Escape to the Movies: Salt

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

This is the first thing that's actually made me halfway interested in seeing the movie. (I mean, I like looking at Angelina Jolie as much as the next straight guy, but let's face it, she's definitely had her share of clunkers.) Thanks for the review, Bob.

Catalyst691:
I saw the premiere in Albany at the Palace Theater last night, and I have to say that this movie is kinda...meh. It's really predictable, and yes there were a few "twists" but they really didn't help make the plot anymore coherent.

I'm just curious to know how you thought a predictable movie was not coherent. I mean, to me a movie riddled with twists tend make the plot less relateable and more absurd. (See M Knight Shamalon) Please tell me, because I've not quite decided if I want to see this.

And I'm with the "Jolie is attractive but her looks are overrated" camp. She can act though, so that's fine with me.

I'm fine with a predictable spy flick, as along as the plot is realistic enough to be relavent. (And by predictable I mean you could clearly see the plot unfold with logic, not by just guessing when a phony twist is about to happen like you do at a Slasher Horror movie.) Something like Eagle Eye, for example. Plot line devoleped, not aburptly change perspective.

There's a South Park episode that compares Mel Gibson's storywriting to M Knight Shamalon's "twists" and totally nails it.

ProfessorLayton:

ToonLink:
MovieBob has never steered me wrong before. Gonna check this one out.

Hmm... did you see Splice? Did you see Edge of Darkness? Did you not see the Book of Eli?

Well, I was expecting this to be a piece of crap, so let's hope you're right about this one.

You didn't like Splice either, eh? I mistakenly took MovieBob's comment about it being the next Matrix as sage advice and saw it in the theater. With my younger brother. Awkward.

And the movie was pretty awful besides.

OT: I'll probably just rent this. I still have to see Inception.

Ok, we get it dude, you have a borderline creepy obsession with Angelina Jolie. I can't take the review seriously after you spend 2 minutes gushing about how hot she is. Which I completely disagree with.

"there are worse ways of spending an evening" is not a selling point for me.

Blue-State:
A spy movie where you can actually see the fight scenes? BRILLIANT!

To the Kremlin: We'll stop making hot spy movies about Russia when Russia stops making hot spies.
image

HAHAHAHAHA this made me laugh! :)

Good review. Not a Jolie fan myself though. She's not bad by any means, but I have my share of favorites and she's not one of them.

Also, Russia is still kind of a dick. Especially if you happen to live next door. Finland does a pretty good job of caring for both our kids and our elderly. And our dairy facilities have very high standards. A hell of a lot higher than yours anyway. Thank you and good day, sir. ;D

Towels:

Catalyst691:
I saw the premiere in Albany at the Palace Theater last night, and I have to say that this movie is kinda...meh. It's really predictable, and yes there were a few "twists" but they really didn't help make the plot anymore coherent.

I'm just curious to know how you thought a predictable movie was not coherent. I mean, to me a movie riddled with twists tend make the plot less relateable and more absurd. (See M Knight Shamalon) Please tell me, because I've not quite decided if I want to see this.

And I'm with the "Jolie is attractive but her looks are overrated" camp. She can act though, so that's fine with me.

I'm fine with a predictable spy flick, as along as the plot is realistic enough to be relavent. (And by predictable I mean you could clearly see the plot unfold with logic, not by just guessing when a phony twist is about to happen like you do at a Slasher Horror movie.) Something like Eagle Eye, for example. Plot line devoleped, not aburptly change perspective.

There's a South Park episode that compares Mel Gibson's storywriting to M Knight Shamalon's "twists" and totally nails it.[/quote

Towels:
[quote="Catalyst691" post="6.217185.7341025"]I saw the premiere in Albany at the Palace Theater last night, and I have to say that this movie is kinda...meh. It's really predictable, and yes there were a few "twists" but they really didn't help make the plot anymore coherent.

I'm just curious to know how you thought a predictable movie was not coherent. I mean, to me a movie riddled with twists tend make the plot less relateable and more absurd. (See M Knight Shamalon) Please tell me, because I've not quite decided if I want to see this.

And I'm with the "Jolie is attractive but her looks are overrated" camp. She can act though, so that's fine with me.

