CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › Fast & Furious: Hobbs & Shaw (2019)

Fast & Furious: Hobbs & Shaw (2019)

Started by Rebecca Scott95 · · 👁 5 views · 23 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Rebecca Scott95darkharbor7Grace EdwardsJack Murphy5Amy Vaughn12Taylor Brooks96stormyviper2Gregory Brown94Elizabeth Cooper2Elizabeth Morales49Rachel Turner2briskhound2Richard Wilson4Aaron Allen12Daniel Kelly57
Rebecca Scott95 Rebecca Scott95 MemberOP
25 messages
joined Nov 2021
#1 ·
Fast & Furious

Hobbs & Shaw is the upcoming action flick—the very first spin-off from the massive Fast & Furious saga.
Agent Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham) are forced to team up to take down Brixton (Idris Elba), a global terrorist leader.

Director: David Leitch
Cast: Dwayne Johnson, Jason Statham, Idris Elba, Vanessa Kirby, Eiza González
Release date: August 2, 2019

image
image
image

IMDb
darkharbor7 darkharbor7 Newcomer
1 message
joined Feb 2019
#2 ·
Hobbs & Shaw trailer (2019) | Movieclips Trailers

It’s quite high-octane; I find myself rather enjoying it.
Grace Edwards Grace Edwards Active Member
184 messages
joined May 2023
#3 ·
There is absolutely zero chance this guy is stronger than Hobbs. Total BULL-SHIT.
Jack Murphy5 Jack Murphy5 Active Member
59 messages
joined Feb 2014
#4 ·
It’s a good sign; they’ve finally made it to the level of a Terminator.
Amy Vaughn12 Amy Vaughn12 Active Member
121 messages
joined Mar 2009
#5 ·
It looks like it might actually be pretty fun. I guess it’ll be a nice little break from the usual Fast & Furious crew.
Taylor Brooks96 Taylor Brooks96 Newcomer
6 messages
joined Jul 2019
#6 ·
Hobbs & Shaw trailer (2019) | Movieclips Trailers

This is easily the most insane trailer I have ever laid eyes on; it is just so incredibly high-octane and frankly, it is far too good
stormyviper2 stormyviper2 Member
40 messages
joined Apr 2019
#7 ·
Honestly, this is going to be even more of a total trash heap than Brick Mansions.....
Gregory Brown94 Gregory Brown94 Active Member
74 messages
joined Nov 2021
#8 ·
This trailer feels like just a prelude, especially since the Fast & Furious saga has reached some serious Avengers movie levels of madness. Just picture Iron Man 3, but swap out Tony and Rhodes for Hobbs and Shaw. And let's make Kilinan Idris Elba. It looks a bit cheesy, but honestly, I’ll still be watching.
Elizabeth Cooper2 Elizabeth Cooper2 Newcomer
8 messages
joined Nov 2020
#9 ·
Hahaha, what kind of trailer is this? It’s so surreal and ridiculous that it’s actually stopped being funny.

But I'll be watching it, obviously, and on the big screen at the theater.
Elizabeth Morales49 Elizabeth Morales49 Member
34 messages
joined May 2023
#10 ·
Of course I'm hitting the theater... you need that massive screen just to process the scene where The Rock proves he's physically stronger than a damn helicopter 🤣
Rachel Turner2 Rachel Turner2 Active Member
53 messages
joined Sep 2022
#11 ·
Crazy, feels like the whole damn movie was just in the trailer...
Gregory Brown94 Gregory Brown94 Active Member
74 messages
joined Nov 2021
#12 ·
Kyle Torres60 said:Of course I'm going to see it in theaters. You need that big screen just to properly process the scene where The Rock proves he's actually stronger than a helicopter. 🤣

Fuck, he’s actually stronger than Captain America. Seriously, what the hell?

Wait, so you're telling me that guy is actually stronger than Iron Man's armor?!

Jesus!

