criterionforum.org

Clive Owen. Monica Belluci. Paul Giamatti.

This is either going to be really awesome or really shitty. Here's the trailer.

The reviews are completely erratic. The general vibe seems to be that the action is interesting, but there's no story, the tone is completely inconsistent and the internal logic is really poor. The negative reviews also indicate that if you're looking for anything to anchor you into caring about the characters, it's a major problem.

I remember seeing the trailer for this a while ago, and I am still super excited for it.

Whether it's good or not, I'll be watching this for the cast and for the reportedly amazing opening birth/shootout sequence.

I may go see it because of the cast, but I would hope it's not terrible.

Three nice posters.

is that a baby bullet-proof vest monica is holding!? Very nice posters, shame those kind of great teasers never make the dvd cover.

SncDthMnky wrote:is that a baby bullet-proof vest monica is holding!?

Yeah. And the tagline reads "it's a better investment than a crib."

It does look pretty shitty, but I love Clive Owen and Paul Giamatti so I'll be seeing it.

Here's the red-band trailer that contains some steamy Belluci/Owen action and an obvious reference to Oldboy.

Antoine Doinel wrote:Here's the red-band trailer that contains some steamy Belluci/Owen action and an obvious reference to Oldboy.

Jaw, meet floor.

Is this Home Alone for adults? Looks ridiculous and speaking as someone who doesn't ordinarily like action movies... count me in.

Anybody seen this? I'm mulling it (and indeed wanted to see it based on the trailers), but the reviews have been so ridiculously mixed from what I've seen that I don't know what to think anymore. I love trashy action done right, Owen, and some Giamatti/Bellucci, but I'm still not 100% sold that it won't suck.

Cronenfly wrote:Anybody seen this? ... I'm still not 100% sold that it won't suck.

I would say that 69% is pretty trust worthy.

I don't understand why everyone's worried that this is going to be terrible. It's an action movie of the stupidest and most awesome variety. I'm going to try to see this and 3:10 to Yuma on the same day.

I was going by some of the extremely negative DVD Talk reviews (though Rich bashes Robocop in his, so he isn't to be trusted) vs., say, Roger Ebert's enthusiasm for it and some of the RT reviews' extreme variety, though, as you say, 69% ain't bad for the kind of movie this is (and being the kind I usually like, I think most of my fears have now dissipated). Not sure I want to see Clive be Bugs Bunny, but hey...

Friend and I went to go see it this afternoon before we go in a big group tonight to see 3:10 to Yuma. It's again like Transformers, leave your brain at the door and just go along for the ride. In fact when it was over my friend and I were talking about how this really felt like something Canon would have made in the 80's. But the major difference was that you have 2 major stars in the leads. So if you go into the film knowing that it's going to be all style over substance, you may like it.
Also, has anyone seen Death Sentence yet?

There ought to be a law against using generic titles like "Shoot Em Up".
Since there isn't; I think we are free to conclude that movies with generic titles are generally lousy. See "Swashbuckler" and "Romantic Comedy" for further details.

I'm upset because now I have to re-title my heroin addiction screenplay

THX1378 wrote:has anyone seen Death Sentence yet?

I saw it yesterday. The overwhelming thought was, "This is something Cannon would have made in the late 80s." Some good work by Bacon, a bravura sequence in a parking garage, an I-think-miscast John Goodman. Worth seeing, but not altogether satisfying. I think the opportunity remains to, as once was the plan, to make DEATH WISH with Jack Lemmon in the lead -- obviously not Lemmon anymore, but an actor like him. When Bacon goes ballistic, it's not a great transformation -- we always knew he had it in him to go vigilante. If you have a Jack Lemmon in that role, it's much more of a metamorphosis.

jesus the mexican boi wrote:

THX1378 wrote:has anyone seen Death Sentence yet?

I saw it yesterday. The overwhelming thought was, "This is something Cannon would have made in the late 80s." Some good work by Bacon, a bravura sequence in a parking garage, an I-think-miscast John Goodman. Worth seeing, but not altogether satisfying. I think the opportunity remains to, as once was the plan, to make DEATH WISH with Jack Lemmon in the lead -- obviously not Lemmon anymore, but an actor like him. When Bacon goes ballistic, it's not a great transformation -- we always knew he had it in him to go vigilante. If you have a Jack Lemmon in that role, it's much more of a metamorphosis.

You're in the wrong thread. The movie you saw was Death Sentence.

Mr_sausage wrote:You're in the wrong thread. The movie you saw was Death Sentence.

Move me, Mr. Sausage. Move me like the dirty little thread-hijacker I am.

jesus the mexican boi wrote:

Mr_sausage wrote:You're in the wrong thread. The movie you saw was Death Sentence.

Move me, Mr. Sausage. Move me like the dirty little thread-hijacker I am.

Is this a board request or something more? I'm afraid, tho', that only Chris can help you on this one (I need a bit more liquor in me first).

Absolute crap: avoid at all costs. Dull, repetitious, headache-inducing, waste-of-talent hack job. No redeeming facets whatsoever. Waste of time and money, not to mention another Owen vehicle gone awry. Why is he so uneven in the scripts he chooses? This, Derailed, King Arthur, Beyond Borders...I know money talks, but in his case it saddens me to see him make so many poor choices, as he really has much more potential than he's usually showing these days (look back to Croupier to see him in his prime). Not even a good, stupid, utter crap movie, just bollocks.
EDIT: Perhaps I'm unfair, but I was really hoping to see something I'd enjoy tonight...and instead got a never-ending stream of carrots and "cock rock."

Cronenfly wrote:Absolute crap: avoid at all costs. Dull, repetitious, headache-inducing, waste-of-talent hack job. No redeeming facets whatsoever. Waste of time and money, not to mention another Owen vehicle gone awry. Why is he so uneven in the scripts he chooses? This, Derailed, King Arthur, Beyond Borders...I know money talks, but in his case it saddens me to see him make so many poor choices, as he really has much more potential than he's usually showing these days (look back to Croupier to see him in his prime). Not even a good, stupid, utter crap movie, just bollocks.

I choose not to avoid it, because you sound like A.O. Scott's review, and A.O. Scott is a hack.

grungies wrote:I choose not to avoid it, because you sound like A.O. Scott's review, and A.O. Scott is a hack.

More than fair: I went in wanting to enjoy it 100%: I don't know what turned me off so violently towards it (everything about the concept, the humor, etc sounded extremely appealing)...many seem to like it, so I'm surely a dolt. I hope you get more out of it than I did. I hide my face in shame for aligning myself with A.O. Scott: whatever penance I can do will surely never wash THAT bilious stain from my flesh. #-o
EDIT-I love stupid, but it all felt so forced, joyless...I'm at a loss.