I'm fine with a predictable spy flick, as along as the plot is realistic enough to be relavent. (And by predictable I mean you could clearly see the plot unfold with logic, not by just guessing when a phony twist is about to happen like you do at a Slasher Horror movie.) Something like Eagle Eye, for example. Plot line devoleped, not aburptly change perspective.

There's a South Park episode that compares Mel Gibson's storywriting to M Knight Shamalon's "twists" and totally nails it.

I reread my post, and noticed that I was not too clear. The movie was "predictable" because it was pretty generic. Meaning, you could see a twist coming. (I would explain how, but it would kinda ruin the movie). Let's just say those closest are usually the biggest threat. On a sidenote, I would not really compare this twist to an M. Night movie just because his twists usually spin the entire plot of the movie on its head.

As to why the movie was not coherent, there were a lot of times where it was hard to understand what characters were saying, and what they were talking about. (Might have just been where I was located, almost at the top). There was also so much going on the plot felt rushed to make way for the action, which is good because its that kinda of movie, but it fails to engage the viewer in any sort of emotional roller coaster.

Anyway, the movie just felt too plain and generic, like a Mission Impossible without the comedy, or a Bourne Identity without the story. It's a fun ride, but don't be looking for anything spectacular. Check out Inception if you haven't yet, the plot is a bit confusing, but worth the effort. Hope this clears things up.

It does suck that Russia is always "the bad guy" in most fiction, nowadays. But look on the bright side: Mark Millar wrote up a fantastic story about a Russian Superman. Then again, that still doesn't help much, considering...

What...if ...it was like... a chick?

HALLLELUJAHHHH

Funny enough the only reason I'd see this film is for Liev Schriber. I could any movie that man is in any day <3

I don't really find Angela that attractive these days, but good video nonetheless.

I actually loved this movie. The plot was slick enough to keep you guessing the entire time, and the action was some of the best I've ever seen, period.

Interesting bit about the gender swap, though; honestly, there's no remnant of a male lead role anywhere in the movie.

zelda2fanboy:
I never understood the "sex appeal" of Angelina Jolie. She's completely unattractive to me and I've seen good portions of Original Sin. She looks too much like Jon Voight. Just watch some of his earlier stuff like Midnight Cowboy and you'll be turned off forever. Chick has got a man-face. She's also not that great of an actress. I know my opinion on this doesn't matter at all, but talking about hot she is isn't going to get you laid either. I'm just saying Brad can have her for all I care.

I don't know about this movie. Can one enjoy it even if one does not like Jolie? Ebert gave it four stars, and like many of his alleged four star movies (Signs, Femme Fatale) I'm a touch skeptical.

I disagree on both points, she is attractive and can act.
But seriously now, that kind of judgment is subjective to the extreme so there really is little point in debating the finer points of Angeline Jolie.

Gildedtongue:
Still insecure about your sexuality that you have to waste more time trying to affirm it to us, Bobbo?

Honestly, it's getting kind of annoying and dull having to listen to a review underneath a shower of fanboi drool.

I'm more and more starting to agree with the second part. I don't give a shit about who's hot or which CGI character Bob wants to wank over. It's seriously treading a line between second rate movie blogger and proper reviewer. I think Bob can do excellent reviews with half the sleazy creepy virgin nerd vibe. If you don't believe me compare the first reviews to the last few.

As for Salt, I'm not too impressed with it. Sounds like a rental.

Blue-State:
A spy movie where you can actually see the fight scenes? BRILLIANT!

To the Kremlin: We'll stop making hot spy movies about Russia when Russia stops making hot spies.
image

my thoughts exactly :P

I'll probably see it eventually, but the trailer made it seem so incredibly generic and uninteresting that it's become a hard sell. And the tagline doesn't do it any favors either. Is Hollywood running out of people with language skills?

Jolie's face is wooden. I don't like her acting in anything.

And if I ever start caring about sex appeal in the movies I watch, I'll go watch porn.

KingPiccolOwned:
Still completely uninterested in this movie, mostly because I don't like spy movies if it isn't James Bond, and I don't think Angelina Jolee (or however that's spelled) is in any way attractive... I'm serious, I don't think she's hot.

Neither do I, so I never really get when people seem to assume one form of physical attraction would ever be universal.

On the film, looks fairly average...maybe a rental someday.

