Maybe its because Angelina Jolie looks like my crazy bitch of a ex girl friend, or maybe its because she whores herself out in every god damn movie, or it might just be that she keeps adopting brown kids, but I hate that bitch with a vengeance. That being said, this sound assrape of Wanted is warranted on its own grounds and it would get just as much flack from me regardless of that slut's involvement or not.

Wanted treads the same god awful plot as every other action movie and its mother of the unassuming 20ish guy finding out he's some sort of ninja jesus and that he has to go avenge/ save god knows who for whatever reason and blah blah fucking blah. Oh and Jolie comes in playing the not so vaguely slutty female assassin character, which apparently manifests as being covered in as many mismatched tattoos as humanly possible. Ergo, she looks like a page ripped out of playboy and scribbled on by a small child.

Now lets get this straight. I am not an obsessive realist, I'm ok with the matrix-ish bullet time (although moving at such speed is not only chemically impossible by human make up, but even if you could it would break every bone in whatever limbs were used) I draw the line when the laws of physics are not just tip toed around, but are blatantly ignored. Worse yet, they are blatantly ignored in idiotic ways. The powers of the assassin's seem to vary widely, sometimes with them being able to dodge bullets with ease, other times they can barely dodge a punch. It just all reeks of inconsistency.

Example: Now lets ignore for a second that the Assassin's ability to curve bullets is COMPLETELY both impossible and illogical, and think of it this way. If they have the ability to do that, why face their targets at all? Why not just stand around a corner and keep shooting? Why do their "spider senses" that let them avoid danger only seem to function every now and again? Why is their name so uninspired and generic? Why are there no likeable characters in this movie?

And finally, why the fuck did I spend 7 dollars on a cgi piece of shit like this?

and to reiterate

DIE IN A FIRE JOLIE

...This is hardly a review...it's a half organized rant...

And I'll still go see the movie...

and you're hardly a person, just someone who posts way to much.

as per the "review"

what do you want? a score? Me saying that the cgi is good but over all its alot of sound and thunder signifying and meaning absolutely nothing?

if all you want is action and plot holes, this movie is the one for you.

So, for being grating and pointlessly opinionated you think Jolie is a bitch?

i think ive said enough.

Aye, I do think she's a bitch

now as for Grating and opinionated, yeah, well duh

I hated the movie so I'm gonna be openly hostile with it and as per opinionated, I believe thats the entire point of reviewing something.

as per openly hostile to people commenting, if you don;t like it and give a reason, more power to ya, but if you just call me a pompous hack, which I am, I'm gonna call you a pompous hack too, which you are

Rant =/= Review.

Piecewise:
and you're hardly a person, just someone who posts way to much.

as per the "review"

what do you want? a score? Me saying that the cgi is good but over all its alot of sound and thunder signifying and meaning absolutely nothing?

if all you want is action and plot holes, this movie is the one for you.

Ignoring the whole matter about me posting a lot, your "Review" is just one loud angry exclamation point, grating and pointlessly opinionated as Joe pointed out, and hardly fulfills the duty of being a review. A review is meant to not only offer insight in the subject that's being reviewed, but provide information for the reader who may or may not be on the fence about the subject, say buying a video game, or seeing a movie. Now it's not that people can't think for themselves, but that people like making decisions for themselves after hearing different sides of an argument.

Further more, a decent review usually has some research put into it. Did you know that Wanted is based off a graphic novel miniseries? What parts of the novel does it stray from? Do you feel it strayed to much, stayed true to the original story? Did you know that half the cast and crew openly admit that they not only know curving a bullet is impossible, but that they don't care, and it's part of the glamor of the film? Knowing this do you still think it was too much, could be toned down, or was well crafted? Did you know that they're even considering making this another trilogy? Does that bother you, can it be done, would you like to see that? These questions are ones that you could of answered in your review and I and others might give you a bit more weight if you had to begin with...

Wanted was a great movie, I don't watch movies for realism, which is why I like Sci fi

you are really infuriating

Wanted (2008) is a movie set in the archetypal setting of revenge and the questions of motivation behind one's actions. Its main character, Wesley Gibson, starts the film as one of corporate America's drones, slaving away in an unfulfilling life. However things quickly change when he is catapulted into the millennia old organization named The Fraternity. There he meets his new tutor in all things explosive and gunpowder driven: Fox, played by Angelina Jolie.

A good segment of the film is dedicated to his training, a unique perspective to take and reminiscent of Heinlein's in depth musings. However, very little concrete detail is revealed about the true workings of the group's effects on the world. One thing that is revealed is that the group has a unique way of getting their targets, a device called the Loom of Fate, which doles out information in binary sequences hidden within the fabric it makes.

Some readers might recognize this movie as the film adaptation of Mark Miller and J.G. Jones's Miniseries, which ran from 2003-2004. And while the ideas featured in the comics were intriguing; allowing one to draw parallels to such works as "the Watchmen", the movie seems to fall far from the stories of the comics.

