News:

Happy 20th, FFvT3R!

Main Menu

The Expendables

Started by Midnite, April 01, 2009, 04:57:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

GogglesPizanno

Quote from: yell0w_lantern on August 19, 2010, 08:05:43 PM
Btw, it takes both Bruce Willis and Dolph to equal either Stalone or the Governator.

BITE YOUR TONGUE!!
Them's fighting words.
And for the record, thanks to the latest expendables poster, we can now see that in terms of Action movie body count, Dolph actually IS the big winner.... that's just science!

http://chud.com/articles/content_images/17/ExpendablesBodyCount.jpg

Actually I'm gonna totally derail this thread slightly to give some love (and apparently it needs it) to the OTHER movie that came out that weekend, and is superior to the Expendables in every way. Scott Pilgrim. The nerd in me was blown away by it, and I saw it with a very non-nerd friend who loved it as well...

We can now go back to debating whether why Dolph is better than the others action stars...Continue.

JeyNyce

I think the point of the movie was every guy favorite action hero team up.  You know, like a Marvel team up kind of thing.
I don't call for tech support, I AM TECH SUPPORT!
It's the internet, don't take it personal!

UnkoMan

Me and my friend laughed at lines, but probably not lines we were suppose to be laughing at. I also had never even heard of Randy Couture and only vaguely knew of Terry Crews. And judging by their body count, with good reason. Did they even need to be in this?

Also there's a difference between shakey cam and confusing cam. I mean, to each their own, but I like fight scenes to make some sort of sense. Not just here's a shot of a guy punching another guy, here's one of a guy flipping some guy, there's a neck break.

Granted, Expendables is trying to follow more than one main character and there have been movies that did this far worst (hi Dark Knight!) but it still wasn't good.

I was going to mention Scott Pilgrim though, actually. Now that's a movie with great fight scenes, save one poorly conceived CGI sound battle. Even at its most frenetic you can still always tell what is going on. Granted, though, they only had to follow a couple people.

Anyhow, that's just my take. If you like it then you like it. That's how these movies work, pretty much.

PS: I can't believe Stallone only killed seven people in Death Race 2000. That seems so wrong. Definitely one of his best rolls though.

marhawkman

Couture and crews are just there to pad the roster.  they're too new to the action movie genre...  their actual careers are in MMA IIRC.

yell0w_lantern

Goggles, I am merely repeating TTT established fact. It takes Dolph and Bruce Willis to equal either Sly or Arnie. They had their hands full with Keanu Reeves while Stallone took care of Wesley Snipes and the Governator took care of VanDamme.
Yellow Lantern smash!

GogglesPizanno

Quote from: yell0w_lantern on August 20, 2010, 04:38:41 PM
Goggles, I am merely repeating TTT established fact. It takes Dolph and Bruce Willis to equal either Sly or Arnie. They had their hands full with Keanu Reeves while Stallone took care of Wesley Snipes and the Governator took care of VanDamme.

Whatever.
None of them compare to Johnny Utah of the F..... B...... I......

deano_ue

haven't seen this yet but was surprised at the RT score 35%

seriously i've heard good things, yet critics seem to be tearing it apart

GogglesPizanno

Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on August 22, 2010, 09:28:39 PM
haven't seen this yet but was surprised at the RT score 35%

seriously i've heard good things, yet critics seem to be tearing it apart

Because its a bad movie that sparks warm nostalgic feelings. Its those feelings of missing seeing guys you like doing the big dumb action guy things they used to that people are responding to... not the quality of the movie. From a quality standpoint this is really no different than those John Cena movies from a few years ago (The Marine, 12 Rounds etc...). The difference is that those movies didn't star Stallone, Lundgren, Roarke and Willis. You pull those guys out of it, and the Expendables would not be near the success that it is. More like a bigger budget straight to video action flick.

steamteck

#38
Quote from: the_ultimate_evil on August 22, 2010, 09:28:39 PM
haven't seen this yet but was surprised at the RT score 35%

seriously i've heard good things, yet critics seem to be tearing it apart

Its a big action movie with no state of the art FX or deeper meaning or politically correct message. Ctitics tearing it apart is expected and validates its worthiness in the genre. Yes, I'm really disadainful and harsh to critics on this score. For this sort of thing , the only thing most professional critics are good for is by reading what they dislike you can often tell what they're saying is so aweful is really thegood stuff. Strngely enough more female critics seem to give action films a fair shake than the male ones IMO.


if you look at moviephone and the user reviews as opposed to the critcs reviews there's a big difference on rating. Even the critics there are nice than rotton tomatoes though?

herodad1

ahh, the male critics are jealous and wished they were more like the guys they are knocking. the female critics like what they see. i might not like feely chic flicks but i'm not gonna knock them because thats not my cup of tea. i wish i had a show where i critised the critics. be like the guys from In Living Color. "hated it"...."loved it"! :lol:

Sevenforce

"Worst...Critics...Ever..."
I so need booze -_-