Make Your Picks

The Fry Box: Spud's Reviews

→ in
Tools    





The Expendables (2010)

Clearly, the only reason to see this is because, as you were growing up, you secretly wanted all of these guys in one big action-packed movie.
Or bedroom.



I disagree with your review, though. It was a great movie, in my opinion. It was like one of the old action flicks from the 80's with Stallone. That's impressive since it seems like most nods to classic films from the last 30 years (remakes and such) always turn out awful and wrong. Stallone's directing helped. The film is definitely typical clichéd material, but I really liked it and I recommend it.



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
I disagree with your review, though. It was a great movie, in my opinion.
For this, it's either you love it, or you hate it. I have yet to see a happy medium to it.
__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg



Yeah, I didn't dig The Expendables either, and I'm pretty predisposed to appreciate campy, self-aware action. It had a few very cool moments, but it felt really slapped together at times. I didn't go in expecting a great movie, just a particularly fun and possibly inventively violent one, and I'm not entirely sure we even got that. There were little shreds of the sort of fighting and comedy I'd expected, but they were few and far between and a lot of the jokes felt like first drafts. I could see what they were going for most of the time, but it never really seemed to land.

Mickey Rourke can definitely still act, though. So there's that.



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World (2010)

Going into this, I wasn't expecting a masterpiece, but I also wasn't expecting what I saw.

I really can't flesh out an entire review of this, simply because... I hated it. Sure, it had some clever lines, and nods to the "classic" video games, but the story was so all over the place, I found myself wanting to leave (and I was watching it at home).

I don't know if it's Michael Cera's voice, his mannerisms, etc., I just don't like the kid. Seeing as how he was in a majority of the film, it was ruined for me.

Granted, I'm probably in the minority of people who didn't get/like it. Of course, it could be the exact opposite. I wasn't familiar with the source material, but as I've said before, that shouldn't matter. If you want the masses to spend money on the tickets, you should make it appeal to a broader spectrum of audiences.

In the end, it IS worth at least one viewing. I would say that if you were to base your decision on watching this, off this or any review, you would be wasting your time. You simply have to watch it.




planet news's Avatar
Registered User
I'm probably in the minority of people who didn't get [...] it.
Oh, you "got" it alright. There's not a whole lot to "get".
__________________
"Loves them? They need them, like they need the air."



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
Oh, you "got" it alright. There's not a whole lot to "get".
Right, you are. Like I said before, I really wanted to like it. However, I kept watching and waiting for the big moment. Sadly, it never happened.



This is really happening
Right, you are. Like I said before, I really wanted to like it. However, I kept watching and waiting for the big moment. Sadly, it never happened.
I liked it from the start. It's not too deep, and Cera's never going to win any awards for his acting ability, but I thought it was really funny and enjoyable
__________________
Recently Watched: AKIRA, Little Miss Sunshine, Take Shelter



Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World (2010)

In the end, it IS worth at least one viewing. I would say that if you were to base your decision on watching this, off this or any review, you would be wasting your time. You simply have to watch it.
Ok
__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha



The Expendables i enjoyed, i watched the movie expecting everything that it was.



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
The Other Guys (2010)

Either I'm losing my sense of humor, or this wasn't really that funny.

I normally like Adam McKay's movies. Granted, Step Brothers took some time to grow on me, but it's one that I continually quote and find quite funny now. This movie, however, had elements which seemed to be forced, at times.

The chemistry between Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg was hilarious when it was at its peak, and unbearable any other time. Some of their antics were quite hilarious ["You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can be used against you as a... floatation device"].

Steve Coogan was not funny, at all. Michael Keaton, who played their Captain (and had a second job at Bed, Bath and Beyond), had some funny lines, but overall the rest of the cast was cannon fodder.

Not a weak performance from either Wahlberg or Ferrell, but their supporting cast was weak. The story itself (if they hadn't gone into their lessons on money and Ponzi schemes) could have been better. Having said that, it is still watchable and quite funny, in parts.




I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
TRON Legacy (2010)

Think back to when you were a kid. You probably had that one movie that was on repeat in your house that you could just never tire of watching. Now, say someone was to come along and do a sequel to said movie, almost 30 years later. What would you expect, and would you be let down with the end result?

I'm not saying that TRON was my all-time favorite, as a kid, but I remember watching it in awe. Over the years, there have been countless breakthroughs in computer generated graphics, but a movie like TRON, which could have benefited significantly from a facelift, was left unscathed. Would it have been better to leave well enough alone? That's a tough question to answer.

What worked in this were clearly the visuals. However, visuals alone can't tell a story. That's not to say the story was terrible, it just wasn't fleshed out well. There were elements that could have been expanded on, or at least hinted to, but the main focus was on Flynn and CLU.

I read in one review that the film is fast-paced and very good, up until Sam's entrance into The Grid. I would say that, for the most part, is a true statement. Of course, it doesn't stop dead in its tracks after this; it just plods along and at one point, stops dead in its tracks.

What really worked for me, in the end, were the visuals (of course) and the usage of the 3-D. There was never that "gimmick shot" that a lot of 3-D films try and incorporate. For that, I am thankful. To be honest, the 3-D aspect was so subtle; it really added depth to the picture, without going overboard. If you plan on watching it in the theatre, you WANT to see it in 3-D, or even 3-D IMAX.

Going back to my original question, would I be let down? Not at all, I was pleased with the outcome.




I want to see The Other Guys. I love Will Ferrell.
__________________
"Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter." - Ernest Hemingway



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
I want to see The Other Guys. I love Will Ferrell.
You might be let down. It was ok, but it wasn't as funny as I expected. I figured Wahlberg and Ferrell could really have fun with their roles, but they didn't, and what resulted was just a few humorous scenes.



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
The A-Team (2010)

Call me crazy, but I was expecting this to be an utter and horrific failure. Sure, it's safe to say that this wasn't going to be winning an Oscar for Best Screenplay or Best Picture, but it was a lot better than I wanted to give it credit for.

One thing I like about all of these TV to movie adaptions, is that while they may not always be good, they do a good job in bringing in a new audience. It's been years since I last watched The A-Team on TV. I remember the crew, most notably Mr. T as B.A. I wasn't sure what to expect going into this, but I had an idea that it wouldn't be good.

I was wrong.

The action was on par with the show, even if some of the stunts they pulled defied gravity and/or reality. Casting was spot on, with the exception of B.A., played by Rampage Jackson. He may be a good fighter, but actor... the verdict is still out on that one.

Story wise, it was a well thought out (fitting of an A-Team mission) type of story. Faceman's time in prison was a little unbelievable. I don’t' care who you know, getting a TV, exercise equipment, etc., in a cell is just ridiculous. They stretched the charm of the guy far past its boundaries.

Not entirely a mindless action flick, but you can check your brain at the door, and just enjoy it for what it is. If anything, get a few laughs out of Sharlto Copley's performance as Murdoch.




planet news's Avatar
Registered User
There was never that "gimmick shot" that a lot of 3-D films try and incorporate.
What is this in reference to?



I ain't gettin' in no fryer!
What is this in reference to?
I'm referring more to the nameless object that is thrust forward into the audience to achieve that "wow" or "scare" factor. Monsters Vs. Aliens had the paddle ball, at the beginning of the movie. My Bloody Valentine had quite a few gimmick shots, just to name a couple.



I want to see The Other Guys. I love Will Ferrell.
Do you like him or think he's funny? I only ask because I've found a number of people who think Will Ferrell is really funny actually, when promted, think his films are funny and are quite shocked to discover that he's the second or third funniest in whatever Will Ferrell film it is. Occassionally, they even think that, while they think the film's funny, he's not.

I think I've said it elsewhere, but I really didn't want to see The A-Team before I saw the 'proper' trailer for it (not a teaser.) Hated the idea of it, the pics, the posters and I do my best to avoid Liam Neeson whenever possible, but that trailer really made it look fun. And it was. I really liked most of the film, though I could've done with that last set piece on the ship. However, before that, I was having a blast. Truly ridiculous, but in the A-Team style of which I approve. However, I'd say that if you didn't like Charlie's Angels or Shoot 'Em Up, then maybe you should avoid this.

Re: Rampage Jackson. Was he really any worse than Mr. T, Spud? I thought he did a good job. And I can definately see tv's and exercise equiptment in a large single cell. Hell, I can see that without having Faceman's charm.