In the comics, Wesley is a much more evil, darker character, who is desensitized to violence, and soon takes a place in the Fraternity, which in this incarnation is a brotherhood of villains who hold dominion over the world. In the Movie, it's a much less super and much less inspired tale, where the fraternity seems to be a secretive and occult force, killing as Fate demands.

Over all its an unfortunate choice as the change has made the actions of the fraternity seem random at times, or even counter productive. And while the Comic anti-hero is a much more "bulls-eye" styled character with an unnatural affinity for instruments of death, his movie counterpart seems to draw heavily from Neo's bag of tricks, defying gravity and physics where the directors see fit.

The movie's greatest triumph is its CGI and fighting/ shooting scenes. They are done in such a way as to make the assassins seem truly invincible, flipping cars, slowing time and curving bullets like an Einsteinian nightmare. However there is the occasional moment where it all seems to hit the "silly:" mark, such as the beginning scene with Gibson's father. Something about his wide mouthed, and over exaggerated rocketing attack seemed almost laughable, and drew one out of the suspension of disbelief.

Over all, the performances of the actors are passable, and the story is still interesting, even if it does fall far from the original. But the true worth of Wanted is in its action and special effects.

Over all, a 7 out of 10, not horrific, but won't show up at the Oscars anytime soon.

better?

Because honestly, I can write good reviews like you want, but I see no reason to waste in depth thinking on a shallow action flick.

Much

And if you can write good reviews then you should, nothing is worth degrading yourself into a sniveling malcontent and pseudo elitist.

Piecewise:
you are really infuriating

Pissing off the masses, one asshole at a time my friend.

Although I disagree with you about Jolie (at least in this film) I actually found your review mildly amusing. But you mentioned the lame name, which made me curious the instant I heard it in the trailer. Why is there a woman figuring prominently in 'The Fraternity'?
On a more opinionated note: 7 out of 10? Seriously? I'd give it 4, maybe 5 tops.

Piecewise:
and you're hardly a person, just someone who posts way to much.

Hides in the corner.

Honestly, this is less a review and more a bashing of AJ. We get it, you hate her, but let's keep ourselves under control. Like any word, a cuss is only as good as you use it. Most of your rant was completely unnecessary and when people have commented, you argue with them. I see you're going to be popular.

Moral of the story: don't swear unless in good context.

I don't know what it is, but everything except his Jolie ranting I rather enjoyed reading. Maybe it's because I hated the movie, but I like to think it's something else.

I just didn't like these sort of speeches:

"And finally, why the fuck did I spend 7 dollars on a cgi piece of shit like this?

and to reiterate

DIE IN A FIRE JOLIE"

A bit unnecessary? Perhaps.

On the bright side his isn't ranting about a good movie like Wall-E

Thats good and great and all, but he's rectified it for the most part...by rewriting a more poignant review

He still is an angry little man though.

shatnershaman:
On the bright side his isn't ranting about a good movie like Wall-E

Actually Wall-E was a stunning both in visuals and in storytelling, managing to make a heartwarming love story even though, and partially because, the main characters only say about 3 words. It moved even an angry little man like me.

also, the voice work was particularly good if you ask me. When the characters only say a few words, it really has to be

Piecewise:

shatnershaman:
On the bright side his isn't ranting about a good movie like Wall-E

Actually Wall-E was a stunning both in visuals and in storytelling, managing to make a heartwarming love story even though, and partially because, the main characters only say about 3 words. It moved even an angry little man like me.

also, the voice work was particularly good if you ask me. When the characters only say a few words, it really has to be

For me it was the humour (cleaning and welding robots ftw)

shatnershaman:
On the bright side his isn't ranting about a good movie like Wall-E

Then I'd have to virtually smack someone. I can't wait until Wall.E gets to Australia. I'm already wetting myself in anticipation.

PurpleRain:
A bit unnessissary? Perhaps.

PurpleRain:
Most of your rant was completely unnessisary

I don't mean to dissect your posts PurpleRain but do you know how to spell "unnecessary"?
Or was that intentional? I come in piece, I meant no disrespect, it was just bugging me.

WlknCntrdiction:

PurpleRain:
A bit unnessissary? Perhaps.

PurpleRain:
Most of your rant was completely unnessisary

I don't mean to dissect your posts PurpleRain but do you know how to spell "unnecessary"?
Or was that intentional? I come in piece, I meant no disrespect, it was just bugging me.

Whoopsy. I'm generally horrible at English but I try my best. Edited for smooth sailing.

Piecewise:
or it might just be that she keeps adopting brown kids, but I hate that bitch with a vengeance.

just a quick question. was this really neccessary? does her adopting habits really affect the movie that much?

Second review was much better. Shame you posted the first review at all, just makes you seem like a bit of a dick to be perfectly honest.

