user123456789
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 11,260
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
the black dude?Hey! Richard T. Jones is in this one....nice.
-TNC
the black dude?Hey! Richard T. Jones is in this one....nice.
-TNC
24 mill = good?
if you paid $5... then it wasn't freeI got into the movie for free last night for 5 bucks. Usually I come out of movies saying it was amazing, but this movie let me down big time.
I'd say 6/10. Not that great, not horrible either, but certainly not great. Hell, I knew the ending in the first five minutes of the film. That's how obvious it was.
That's the most expensive free movie ever. Anyways i've heard the movie is decent, but nothing spectactular. But it is the second most buzz worthy movie of the year ( so far), behind cloverfield.I got into the movie for free last night for 5 bucks. Usually I come out of movies saying it was amazing, but this movie let me down big time.
I hope you're exaggerating, because that's just not possible. You hadn't met half of the important characters yet.
Well kinda, don't know the exact time but:
When the guy from Lost- forgot his name currently- came and told Quaid's character "don't thank me yet." That's the exact moment I knew. The line was just really odd and the way it was delivered was very ominous.
And didn't know how the ending would play out, only the main 'twist' of the film.
I saw it on opening night and really enjoyed it for what it was. However, it did leave quite a bit unexplained though.
Why did Matthew Fox's character join the terrorists? Was their a reason for him joining them? Was he trying to destroy it from the inside?
Overall though I found it to be an enjoyable thriller that used a unique style of shooting the film by showing everyones different points of view. I looked on the time sheet and saw it was 2 hours and 20 minutes, it didn't feel like it was that long as the action and the story really made the time fly.
I recommend this movie though.
HAAHHAHAHAHHA! I can imagine it now!t:This movie was a joke. It was an interesting concept -- seeing this event happen from the point of view of different characters and seeing how it all came together. However, after each person's vantage point, they felt the need to rewind the movie back to the start and show us the time it started from. This was cool maybe the first two times, but after seeing the movie rewound 8 times it became funny. The whole theater cracked up every time this happened. We were all like, "Here we go again...". It was as if they didn't trust us to figure out when they went back to the beginning, so they had to show us.
Aside from that, the movie got a little ridiculous and corny once Forest Whitaker's character came into play. Overall, a pretty lame movie that had potential.
HAAHHAHAHAHHA! I can imagine it now!t:
I actually liked the rewinding of events and showing it from different characters point of views. For me it was a different type of storytelling that showed some originality with the director, it was no different than the method that's used for 24.
As I said, the only thing that disappointed me about the film is the lack of development for Matthew Fox's character. He just seemed to be placed there with no real indication of what to do with his character.
It would've been nice to have him confront Dennis Quaid's character in a different setting explaining why he sided with the terrorists. Rather than him simply saying with his dying breath "This war will never stop".
It also could've used more blood than what was shown, yeah it was a PG-13 film and all, but with the explosions and all you'd think the reporter, Quaid's character, and Forrest's character would've had more scratches, bruises, and blood on them.
if you paid $5... then it wasn't free
rofl