None of that actually makes any sense. It’s just... illogical. And honestly? That's what hurts.
Elizabeth Morales49 Elizabeth Morales49 Member
34 messages
joined May 2023
#13 ·
Watched it. It’s a decent enough way to kill two hours if you're bored enough.

At times, it just feels like typical mindless banter between the two leads. The villain isn't half bad, though—kind of like a gritty RoboCop mixed with some tech pulled straight out of a Transformers workshop.🤣

Basically, don't think too hard about it and you'll be fine.😁
briskhound2 briskhound2 Regular
411 messages
joined Mar 2009
#14 ·
I only realized after the fact that they’re playing a track from that deadly weapon movie in the trailer. Whether it was a total accident or some calculated move... honestly, who knows 😁
Richard Wilson4 Richard Wilson4 Veteran
2K messages
joined Sep 2009
#15 ·
Kind of a stupid name, honestly. From a marketing standpoint, I don't get it—couldn't they have gone with something that actually ties back to the original series title?
Aaron Allen12 Aaron Allen12 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Aug 2019
#16 ·
Massive spoilers everywhere, and the movie is an absolute disaster. Is this why they pushed back Fast 9? It’s pathetic. Honestly, the only redeeming qualities are the Fast & Furious style action sequences and the special effects—not that you actually need acting when everything is just explosions anyway.

The plot is basically a mess of clichés—you can't even count them all. As for the cast, it’s pretty questionable, though you have to give it to The Rock and Statham. And I guess Ryan Reynolds was okay, but he basically just played his Deadpool persona again, only this time as a CIA agent working for Mr. Nobody. Typical Ryan Reynolds. It must be nice having a family you can just order on demand like Shaw. He gets a brother whenever the script needs one, a wild mother when they need more action, and now he gets a sister right when it suits the plot. Of course, she’s an adult and predictably just as prickly as he is. 👎 So, Shaw's sister gets framed for stealing some virus, and of course, Hobbs and Shaw get stuck handling the case—only to decide they have to save her. Then Hobbs falls for Shaw's sister. Wow, who could have possibly seen that coming? You could see that plot twist coming from a space station. 👎

With Hobbs' character, they’ve officially taken another step toward total space-age stupidity. Suddenly, Hobbs has this massive family out of nowhere—after all, he supposedly abandoned them 25 years ago, only to find out he has a million brothers. And get this: his entire clan, including all those brothers and his mom, lives together on one giant estate in Samoa. The most brilliant part? God forbid any of those brothers actually had a life during those 25 years. Nope. Apparently, none of them have anything better to do than sit around that estate since the day they were born. Not a single one of them has their own family, a girlfriend, a wife, or kids. It’s ridiculous. They’ve all just been sitting there for two and a half decades, waiting for Hobbs to show up so they can finally be useful. 👎

Oh, please. Of course one of those brothers has an issue with Hobbs just for "dramatic effect" (give me a break), so he stands his ground against him. But then, naturally, everyone accepts him back within five seconds because we can't let twenty-five years of waiting go to waste now that Hobbs finally showed up to ask for help. It’s ridiculous. Even Hobbs himself didn't realize he had such a massive family; only the screenwriter thought that was a good idea. 👎

Oh, absolutely. And the stupidity doesn't even end there. Of course his brothers are all total losers—which wouldn't be surprising, considering they waited 25 years just to serve as a "deus ex machina" family for Hobbs. And they aren't even the only deus ex machina in this mess; Kevin Hart is basically a deus ex machina in an even more retarded way. But wait, it gets worse. Most of them are supposedly mechanics. Not bad mechanics, mind you—actual, legit mechanics. And the part that really pushed me over the edge, where you honestly don't know whether to cry or die laughing, is when Hobbs claims his brother (yeah, the one single guy who actually stood up to him) is the BEST mechanic he knows. He clearly forgot about that certain bald guy driving a Dodge Charger and the crew he spent the last four movies with. The screenwriter completely fucked up here—not just for the Fast & Furious saga, but for everyone actually following the story. It’s a massive, monumental screw-up.