Isaac Dodgson:
Thats good and great and all, but he's rectified it for the most part...by rewriting a more poignant review

He still is an angry little man though.

I don't think you've used poignant in the right context.

I don't see why you'd write that first review which sounds totally unbalanced, as if you hated the film purely because of Angelina Jolie, the second one sounds far better, almost to the point of suspicion - did you really write it or is it a ctrl c job?

I bloody loved wanted, but that's because I fucking love all that slow mo action, shooting bullets out the air, improbably awesome gunfighting shit, so I was totally prepared to overlook some of it's gaping flaws. Plus, it was completely stylised up the arse which I thought was totally sweet. Ha, and I've just complained about a review sounding unbalanced!

Wanted was a great movie, I don't watch movies for realism, which is why I like Sci fi

<facepalm>

But that's the thing - there should be a certain number of realistic science-fiction films, with heavy research involved. I'm sure that people can make exciting science-fiction films that do rely on realism instead of stupid bending-bullet trajectories and pointless inaccuracies. They just have to be inventive in other ways.

RAKtheUndead:

But that's the thing - there should be a certain number of realistic science-fiction films, with heavy research involved. I'm sure that people can make exciting science-fiction films that do rely on realism instead of stupid bending-bullet trajectories and pointless inaccuracies. They just have to be inventive in other ways.

The Andromeda Strain. Awesome movie (the original, not the recent mini-series), hard sci-fi all the way. I also have a soft spot for Contact.

I haven't seen Wanted, does it really qualify as science fiction?

Iron Man did a good job of placing it firmly in reality, wonder how they're going to explain Thor in realistic terms though 0.o

Second review would have got you applause (apart from perhaps the scoring).

First review would have got you flamed.

Seriously, you can be bitter and twisted all you want, but don't make it personal.

"Angelina Jolie really needs collagen in her acting muscle as well" works far better than "I hate how she's everywhere".

Why did you spend $7 on that CGI piece of crap? I don't know, as your first review told me next to nothing about the movie...

Review of the review; too many irrelevancies, too much in the way of personal vindictiveness to the point of appearing more like a crazed rant by someone with an axe to grind against one of the actors than a genuine reflection of the movie's quality, obsesses on trivialities like bullet trajectories instead of dramatic structure or character elements, excessive use of pointless profanity.

Not a total failure of a review, as there were some elements that addressed valid points, but in the main it's forgettable and unlikely to help anyone save perhaps the reviewer's psychoanalyst.

D-, see me after class.

-- Steve

As I've said in all of these Wanted threads so far - the film doesn't really make any sense as it's really a mash of hollywood fabrication and spuriously-represented pieces from the original comic.

So yeah, read the comic. It's awesome.

No Country For Old Men - Realism.
X-Men - Not realism.
Fool's Gold - Realism.
Lord Of The Rings - Not realism.
Sahara - Realism
Wanted - Not realism.

See what I just pointed out there? If you want to see a movie with realism in it go see something that could possibly be real. FFS I hate people that go to a movie thats so BLATANTLY not supposed to be real and then give it a bad review because they were expecting it to be. It's like eating rotten food out of the dumpster because you couldn't get in and then giving the restaraunt a bad review. Pointless and ridiculous. Stop going to movies expecting something that it's not.

Heh, 31 replies, perhaps I should put "DIE IN A FIRE JOLIE" in my next review ;P.

On the whole, this review struck me as pretty angry, I can see why you'd want to convey emotion to an article, gives it more character and all, but here its just devolved your entire thing into a hate rant against Angelina Jolie, not to mention complaining about a lack of realism in a film where the trailer shows bullets curving around slabs of meat is really stating the obvious IMHO...

Since many of us have decided that this is indeed a rant and not a review, may I suggest we move it out of the Reviews section? Maybe to Off-Topic or something.

As for my response to this..."writing", next time you have an urge to write a "review" please actually review the movie/game/book, and not point out facts that everyone already knows (i.e.: bullets can't be curved, people can't dodge bullets like in movies) and actually write about the movie's strengths and weaknesses. Also, reviews aren't meant to be biased. Please, leave as much of your feelings at the door as you can.

One last thing; when responding to people who reply to your posts, assaulting said reply-poster isn't only a bad idea, it's a great way to get banned. Although I see you learned that lesson, hopefully at least.

Edit: To be fair, I missed the other review you wrote. That was well-written and gets your point across that you didn't like it without all the hate. If you don't believe that such a task is good enough for in-depth thinking, may I suggest not writing it at all?

WlknCntrdiction:

PurpleRain:
A bit unnessissary? Perhaps.

PurpleRain:
Most of your rant was completely unnessisary

I don't mean to dissect your posts PurpleRain but do you know how to spell "unnecessary"?
Or was that intentional? I come in piece, I meant no disrespect, it was just bugging me.

Holy Irony Batman!