Ocean's 13

urbanmaker6 said:They’re all bottom-tier. You can tell just by looking at the cast and the title alone.👎
It's awful. It's basically the lowest common denominator of mindless American comedies.👎

And I suppose this is your idea of peak cinema—maybe you think movies like "Junfer at Forty" are masterpieces, or perhaps you're more the type who lives for Chuck Norris, Van Damme, Segal, or any other similar actor (as long as it's a low-budget action flick you'd see on basic cable) watching them break bones and take down "villains." Sigh. 🙄

A little joke for you:
Why is God called God?
-Because the name Chuck Norris was already taken.

Do I seriously need to watch the first two movies just to follow what's happening here?

I honestly think it's 😁.

You watched the same thing I did—just total chaos. Let people speak their minds. 😁

Total amateur hour 😍 🙂

Unit one is hands down the winner.
The second duo? A total disaster—if their goal was just to burn through cash...
As for the third option, it’s decent enough, I suppose, but it doesn't even come close to outperforming unit one.

urbanmaker6 said:All three are terrible. You can tell just by looking at the cast and the titles.👎

The cast is definitely pathetic.😕
Man, you hear some crazy things.🤣 🤣

I watched it the other day and I actually really liked it 😬 such a hilarious ride (that part at the end about the weight gain and the kids was 👍 and don't even get me started on Oprah and Sinatra 🤣 or that worker strike in Mexico—seriously, that was probably the funniest bit in the whole movie 🤣 Casey Affleck 🙏), just a great little flick for chilling out. All in all, I'm pretty glad I gave it a watch 😁

James Roberts87 said:The cast is honestly pathetic.😕
I can't believe I have to hear this kind of stuff.🤣 🤣

It’s way too Hollywood, just packed with massive stars, you idiot. 😠 Real movies usually have one or two big names, while everyone else is just a solid actor—not necessarily famous, but good enough to make the movie work. In the case of Ocean's Eleven, they just throw every A-lister at the screen to mask a mediocre, pretentious flick. That’s the problem with these all-star trash movies!👎

Patrick Smith44 said:So, I guess comedies like "Junfer at Forty" are your peak cinema, or maybe you're just the type who lives for Chuck Norris, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Segal, or any other similar actor—as long as it's a low-budget action flick where they spend the whole time breaking the "villains'" bones. c-c-c-c 🙄

Anyway, here's a joke:
why is God called God?
-because the name Chuck Norris was already taken.

Hell no!🙂 It's pretty obvious from my post that my take is actually the exact opposite. When I say a movie is stupid, just like those dumb American comedies, it means I don't like those either, nor do I like movies like this one. Use some common sense; it wouldn't hurt.😉

urbanmaker6, you're talking a lot of crap.

Look, if you aren't into movies with actual stars, feel free to go catch the latest indie flick from Denmark starring Björk. Hey, the woman is a legend—incredible actress—and since there isn't anyone else famous in the cast, I guess that checks all your boxes.

Either do that, or actually sit through one of the Ocean's Eleven movies—from start to finish—before you start a war over what you watched. Don't just rage based on some internet review you read because you’re feeling insecure about the fact that everyone in the movie is better looking than you. 😁

BTW, I watched Ocean's Thirteen yesterday and it was seriously great. It might be a tiny bit (as someone else put it) weaker than the first one, but still brilliant. Maybe a little predictable toward the end—it can't quite touch the original—but there are scenes that will have you laughing all night. Personally, that one with the labor strike... 😁

Raymond Ramos59 said:but man, there are scenes that just have you laughing all night long. personally, that one with the labor strike... 😁

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

I totally agree with 👍 👍 👍

The movie was alright. But man, yesterday we were walking around with nothing but a cheap milk carton in our hands 😍 heading to the theater. Before that, we hit up the video store in the blazing heat to see if we could catch an eleven o'clock showing, but they didn't have it, so we just grabbed Snatch 🙏, Shrek, and some erotic thriller my wife suggested that we didn't even get around to watching 🤣

The thing is, after Snatch, every other movie felt like garbage—except maybe Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels 😁

Ocean's Eleven is a decent flick, but to me, it feels a bit played out because I saw those same tropes all over the place back when that Las Vegas series used to run on ABC.
He’s pulling a face three hundred and sixty degrees more intense than Al Pacino, and that’s James Caan. And his suits? At least 234 times better, not that I’d bother listing them.

There's just one thing, though, that completely blows everything from yesterday's movie out of the water with one hand.
http://www.askmen.com/specials/2005_...molly_sims.jpg

I seriously need to get myself to Las Vegas, damn it 😍. It's a shame I said I wouldn't gamble, because if I don't, I won't have any real fun 😬

Anyways, the movie is solid, but the concept is a little thin to me. They’re this big, high-flying team, and now they’re out for revenge over some business screw-up that Pacino pulled on that guy Reuben or whatever.

Get this: they're all just rich guys overcharging other rich guys, trying to settle some grudge. It feels a bit stretched... plus that earthquake simulation. Then the helicopter and the diamonds—it all felt a bit too flashy and brutal for what was supposed to be a "sophisticated operation."

Regardless, it's not a bad film. Yesterday turned out to be a total Brad Pitt day, for real 😁. We watched Snatch first, then Ocean's Eleven, then Interview with a Vampire 🤣
Alex tells me she only likes Brad Pitt when he looks gritty like in Snatch or when he has long hair; honestly, I might just hang myself 🤣

The cast is heavy-hitting, I'll give them that, though they were even stronger in Snatch 😁.

The movie is a fantastic, low-key indie gem that doesn't try too hard.
I'll just point out a couple of plot holes.
1. What was the deal with that Frenchman in Fabula 😁
2. Why is the FBI handing data over to Pacino when they're actually pulling the strings themselves???

And that episode set in Mexico? Honestly, one of the absolute highlights of the trilogy 🙏 🙏

Should I go ahead and pitch this idea for a movie or what?

and it goes 😁.

Raymond Ramos59 said:shmuley, you're talking way too much crap.

If you aren't interested in movies starring famous actors, feel free to go watch the latest Danish art house flick starring Björk. Hey—the woman is incredibly famous, an amazing actress, and since there isn't a single other recognizable face in the cast, I’m sure that meets your very specific criteria.

Otherwise, you could try actually watching one of those Ocean's Eleven movies—from start to finish—before deciding to wage war based on some internet casting list you hated because you're just a little insecure kid who feels threatened by the fact that everyone in the movie is better looking than you are. 😁

The guy shares his opinion and suddenly everyone thinks they've got his whole life story figured out... Honestly, I totally get where he's coming from and I agree. It’s not even the fact that they're stars that bothers me—it's the question of *which* stars we're talking about. George Clooney is easily one of the most irritating actors out there, and all these other guys just seem to be filling in the gaps of that eternal puzzle of actors transitioning from the B-list to the A-list. For instance, I might wait until a film hits DVD, but I wouldn't dream of seeing it in a theater. It’s not even about prejudice; it's just that I know exactly what I'm getting, and I know exactly how it's going to be served to me. I watched the first two installments, and for me, it was a total waste of money. So, what's the plan? Let's just hire fifteen superstars and split $20 million among them just to make sure we have enough "star power" on screen. That's basically the formula used for Good Job in Italy—though, granted, there's slightly less overacting over there.

And at the end of the day, trashing Junfer just to elevate this particular film isn't exactly the smartest move.

I caught the movie this past Saturday, and I have to be honest... it’s a massive step down from the first two installments. It was so lackluster that even Al Pacino couldn't pull it out of the gutter... There is virtually zero chemistry or dialogue between the characters, which was honestly the best part of the original film. I'm just left feeling completely let down!

irongardener12 said:A guy shares his take and suddenly everyone thinks they’ve mapped out his entire life story.... I totally get what he's getting at and I'm with him. Honestly, it’s not even about how big of a star someone is—it's about WHO those stars actually are. George Clooney is easily one of the most irritating actors out there, and all these other guys just seem to be filler for that endless puzzle of "B-list" actors trying to make it back to the A-list. I might catch the movie on DVD eventually, but I am definitely not paying to see it in a theater. It’s not even that I have some deep-seated bias or think it'll be a total bore—it’s just that I know *exactly* what I’m getting, and I know exactly how it's going to be served up. I watched the first two installments and, for me, it was a complete waste of money. What’s the plan, right? Let’s just round up 15 superstars and split $20 million between them just so we can check all the boxes. That’s basically the formula for Good Job in Italy, except there's slightly less overacting there.

And honestly, trashing Junfer just to make this movie look better isn't exactly the smartest move.

Man, that's my best friend, and I know for a fact he's only bashing it because I actually like it. Generally speaking, he's a good guy—it's just the actors that drive him crazy.

He's an indie kid who can't stand anything commercial, so...

Watched it yesterday

The movie was solid. Better than the sequel, but didn't quite hit the heights of the first one.

I got a few good laughs out of it. Honestly, it was a decent way to kill two hours at the theater.