I won’t even get into the second half of this stupidity or the fact that the main villain is basically just a Terminator for the poor. The way his whole deal works is just as shaky as the rest of the plot. Even by movie logic, the way this "Terminator for the poor" functions is comically impossible and completely inconsistent. Sure, Shaw and this guy have a history. Shaw killed him, and then some scientists who invented this virus "brought him back" by implanting an AI into him. If they had stopped there, it might have almost made sense. But suddenly, this guy gets all his old memories back? That is physically impossible. He died, and his memories died with him. Plugging an AI into a body doesn't magically restore a dead man's brain. The idea that he suddenly remembers everything—even though he isn't even the same person anymore, just a machine running AI—is retarded as hell. And don't even get me started on how Hobbs and Shaw handle him and eventually take him out. It's a total disaster. Lazy, sloppy, and poorly written. 👎 What’s even more terrifying is that we’ll probably get a sequel to this absolute disaster because that mysterious character who built this Terminator for the poor apparently has some kind of history with Hobbs at the end. 👎

By the time the credits rolled, I was asking myself the same question I had at the start and halfway through: Is this really why Fast 9 got pushed back? Hollywood has officially lost its mind. 👎 👎 This movie is a 2.5/10 at best. Give me 1 point for the acting from Statham and The Rock, and maybe 0.5 for Ryan Reynolds and the overall action and effects. Everything else is a zero. Of course, this flick will probably score a 10 for all the people who go to the theater just to stare at flashing lights and bright colors instead of looking for a cohesive, logical plot. Since most people today are that brainless, so be it.

By the way—
Richard Wilson4 said:Pretty stupid name, if you ask me from a marketing standpoint. Couldn't they have picked something more connected to the original series title?

The movie is literally titled "Fast & Furious presents: Hobbs & Shaw." Please, enlighten us—how much clearer or more connected to the original saga could they have possibly made it? Almost everything about this movie sucks, but you actually managed to nail one rare thing that makes sense. You're a genius. 🤦 You could have at least checked what the movie was called. Same goes for Rebecca Scott95 who started this thread. Starts a whole discussion and doesn't even know the actual title. Hollywood has gone insane.
briskhound2 briskhound2 Regular
411 messages
joined Mar 2009
#17 ·
Aaron Allen12 said:Is this why Fast 9 got pushed back? That's just awful...

It’s pretty obvious they completely forgot about that certain bald guy driving a Dodge Charger and the specific crew he's spent the last four movies running with. The writer basically fucked up on their own, fucked up the whole Fast & Furious saga, and honestly, just fucked over everyone actually following the story... it was a massive, epic fail.

By the end of the movie, I found myself asking the exact same question I had at the start and halfway through—is this really the reason Fast 9 was delayed?

After all that, you come out with this...

I mean, obviously the movie will probably hit near 10 for those people who only go to the theater for flashy lights and bright colors rather than anything resembling a cohesive or logical plot. Since most people these days are kind of mindless like that, so be it.

Are the Fast & Bullshit movies usually known for having cohesive plots, logic, and powerhouse dramatic performances?

And maybe watch your tone a bit when talking to others here... until recently, this was being pitched as "Hobbs & Shaw," so the idea that this represents the core F&F vibe was just tacked on later.
Aaron Allen12 Aaron Allen12 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Aug 2019
#18 ·
briskhound2 said:And then you come out with this...
Are the Fast & Bullshit movies actually known for cohesive plots, logic, and powerhouse dramatic performances?

No, but you’re asking the wrong question in the wrong damn place. The Fast & Furious movies are definitely way more cohesive, logical, and better acted than Hobbs & Shaw. But are they on the level of an Avengers movie, Pulp Fiction, or other cult classics? Of course not, but that was never the goal. The Fast & Furious movies aren't much worse by those standards than Hobbs & Shaw is compared to the Fast & Furious saga. And I don't see where I ever claimed the Fast & Furious saga was anything like the stuff you just asked about.

briskhound2 said:And maybe watch your tone when talking to other people here. Until recently, the movie was being presented as "Hobbs & Shaw"; this idea that it represents F&F was added later.

