Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

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

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

- 22/2/2008 9:02:20 AM

Cameron1975Williams

Posts: 200
Joined: 5/12/2005
From: Cardiff

I don't wanna make excuses for the man but I hear it was a one helluva grueling shoot. In my opinion, Stallone took too much on by writing, directing and starring in. He should've let someone else carry the strain while he worked on developing the script and adding some action sequences for Rambo.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 121

Lately... - 22/2/2008 10:13:03 AM

tallaght24

Posts: 734
Joined: 20/2/2007

...Empire's reviews smack of appealing to the masses, or better yet, the film studios who provide the freebies and the walk on parts (i'm talking to you Chris Hewitt). Some people have no shame.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 122

Empire does not like SLY! - 22/2/2008 10:17:20 AM

stephendowie

Posts: 12
Joined: 16/8/2006

This review is typical of how Empire treats Sylvester Stallone.
Now everyone has an opinion and a right to it but it is clear from this that Roberto Sadovski does not like the Rambo series. The Rambo films have never ever been oscar material and thats not what they are meant to be about.
When ever Sly has been interviewed in the past by Empire all they do is focus on his misses not his successes, and they always bring up the Razzie awards - see last issue when they were going over Escape To Victory, just another in a long line of poor articles on Sly.
Sly is one of the most successful movie stars of all time and that should be respected if not at least acknowledged by a movie magazine.
This film was great fun and fits in perfectly with a great franchise.
By the way on Empires 20 things we love about Rambo they incorrectly state, again! that Rambo 3 bombed when in fact they film was a success - and in all honesty Rambo 3 is the most fun of the whole saga.

< Message edited by stephendowie -- 22/2/2008 10:18:50 AM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 123

Head of nail...meet hammer. - 22/2/2008 10:22:25 AM

tallaght24

Posts: 734
Joined: 20/2/2007

stephendowie just nailed it, but I don't think it's only with Rambo, I feel Empire choose the people who will least like the movie to review it, because their twisted logic thinks that it will result in a balanced review, as we see it's more of a biased/negative one.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 124

Hitting people with rocks in a Burlap? - 22/2/2008 2:40:53 PM

markymark123

Posts: 22
Joined: 18/2/2008

If you thought this film was good and want to tell people on the forum-take note: Okay, here's how it works. Forums are invented so that readers can tell the writers what they think of their views and reviews. At Empire it's a different thing: Olly Richards says this "Your suggestion that Rambo is better than There Will Be Blood is, to my mind, absolutely staggering" and an Empire moderator wants to hit people with a Burlap full of rocks too. Who the heck uses the word Burlap? So Empire invented a forum where they openly defend their position-no less than three times! The point is this, the magazine became out of touch and out of date a long time ago. Sorry to offend, but I judge films on whether they entertain or not. I am not in the pockets of film producers and directors-if you want unbiased reviews go elsewhere. This magazine has become far too pally with the film industry and far too snobbish for the masses. If you are not related to Stallone and think the reviews are unfair, make sure you post on this site and let them know how you feel. Just don't be surprised if you get the magazine's Editor replying to you, trying to defend himself and talking down to you.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 125

Sadovski - 22/2/2008 2:43:36 PM

markymark123

Posts: 22
Joined: 18/2/2008

Oh, and by the way "Rambo having spent 20 years as a fisherman." Have you actually watched this film Sadovski?

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 126

Sadovski - 22/2/2008 2:43:55 PM

markymark123

Posts: 22
Joined: 18/2/2008

Oh, and by the way "Rambo having spent 20 years as a fisherman." Have you actually watched this film Sadovski?

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 127

And you gave Death Proof 4 stars? - 22/2/2008 3:58:54 PM

markymark123

Posts: 22
Joined: 18/2/2008

Oh so that's how Hostel II got three stars, thanks for that info. Also how in the hell could you give Death Proof 4 stars and Rambo only 2 stars? I guess it all depends who you have on your friends list...

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 128

Hey... - 22/2/2008 4:42:13 PM

iconzero

Posts: 104
Joined: 31/8/2006

It was better than the other two sequels, the actual character of Rambo diminishes with each film though. In First Blood, John Rambo was an actual person with heavy problems. II & III turned him into just another dickhead with a gun.
Rambo 4 is good because it does what it says on the tin, and doesn't make much of an attempt at a plot.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 129

RE: Rambo - 22/2/2008 4:56:47 PM

Neth

Posts: 4750
Joined: 3/10/2005

In turn deeply stupid and repugnantly gratuitious (and on many occassions, both at once), Rambo makes for a visceral but empty timewaster. Any serious point Stallone was trying to convey is smothered as soon as the limbs start flying, and no doubt packs of morons will flock to see the copious exploding heads and bullet-ridden children with a triumphant roar of "Cool!" or "Awesome!"

That said, the film betrays its dumb script with some fantastic visuals, and the carnage is undeniably impressive in its excessiveness. Even more vitally, Stallone still cuts the mustard as a credible action lead - making his younger co-stars look like rank amateurs in his wake.

Anyone still braying about the loss of the Calor-gas stink of their local video library will no doubt get some serious kicks here. The faint-of-heart, or those looking for a compelling story and interesting characters, should probably steer clear. ***

_____________________________

"You taste like a burger. I don't like you anymore."

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 130

- 22/2/2008 8:04:52 PM

willchadwick

Posts: 310
Joined: 13/3/2007

Violent. Too violent, cardboard dialogue, poor acting and senseless Predator action.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 131

- 22/2/2008 8:04:54 PM

willchadwick

Posts: 310
Joined: 13/3/2007

Violent. Too violent, cardboard dialogue, poor acting and senseless Predator action.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 132

RE: - 22/2/2008 8:37:48 PM

Porrohman

Posts: 627
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Nottingham

quote:

ORIGINAL: willchadwick

Violent. Too violent, cardboard dialogue, poor acting and senseless Predator action.

You`ve given me an idea for a new movie -

VIOLENT CARDBOARD PREDATOR requiem

i can`t lose.

< Message edited by Porrohman -- 23/2/2008 7:32:07 AM >

(in reply to willchadwick)

Post #: 133

Opinions Opinions Opinions! For me, RAMBO is as it shou... - 22/2/2008 10:25:08 PM

rockybalboa

Posts: 9
Joined: 4/1/2006
From: NY

Having just returned from seeing the new RAMBO movie, i have to say, i loved it! But to love it you have to be a fan of RAMBO. Im not pleased with a 2 star review but i can see why it was given. It doesn't really matter, it's only opinions.
There were two particular parts for me that really stood out for Rambo fans - 1) the flashback/dream sequence was awesome (taking it back like he did with Rocky), and 2) the ending (que the theme music, great walk off - great feeling!)

If there is one thing i am dissapointed about with EMPIRE, is that they didn't really touch on Sly's directing. They said with Rocky that Stallone is a better director than people give him credit for, why did'nt they give him credit for Rambo?? Can't knock his directing, Sly knows how to capture the moment. Again this is just an opinion so who really cares? -I will still continue to buy your magazine because even when you may dissapoint, you always come back with something else to cheer me up i.e. 20 reasons why Empire loves Rambo (hope to see something of that nature in print though :o)

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 134

Greeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaat - 22/2/2008 10:37:06 PM

radski

Posts: 4
Joined: 22/2/2008

Just got back from the FLIX..this movie KICKED serious ass....great story great body count...direction was fine....4/5 all the way

EMPIRE I`m losing in faith your sorry asses...2 stars sort it OUT ...
It did exactaly what it said on the tin and did it well

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 135

Greeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaat - 22/2/2008 10:42:49 PM

radski

Posts: 4
Joined: 22/2/2008

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 136

RE: Greeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaat - 22/2/2008 11:35:45 PM

Chief Wiggum

Posts: 1921
Joined: 30/9/2005

I've just finished watching this film and felt I could share my thoughts, we'll start off by going through what I thought minute by minute of the film.

0mins - haven't seen a rambo film in a while, i wonder if this is any good?
2mins - Rambo got fat, yo! (in my defence I've also been watching The Wire today

)
1hr30mins- ooh the credits!

My problem is that my favourite rambo film has always been first blood, not because of rambo kicking redneck "ass" in the woods, but for the other, more important part of the story that deals with the difficulty that soldiers find when it comes to leaving that life and becoming a civilian again, and this film beared no resemblance to that in any way, there was no decent characterisation of anybody, nothing that made you sit back afterwards and think, there wasn't even a decent narrative. What there was was mindless, relentless and unrealistic violence. if you want to sit back and let your pot-addled mind turn off for a while whilst watching rambo rip a guys throat out, see this film. if you want to see a film that will make you think/cry/laugh/care go and see anything else before you sit down to watch this film, the only thoughts that will cross your mind when you leave the cinema will be "Did I seriously pay money for that?" and "what kind of flat-out idiot actually enjoyed this peice of mediocre toss?"
When it comes to giving this film a rating well, as a stand alone film I have to disagree with empire's review, two stars gave it at least one star too many. The story was weak, the supporting actors were a little hammy to say the least, and the film managed to take a serious and potentially thought provoking situation and turned it into little more than an excuse to turn as many stomachs as they possibly could. But then I thought of the other rambo flicks, and the Commandos and others of the ilk and then it makes sense, with the progression of special effects that we've seen between this and the last Rambo film the standard Rambo demographic just want to see big kills with as much blood and guts as possible, with the level of gore in your average video game these days they had to make up for the lack of a decent story, otherwise the mouthbreathers of this world would feel ripped off, so when you compare it to most of the other films of its ilk it's not bad, certainly average, three stars perhaps. so bearing in mind the score as a film in it's own right and as a film in a series...
once again empire you are correct two stars is all this deserves, and even then it should count its self lucky.

_____________________________

The Empire Forum Photo Competition - join now for fun and profit. okay no profit, or fun. but do it anyway!

(in reply to radski)

Post #: 137

RE: Greeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaat - 22/2/2008 11:38:35 PM

darth silas

Posts: 4949
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: My living room

SPOILERS AHOY!...

This film was raw and brutal in its depiction of the horrors of war and close up combat.The attack on the karen village was the most frightening thing iv seen in the cinema since the opening of Saving private ryan.

Stallone is just an awesome presence in this movie.My favourite scene is where he takes out the burmese guys with his bow and arrows.Just awesome!.

The final battle is pretty much the same as Rambo 3,with the rebels coming to the rescue,but is terrifically filmed and really intense.Loved it when Rambo gutted the Burmese militia general with his knife at the end.The whole audience cheered!

BUT.And it is a big BUT,The film is WAY too short.Just as its getting really good,its over.However,its way better than some films that Empire gave higer ratings to.

Four stars.

_____________________________

Star Wars:Episodes 1,2,3,4,5,6.Taken together they are one giant movie and it is the greatest movie EVER.

(in reply to radski)

Post #: 138

RE: Greeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaat - 22/2/2008 11:38:57 PM

Chief Wiggum

Posts: 1921
Joined: 30/9/2005

)
1hr30mins- ooh the credits!

My problem is that my favourite rambo film has always been first blood, not because of rambo kicking redneck "ass" in the woods, but for the other, more important part of the story that deals with the difficulty that soldiers find when it comes to leaving that life and becoming a civilian again, and this film beared no resemblance to that in any way, there was no decent characterisation of anybody, nothing that made you sit back afterwards and think, there wasn't even a decent narrative. What there was was mindless, relentless and unrealistic violence. if you want to sit back and let your pot-addled mind turn off for a while whilst watching rambo rip a guys throat out, see this film. if you want to see a film that will make you think/cry/laugh/care go and see anything else before you sit down to watch this film, the only thoughts that will cross your mind when you leave the cinema will be "Did I seriously pay money for that?" and "what kind of flat-out idiot actually enjoyed this peice of mediocre toss?"
When it comes to giving this film a rating well, as a stand alone film I have to disagree with empire's review, two stars gave it at least one star too many. The story was weak, the supporting actors were a little hammy to say the least, and the film managed to take a serious and potentially thought provoking situation and turned it into little more than an excuse to turn as many stomachs as they possibly could. But then I thought of the other rambo flicks, and the Commandos and others of the ilk and then it makes sense, with the progression of special effects that we've seen between this and the last Rambo film the standard Rambo demographic just want to see big kills with as much blood and guts as possible, with the level of gore in your average video game these days they had to make up for the lack of a decent story, otherwise the mouthbreathers of this world would feel ripped off, so when you compare it to most of the other films of its ilk it's not bad, certainly average, three stars perhaps. so bearing in mind the score as a film in it's own right and as a film in a series...
once again empire you are correct two stars is all this deserves, and even then it should count its self lucky.

EDIT: Just noticed the double post, if a kindly mod could delete this one.

< Message edited by Chief Wiggum -- 24/2/2008 2:20:06 PM >

_____________________________

The Empire Forum Photo Competition - join now for fun and profit. okay no profit, or fun. but do it anyway!

(in reply to radski)

Post #: 139

RE: Greeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaat - 23/2/2008 4:36:28 AM

Rhubarb

Posts: 24398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: No Direction Home

Rambo starts out as an attempt to make a serious point about Burma, with disturbingly realistic scenes of violence. My initial thought was wondering if I really was watching a Rambo film or some kind of documentry. However the tone shifts drastically when Sly appears as his titular 'hero'. As with Rocky, he plays it fairly sensible, with the build up being the lead taking your point of view, that my god, he must be too old for this (shit). When he finally decides he is gonna kick some ass though its all a bit over the top. We do get Sly's promise of action as bloody as the Saw films, but it completely buries the original serious message under an absolute deluge of ultraviolence. No doubt this will delight the action fan equivelent of a Saw fan, but anyone who's looking for anything deeper....well probably isn't queing to see Rambo actually.
Its an adequete timewaster, stupid enough to not be taken too seriously, clever enough to know where its strengths are often enough for it to work. Its not the outragously good 5 star film some have been predicting as a knee-jerk to Empire's review. Its just an ok way to spend a couple of hours.

3/5

_____________________________

Team Ginge
WWLD?

quote:

ORIGINAL: FritzlFan

You organisational skills sicken me, Rhubarb.

(in reply to Chief Wiggum)

Post #: 140

It's a Rambo Film! - 23/2/2008 10:59:22 AM

ageinghero

Posts: 1
Joined: 23/2/2008

What were any of you expecting? As a film, it gathers momentum at breakneck speed with little in the way of plot...but what really needs to be consumed here?. There's no twist essential...no cover-up to be dissected, no reverse sequencing to challenge the little grey cells, It's a Rambo film! & thank the big guy for that! The film is brutal. There is emotion where necessary, there is heart...where necessary, then there is Action galore. Once the film kicks in...it barely lets you breathe for heart-pounding adrenaline...There are good guys...there are bad (classic good versus evil) in it's make up & the film spends very little time monologueing what we can physically see with our own eyes. Sly relys on this to tell the story (not much dialogue needed). The film looks glorious (Well directed) and sounds deafeningly stunning! The explosions are not heroic...they're terrifying & the action is about as sickeningly realistic as it gets. A hard film to watch & a hard film in general...but If you like hard movies that have been so ever lacking in recent years, this movie will rekidle the thirst for more. A welcome return for sure, if only the short running time leaves you wanting more.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 141

OK - fab OTT violence but bad dialogue - 23/2/2008 11:55:43 AM

Makman

Posts: 128
Joined: 17/1/2008

Saw the film yesterday, while I am glad Rambo stuck with its brutal violence (less cartoony than Rambos 2 and 3). I did feel some of the mercenary & missionary characters were mis-cast and had some dreadful dialogue. The idea of Rambo working with mercenaries made the film slightly more plausible (than him saving the day all by himself) - although I was hoping for a Dirty Dozen, Aliens or even Predator feel. Also, the CGI blood is a bit iffy in places and there is a BIG gaff where Rambo stabs a villian with a knife - lots of CGI blood but then his knife is completely spotless clean (Doh).

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 142

Rambo's back and bigger than ever. - 23/2/2008 12:57:50 PM

Maddogbifftannen

Posts: 15
Joined: 24/10/2006

now i went to see this film last night and it was everything i expected. i have just read the empire review and i would just like to ask ARE YOU BLIND? this was a very very good action move, i'm not quite sure what empire expected from it, were they looking for a saving privet ryan? well stallone new exactly what we wanted to see he new how he needed to end the now for movie collection. the violence in this film is what’s missing in most action movies these days, now i'm not saying i want to see some get decapitated in every action movie or some one needs to get the thought ripped out. but the impact of every thing was perfect. there was only one problem with this film that i can see and that was the mercenary’s in it, they could have been classic characters but there two busy being english stereo types. so stallone you did a grate job of this his performance was grate i was convinced that this man could do everything he’s doing. this is a 4 star movie no less.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 143

RE: Hitting people with rocks in a Burlap? - 23/2/2008 1:29:50 PM

Olly Richards

Posts: 597
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: markymark123

If you thought this film was good and want to tell people on the forum-take note: Okay, here's how it works. Forums are invented so that readers can tell the writers what they think of their views and reviews. At Empire it's a different thing: Olly Richards says this "Your suggestion that Rambo is better than There Will Be Blood is, to my mind, absolutely staggering" and an Empire moderator wants to hit people with a Burlap full of rocks too. Who the heck uses the word Burlap? So Empire invented a forum where they openly defend their position-no less than three times! The point is this, the magazine became out of touch and out of date a long time ago.

That's an extremely unfair misquote. Here's what I actually said to you: "Your suggestion that Rambo is better than There Will Be Blood is, to my mind, absolutely staggering. Even if you don't like the latter, I don't see how the level of artistry and cinematic creativity is comparable. I completely disagree with you, but I'm not going to say you can't have that opinion because I have no right to. I'll respect the opinion of anyone who's seen a film and made up their own mind".

I was saying that all reviews are opinion; there is no right or wrong. You said our review was wrong, questioned our ethics and said we were lying about how entertaining it is. I refute that. I have never told any reader that their opinion is incorrect and I don't think anyone else on the staff has either. I also don't see what is wrong with us defending our position on something. If someone publicly said that you were terrible at what you do, would you not offer some kind of counter argument? I hope I was always civil to you and didn't intend any comments any other way.

We often enter into discussions with users of the forum about all manner of subjects. We mainly do this in the magazine and online feedback forums, which is where you initially posted, because they are intended as a place for dialogue between us and the readers. We consider it a service to respond to feedback and, I hope, many users welcome it. You are absolutely entitled to offer feedback either positive or negative, but please recognise our right to respond to either. And please do not knowingly misquote me in order to misrepresent my opinion.

(in reply to markymark123)

Post #: 144

In response to Olly Richards - 23/2/2008 3:06:42 PM

markymark123

Posts: 22
Joined: 18/2/2008

Hello Olly,
I am sorry but I cannot see how I have misquoted you; if you feel I have then I apologise. I also apologise for going slightly over the top before, but my whole point has been about the objectivity of your magazine's review. This film has never tried to pass itself off as an oscar worthy epic, it is a bog standard action film and should be reviewed on that merit alone which I think your reviewer has missed. In regard to the violence depicted on screen, why has Stallone garnered so much criticism? The reason I think is that Cronenberg, Lynch, Spielberg and Cronenberg could get away with it as their films are seen as arthouse or above mainstream. That is hardly fair is it? The other is that reviews for this film seem to be a criticism of Stallone himself. How does his previous Rocky film have any bearing on Rambo? This is a different character, and obviously has its own seperate objective. I must once again point out that I am not a Stallone fan, but I am dismayed that so many critics feel they are obligated to dump on this film. I am also surprised that no reviewers have given Stallone any kind of credit for bringing the Burma situation into the mainstream. I have donated money to Amnesty for years and I have to say I feel his film explores issues such as landmines without the naive short sightedness of films such as Syriana.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 145

It's quite simple - 23/2/2008 5:10:57 PM

iconzero

Posts: 104
Joined: 31/8/2006

If you're a fan of the Rambo films, you'll probably love this. Not a great deal of depth but some insanely violent carnage.
Probably the best Rambo sequel.
Don't worry about the Empire review, if you look you'll find it gave two stars to the first two sequels as well.

_____________________________

"Chief, put out the fire will ya"

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 146

Sorry but... - 23/2/2008 5:21:32 PM

hellboyx

Posts: 44
Joined: 1/10/2005

I feel that (as did many people) Empire missed the mark on this one. Went into Rambo not expecting much and came out very surprised and got that funny warm feeling of satisfaction that usually tells me that i really enjoyed the film.
Lets get one thing straight... Rambo is not going for any Oscars or looking to change your life, it is what it is and what it is, is 90 Mins of pure 80's homage to a character that defines the Genre, and all that about him being a 'supporting character' is in all honesty (and please pardon my French) bollock! i cant recall an action scene (and there are many) in which Rambo was not the main character involved; an arrow to the face here, a machine gun to the chest there.. in all honesty after reading the review and then seeing the movie i had doubts if Roberto Sadovski actually sat down and watched this movie.
Not only a no-brainer actioner as well, i cannot believe how much this film has got recognition for the issues in Burma now; surely this alone should put this film in high recognition, and some serious no holding back-shots on the screen will no doubt haunt some peoples minds for many nights after.
Honorable mention also needs to go to Bryan Tylers musical score as well... my god what a job he has done on this one! simply beautiful and unforgettable to the point that i have ordered a copy of it. All in all i will sum my review up as this is a good film that deserves more praise than it has got from critics, but oh well suppose thats just another reason to skip that section of the Empire mag every month!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 147

RE: Sorry but... - 24/2/2008 12:57:39 PM

Lightfoot

Posts: 350
Joined: 17/12/2007

Rambo

Anthony Lane, in his review of Saving Private Ryan, idly mused what it would be like if a whole movie were filmed like the Omaha Beach sequence. "Probably unwatchable", he concludes. Now, we can stop wondering. That movie is Rambo, but luckily it's not unwatchable, it kicks seventeen types of man-ass.

Holy shit. Not seeing this movie means immediate revocation of Mancard. Not seeing this movie twice. Holy shit. For 90 brief minutes, I was truly back in the eighties. I haven't seen this much honest testosterone-fuelled carnage since the brilliance of Commando. This movie was more macho than Jesse Ventura and Carl Weathers having a dynamite-eating competition. More balls than Vernon Wells circumsizing a herd of bull elephants. It's like being slapped in the face for ninety minutes by porn star Dick "The Dick" Dickson's male member.

While I hesitate to get analytical in any way whatsoever about this film or Stallone's political ... "philosophy", I suppose, I think he's a shrewder writer than people give him credit for. The direction is more than competent too, by the way. The film is really the ultimate distillation of a hawk v dove mentality, and of course the hawk in all of us must win. Having a missionary naively state "It is always wrong to take a life!" only to have him bash a soldier's brains out with a rock during the climax is as subtle as a grenade, of course, but let's be honest here; it's a lot more admirable in its pretense-free blackandwhiteness than any number of carefully ambiguous Renditions and Kingdoms. It also gives us probably the film's best line:

quote:

"We're going to make a difference up there."

"Are you taking any weapons?"

"Of course not."

"Then you won't make a difference."

Bra-fluffing-vo. This is a film by a man who knows his limits, knows what his audience wants to see, and gives them more than what they asked for. The end-film shootout is, quite simply, probably the best shootout on film we've seen since that splendid decade, the eighties, sadly ended. When Rambo on the .50 cal annihilated an entire truck of enemy soldiers, turning the back into a emptied tin of Campbell's soup big'n'chunky, the entire cinema, mostly males in their late twenties and early thirties, cheered. Like Rambo in the jungle, we were home.

4/5

(in reply to hellboyx)

Post #: 148

RE: Sorry but... - 24/2/2008 1:39:53 PM

Posts: 33
Joined: 21/1/2008

I actually found the violence in this really hard to watch. For the first time in recent memory, I actually wanted to stop watching becuase it really is unwavering and an assault on your eyes and ears. The main reason why, is because a lot of the violence is almost shot like news footage. At times it looks extremely realistic and ergo seems more shocking as a result. Its a very brutal film.

However, ironically the rest of the performances are as wooden as they come. Stallone is the only one who comes across as the real deal. The rest of the cast, in particular the drippy missionaries and the laughable British mercenaries are truly awful to watch. lame acting, unconvincing and funny when there aren't suppossed to be.

Oh, and do they still let olly Richards review films? After his "5 star Cloverfield" review, he showed he was no Barry Norman.

< Message edited by C3 -- 24/2/2008 1:40:39 PM >

(in reply to Lightfoot)

Post #: 149

RE: Sorry but... - 24/2/2008 1:47:41 PM

Manchurian candidate

Posts: 11123
Joined: 13/6/2006
From: A Clear-Thinking Oasis

quote:

ORIGINAL: C3

Oh, and do they still let olly Richards review films? After his "5� star Cloverfield" review, he showed he was no Barry Norman.

yeh i disargee with him 2 they sholdnt let him wish dishes lol i fink that revewers shold not b aloud to have there own opionoions becarse they get it well rong right lol?

rofl!!!1!!!!1

< Message edited by Manchurian candidate -- 24/2/2008 1:49:13 PM >

_____________________________

"Ford's economics are the worst thing that's happened to this country since pantyhose ruined finger-fucking."
Lyndon B. Johnson
"British Beatitudes! � Beer, beef, business, bibles, bulldogs, battleships, buggery and bishops"
-Ulysses, By James Joyce
"Rose McGowan is a fucking clown"
-Harry Lime
"Who's Keith"
- Rhubarb

(in reply to C3)

Post #: 150