Posts by Jessica Adams8

It’s a decent enough watch if you're looking for something mildly entertaining...

The script was pretty middle-of-the-road and the acting felt off... Reynolds and Jackson didn't really have any chemistry as a duo. Jackson seemed to be trying way too hard to be funny, which ended up being more annoying than anything else... Reynolds was just doing his usual thing, and he’s not really my cup of tea. Oldman felt like he was just there to chase an award, and Salma Hayek was totally lost—I honestly couldn't tell what her character or her performance was supposed to be... Was it funny? Not really...

The humor feels forced. Sure, you might get a chuckle here and there, but when you fire off a hundred jokes in one movie, a few are bound to land... There were also two or three scenes that felt like they belonged in a parody (like the one where Jackson and Hayek meet)... The soundtrack choice was poor... The action was alright, I guess...

5 / 10

The first one was a pleasant surprise—honestly, one of the better action films out there in recent years. The sequel aims to be bigger, wilder, and more fun, but unfortunately, it misses the mark on every single level.

There are so many things wrong with this movie that I don't even know where to start. It’s not like the entire thing is a disaster, though; there are some decent moments, which actually makes it a bigger shame because large chunks of the film are just awful. When it hits, it's a solid, relatively fun action flick. Some of the characters still work for me, and there are still some creative action sequences with interesting camera work, even if they're weighed down by too much CGI. But when it fails? Man, it's just terrible and hard to sit through. There are so many scenes that lean way too hard into parody, almost like I'm watching Austin Powers. Sure, the first one played with James Bond's tropes a bit, but it did so with some style. Here, they completely overdo it—the scenes are impossible to take seriously, yet they aren't even funny or entertaining.

The main villain is easily one of the worst antagonists we've seen in years. And the rest of the cast isn't much better—Bridges and Berry look like they just showed up to collect a paycheck, and Elton John, who isn't usually my cup of tea anyway, is just grating.

Skip it.

4 / 10

Round 2:
Fight Club Battle of the Blockbusters: The Godfather (1972)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) Battle of the Blockbusters vs. The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Apocalypse Now (1979) Battle of the Blockbusters vs. Forrest Gump
Trainspotting (1996) vs. Battle of the Blockbusters! The Usual Suspects (1995)

The Shawshank Redemption (1994) vs. ... what? You left me hanging there. Are we talking about a cinematic showdown or just a random thought? If you're looking to pit it against another heavy hitter, let me know which one is stepping into the ring. Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Léon: The Professional It’s a classic showdown: Vertigo vs. everything else.
The Silence of the Lambs (1991) vs. ...? Taxi Driver (1976)
Goodfellas (1990) It’s a tough one, but I’d put my money on Se7en.

The Big Lebowski (1998) It’s a classic showdown: versus Chinatown.
Battle of the Blockbusters: Braveheart vs. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest It’s an interesting matchup when you put them side by side. On one hand, you’ve got the sweeping, bloody epic scale of Braveheart—all grit, passion, and fighting for freedom. Then you have the psychological weight of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, which hits you in a completely different way, focusing on the individual versus the system. One is a roar; the other is a quiet, devastating punch to the gut. It really comes down to what kind of cinematic experience you're looking for in the moment.
The Deer Hunter (1978) It’s a real clash of styles when you pit these two against each other. On one side, you have the high-octane energy of a blockbuster, and on the other, you have the slow, haunting burn of Once Upon a Time in America. It’s like comparing a sprint to a long, heavy trek through a fog. One wants to grab you by the collar, while the other just sits there in the room with you, staring until you can't look away.
Blade Runner (1982) vs. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966)

The Godfather Part II (1974) vs. The Godfather Unforgiven (1992)
The Dark Knight (2008) Battle of the Blockbusters: Psycho (1960)
Scarface (1983) It’s a tough call when you're weighing it against Schindler's List. Both hit hard, but they do it in completely different ways.
The Matrix (1999) Battle of the Blockbusters: The Shining (1980)

To’s a masterpiece and easily one of the best films from the 90s.

Caught it last night. It’s a solid movie, but honestly? It’s way too long. I feel like they could have told the whole story in ninety minutes instead of dragging it out to nearly two and a half hours...
The acting was top-notch and the dialogue felt real enough, but I had a hard time buying her sudden urge to help a group of total strangers without even asking what they were up to. Plus, the whole "I've been totally isolated" bit felt a little thin. If this thing were an hour shorter, it would've been much better...
6 / 10

briskhound2 said:Honestly, Jonah Hill is probably one of the least funny guys in Hollywood—and man, the competition is stiff when you look at guys like The Rock, Tucker, Black, or Hart... plus the humor is just your typical, blunt, low-brow American slapstick. You might be the first person I've ever run into who actually thinks these movies are funny...

Here's another one 🙂. The first one was alright, the second was just okay... but I wasn't exactly expecting anything more than just some mindless entertainment out of them...

And you act like she said movies like those Adam Sandler, Kevin James, or Rob Schneider flicks are garbage, or those terrible parodies (dati movie, Scary Movie, etc.). The 21 Jump Street movies actually did really well with audiences (both have over a 7 on IMDb and pulled in some serious cash) and with critics too (around 70 on Metacritic and 85 on Rotten Tomatoes). In fact, 21 Jump Street is considered one of the most successful remakes in recent years...

Look, Hill isn't my personal comedy king either, but calling him the *least* funny? I'd put guys like Martin Lawrence, Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Rob Schneider, or Zach Galifianakis way higher on that list... there are plenty of them. 🙂

It’s been eight years, but Mel Gibson is finally back in front of the lens for edge of darkness, the new thriller from director Martin Campbell (the guy behind Casino Royale and GoldenEye). It’s an adaptation of a 1986 mini-series that Campbell also directed, and word on the street is it’s a winner—I’m actually downloading 🙂 right now.

The story follows Thomas Craven, a homicide detective who starts digging into his activist daughter's death. What he finds isn't just her private life, but a massive corporate cover-up involving government officials, which eventually puts him in the crosshairs of an agent sent to scrub the evidence.

trailer:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/42718