You could, but you should probably check your facts first because you're just as wrong as those two. There's a difference between a working title and the official title. While the working title was Hobbs and Shaw at the start (for a short time), a working title isn't the official name of the movie—it never was. The official title is the actual name. And that recent change didn't happen twenty-four hours ago. It's been like that for a decent amount of time. Making cardinal errors like these guys—with their condescending comments and the wrong thread name—is completely inexcusable. That's on them. Check your facts before you post. Accuracy and precision matter most.
briskhound2 briskhound2 Regular
411 messages
joined Mar 2009
#19 ·
Aaron Allen12 said:Nah, you're asking the wrong question in all the wrong places. The Fast & Furious movies are definitely way more cohesive, logical, and better acted than Hobbs & Shaw. But are they up there with Avengers movies, Pulp Fiction, or other cult classics? Of course not—but that was never the point. Just as much as those movies fail those specific criteria, that’s exactly how much Hobbs & Shaw falls short compared to the Fast & Furious saga.

"More logical," you say. Right... Let me just check my notes... crashing drones, using a Charger to take out a submarine, steering a torpedo with your bare hands, thousands of cars driving themselves... Yeah, totally logical and perfectly cohesive. Definitely.

You could, actually, and maybe you should double-check your facts because you're just as wrong as those two. There's such a thing as a working title versus an official title. While Hobbs & Shaw was used as a working title for a little bit at the start, a working title isn't the official name of the movie—it never was. The official title is what counts. And that recent change didn't just happen 24 hours ago; it's been that way for quite a while now. Making cardinal errors like these—along with those condescending comments and getting the thread title wrong—is honestly inexcusable. It's their mistake. Check your facts before you post. Accuracy and precision above all else.

Hold on, let me check my inbox... Nope, I don't see any message from you telling me the title was wrong and asking me to fix it. And honestly? Who gives a fuck if it doesn't say "A Fast & Furious Film Presents" or whatever... everyone's going to know it's Hobbs & Shaw anyway.
Aaron Allen12 Aaron Allen12 Newcomer
3 messages
joined Aug 2019
#20 ·
briskhound2 said:More logical, you say? Let’s look at the facts... a drone gets taken down by an emergency demolition, a Charger wipes out a submarine, someone steers a torpedo with their bare hands, and thousands of cars drive themselves. Yeah, totally logical and cohesive.

You realize movies have their own reality, right? Just because it isn't the world you live in doesn't mean it doesn't make sense within its own bubble. You're looking at this one-dimensionally if you think you can just compare them directly. Movies are their own universe with their own physics, laws, and internal logic. Within the established universe of the Fast and Furious saga, those movies are way more logical and cohesive. As far as I'm concerned, Hobbs and Shaw is a standalone film—it digs its own grave and finishes the job within two hours. With the Fast and Furious saga spanning eight films, there's much more continuity and cohesion (especially regarding character arcs), and plenty of logic—the logic of the Fast and Furious world, obviously, not ours. Keep them separate. Your criteria don't hold water anyway.

And wait, one quick correction. I'd bet money that a heatseeking missile destroyed the sub in part 8, not a Charger.

briskhound2 said:Let me check my inbox. Nope, I don't see any message from you telling me the title was wrong and asking me to change it. And honestly—who the hell cares if it didn't explicitly say "A Fast and Furious Story"? Everyone knows it as Hobbs & Shaw anyway.

Didn't realize I was on duty for this thread. I'd bet I wasn't even the one who started it. 🤔 Besides, I didn't even see or open this until today, so it's the same story all over again. Who gives a damn? Certainly not me, based on what I'm seeing here. From just two posts, it's obvious you aren't exactly a stickler for precision. There are plenty of us who care about accuracy, and we don't give a damn about your nitpicking. At least, the ones who actually have a spine 😁

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads