing is said that justifies that 3rd star. But Empire has given this movie so much coverage it's almost as if it can't give it a star rating below 3. Wait til it comes out on DVD and we'll get a star rating that matches the review,




BelfastBoy -> RE: Text to Star inconsistency (26/3/2011 4:34:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wozza31

Now I haven't seen this yet so I am not judging the film (although I'm convinced it'll be nothing more than vaccuous nonsense with nice images and bland performances: basically everything Snyder's made) , but that review reads like a 2 star (at best) review. Basically you say it looks nice, makes no sense, has no characters to relate to and it's confused. Nothing is said that justifies that 3rd star. But Empire has given this movie so much coverage it's almost as if it can't give it a star rating below 3. Wait til it comes out on DVD and we'll get a star rating that matches the review,


I agree. Based on the review, Sucker Punch sounds like a total mess - non-existent characterisation, lazy titillation, nice to look at but also so confusingly framed that it's impossible to work out what level of reality (or otherwise) it's meant to be taking place in. So 3 stars seems surprising given that it seemed (to me anyway) that the reviewer was bewildered and certainly not impressed.

Many months ago, when Empire started hyping up this film, I predicted somewhere (probably in the future films thread) that it was likely to be another of those increasingly frequent occasions when the magazine - the majority of whose staff appear to be unashamed gamers and graphic novel aficionados - gets it wrong. I don't want to tread over old ground again, but films beloved of Empire recently (Scott Pilgrim, Kick Ass etc) don't seem to be finding these huge audiences that more obvious films manage. But, the thing that I would like to make clear is that obviously in all cases the reviewers are entitled to their opinions and I never doubt anyone's independence or integrity. However, would it be fair to say that in many cases, the pop culture interests of reviewers are not matched by either the readership, or those who go to the cinema?




Spaldron -> RE: (26/3/2011 4:35:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluehawk

It looks bloody good. Like Scott Pilgrim vs The World an awesome film, only understood by gamers.


I'm a gamer and Scott Pilgrim was shit.




Spaldron -> RE: Text to Star inconsistency (26/3/2011 4:37:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BelfastBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wozza31

Now I haven't seen this yet so I am not judging the film (although I'm convinced it'll be nothing more than vaccuous nonsense with nice images and bland performances: basically everything Snyder's made) , but that review reads like a 2 star (at best) review. Basically you say it looks nice, makes no sense, has no characters to relate to and it's confused. Nothing is said that justifies that 3rd star. But Empire has given this movie so much coverage it's almost as if it can't give it a star rating below 3. Wait til it comes out on DVD and we'll get a star rating that matches the review,


I agree. Based on the review, Sucker Punch sounds like a total mess - non-existent characterisation, lazy titillation, nice to look at but also so confusingly framed that it's impossible to work out what level of reality (or otherwise) it's meant to be taking place in. So 3 stars seems surprising given that it seemed (to me anyway) that the reviewer was bewildered and certainly not impressed.

Many months ago, when Empire started hyping up this film, I predicted somewhere (probably in the future films thread) that it was likely to be another of those increasingly frequent occasions when the magazine - the majority of whose staff appear to be unashamed gamers and graphic novel aficionados - gets it wrong. I don't want to tread over old ground again, but films beloved of Empire recently (Scott Pilgrim, Kick Ass etc) don't seem to be finding these huge audiences that more obvious films manage. But, the thing that I would like to make clear is that obviously in all cases the reviewers are entitled to their opinions and I never doubt anyone's independence or integrity. However, would it be fair to say that in many cases, the pop culture interests of reviewers are not matched by either the readership, or those who go to the cinema?


This ^




Snake-Eyes -> Sucker Punch Review (26/3/2011 6:01:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluehawk

It looks bloody good. Like Scott Pilgrim vs The World an awesome film, only understood by gamers.



I'm a Gamer and this statement makes no sense whatsoever.




Snake-Eyes -> RE: Text to Star inconsistency (26/3/2011 6:03:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BelfastBoy


I don't want to tread over old ground again, but films beloved of Empire recently (Scott Pilgrim, Kick Ass etc) don't seem to be finding these huge audiences that more obvious films manage.



WORD.




captainrentboy -> RE: Sucker Punch (26/3/2011 6:29:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

quote:

ORIGINAL: captainrentboy

The US press are ripping this flick to shreds, I don't know if the sources over there tend to favour the more arty farty side of movies, but they definitely aint liking this one.
Which is why I was pleasantly surprised to see Empire and Total Film give it a 3/5, pretty much what I thought it would get. So hopefully it'll at least be a fun/exciting watch, if not the most mentally challanging of movies.
Can't be as God awful as Battle LA, surely.[&:]


what is this i don't even...


Anyways, they are ripping it for the script and the lack of any decent character writing apparently, which is a shame as I was really excited for it. Will watch on dvd then.



Movie snobs/elitists, they exist, they're out there, I've heard their ramblings. The guys that would rather murder their parents than admit they ever got a smidgen of entertainment from a Michael Bay film.
Although it was silly of me to suggest that these negative reviews are all coming from folk like that.
Any flick that's hitting 20% on Rotten Tomatoes probably is a bit of a stinker. Shame, I've really liked all of Snyder's efforts so far and was chuffed that he was on Superman duties. Watching this looks like it might change that.[&:]




BatFan -> RE: Sucker Punch (26/3/2011 8:45:15 PM)

Scott Pilgrim Vs The World was my favourite film of last year and i'm pretty sure it'll grow to be one of my favourites of all time. Kick-Ass was one of my favourite films last year and one of my favourite comic book films. If Sucker Punch is gonna end up being anything like either of them then i'm looking forward to it.




badsanta -> But Cheeks (27/3/2011 6:00:32 AM)

"Browning fights in a pleated skirt so short it barely covers her butt-cheeks"

And quite frankly, that's all the reason I need to watch it.




Aticus -> Bold Statement: (27/3/2011 8:36:08 AM)

When Empire gives big films 3 stars it means they are terrible. This will be terrible,




sephiroth7 -> looks like fun (27/3/2011 11:57:26 AM)

Looking forward to this. Haven't enjoyed any of Zack's output so far but I'm hoping he's learned to bring the fun in to his pics.




nhassell -> RE: looks like fun (27/3/2011 2:11:02 PM)

I'm seeing this Thursday evening. Despite the review, I am still very excited for it.




hatebox -> RE: looks like fun (27/3/2011 2:40:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sephiroth7

Looking forward to this. Haven't enjoyed any of Zack's output so far but I'm hoping he's learned to bring the fun in to his pics.


From the sounds of it you definitely, definitely won't like this film then.




darko18 -> (27/3/2011 4:20:50 PM)

Exactly the review I was expecting. All style, no substance. Sigh. I'll still go and see, but I'm afraid Snyder might not be worth my attention anymore. Dawn and Watchmen were great, but maybe he is just a music video director.




thepluginbaby -> RE: (27/3/2011 5:21:14 PM)

I've just started doing a film review segment for local radio, and I know that for the sake of being professional I am going to have to sit down and watch this movie... Not looking forward to it based on what I've heard. A couple of months ago The Sunday Times did a piece on it calling it the death of intelligence in cinema, which I feel a bit skeptical towards in light of Inception.

But anyways, the trailer for sucker punch was too much for me and I've never been a great fan of Zach Snyder, save for the remake of Dawn of the Dead, which wasn't a patch on the original but had its moments.

And to the person who said this is for gamers. [:@] [shakes fist] 'cos dragons fighting biplanes is obviously my crack...

there was an interesting article on Kotaku about how self knowingly awful this movie is... http://kotaku.com/#!5785833/sucker-punch-goes-beyond-awful-to-become-commentary-on-the-death-of-moviemaking




adambatman82 -> RE: Sucker Punch Review (27/3/2011 7:05:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Snake-Eyes


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluehawk

It looks bloody good. Like Scott Pilgrim vs The World an awesome film, only understood by gamers.



I'm a Gamer and this statement makes no sense whatsoever.


I'm NOT a gamer, and quite liked Scott Pilgrim. So yes, nonsense.




Super Hans -> RE: But Cheeks (27/3/2011 7:28:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: badsanta

"Browning fights in a pleated skirt so short it barely covers her butt-cheeks"

And quite frankly, that's all the reason I need to watch it.


Yeah, put me down for two! [:D]  I did like the sound of this but got put off by the trailer and the 12 certificate - I was hoping for something a heavier, maybe (not in story really, mre action-wise).




Deviation -> RE: Sucker Punch Review (27/3/2011 7:30:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Snake-Eyes


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluehawk

It looks bloody good. Like Scott Pilgrim vs The World an awesome film, only understood by gamers.



I'm a Gamer and this statement makes no sense whatsoever.


Did you see SPvsTW?




sanchia -> RE: Sucker Punch Review (27/3/2011 7:35:19 PM)

I think Scott Pilgrim has taken over this thread. Sucker Punch looks like a visual treat although I get the impression that the plot etc shall be a bit lacking (much as in Scott Pilgrim [;)]). Hopefully I shall be mobile again before it vanishes from the cinema screens although I get the impression it shall be decidedly average (like Scott Pilgrim [;)]).




Deviation -> RE: Sucker Punch (27/3/2011 7:48:54 PM)

 
quote:

ORIGINAL: captainrentboy

Movie snobs/elitists, they exist, they're out there, I've heard their ramblings. The guys that would rather murder their parents than admit they ever got a smidgen of entertainment from a Michael Bay film.


Ah yes horrible people those. Those are snobs and not arty farty, which is a silly, dumb word. Still, how can anyone not enjoy The Rock?

quote:


Although it was silly of me to suggest that these negative reviews are all coming from folk like that.


Surely you mean quite silly?






bobatim -> RE: Sucker Punch Review (27/3/2011 8:01:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Snake-Eyes


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluehawk

It looks bloody good. Like Scott Pilgrim vs The World an awesome film, only understood by gamers.



I'm a Gamer and this statement makes no sense whatsoever.


I'm NOT a gamer, and quite liked Scott Pilgrim. So yes, nonsense.


I'm not a gamer and I didn't like Scott Pilgrim. What does this mean? [:-]




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.078125