Just got back from it.

Eh, it was okay. Not horrid, but not great either.

And I guess I really am the only person who finds Angelina Jolie completely unattractive and a horrid actress.

Julianking93:
And I guess I really am the only person who finds Angelina Jolie completely unattractive and a horrid actress.

I'm right there with you son.

Russia does send spies to the US, so they can't really complain.

maxben:

I disagree on both points, she is attractive and can act.
But seriously now, that kind of judgment is subjective to the extreme so there really is little point in debating the finer points of Angeline Jolie.

Eh, just looking for someone else who agreed with my unattraction towards the "most attractive woman in the world." Maybe it's just because everyone else agrees that she's hot that she doesn't do anything for me personally. Like Pamela Anderson or Jennifer Aniston, who also bore me a little bit. I'd much rather watch stuff with any of the girls from Scrubs.

Pfft, she's not that hot.

Give me the Black Widow anyday.

image

/drool

zelda2fanboy:

Eh, just looking for someone else who agreed with my unattraction towards the "most attractive woman in the world." Maybe it's just because everyone else agrees that she's hot that she doesn't do anything for me personally. Like Pamela Anderson or Jennifer Aniston, who also bore me a little bit. I'd much rather watch stuff with any of the girls from Scrubs.

Oh holy shit yeah. Sarah Chalke is bonerific.

LawlessSquirrel:
Wait, so this is actually fairly good? Looked cliched and stale to me from the trailers, but hey, sounds interesting enough to me now.

^This. Since I'm in a situation where I agreed with two mates to go to the cinema one of these days, this will supplement Inception nicely so I don't have to watch it twice/switch plans ^^

Oh and on Angelina, she's got some proper talent if you watched her movies past the Tomb Raider stuff, though it is a bit taste-specific. On her looks, I can't disagree with Bob on this one, she's hot, but not in a sexy/smoking hot kind of way (which Scarlet would certainly fit into ;) ), but in a wild, raw-sexuality sort of way.

I'd say Bob got it pretty spot on with this one. It's good, but in a popcorn-movie kind of way, not in a thoughtful, quality movie kind of way.

However, Bob must have walked into the movie a little late. Let's just say they certainly find an excuse at the beginning of the movie to show Jolie in FAR less than a torn midriff in a situation where, while not exactly gratuitous, isn't exactly necessary either.

Mezmer:

KingPiccolOwned:
I don't think Angelina Jolee (or however that's spelled) is in any way attractive... I'm serious, I don't think she's hot.

This. Her lips creep me out.

They take up half her face. DX I don't get the appeal.

OT: I dunno. I feel like this movie's been done before...

Woodsey:
...

I thought this film came out like a year ago?

^This, dear god this...

This has been driving me insane, I have clear memories of watching either a trailer or a storyboard about this movie over a year ago. Trying to get other people to recollect this has been very frustrating and I started to think I was hallucinating. Thank you for giving me some hope. I think it might have been a pushback like Dragonheart was.

Also, I just want to take a moment to thank good ol' moviebob for something I usually take for granted in his reviews. Touching base with the origins of the film's conceptualization, director history, changes in the script and story, and other interesting sidestories may seem like just a device to help spice up the reviews or to legitimize MvB as a movie snob but it also gives me insight into whether I will like a movie more than I think many people realize.

I don't like movies much, with a few notable exceptions, so I've been searching for a long time for a critic that has views and tastes that allign with mine. MvB is no more that than most others, he likes Peter Jackson's crucifiction of Tolkein and dislikes more than a few movies that I thought were great (Lady in the Water for example). But one thing watching MvB does that tells me if I'll like a movie is post all the other side information that I rarely have time to compile but would make all the difference to whether I give it a try.

So thanks again moviebob! Keep up the awesome work and I'll keep drinking the Escape to the Movies Kool-Aid

KingPiccolOwned:
Still completely uninterested in this movie, mostly because I don't like spy movies if it isn't James Bond, and I don't think Angelina Jolee (or however that's spelled) is in any way attractive... I'm serious, I don't think she's hot.

*Ahem* "Men, we have found another.. take him to the PIT."

..Kidding, completely your opinion.

Angelina Fucking Hot Beyond ..Wow. Jolie in a spy movie in which she gets to be.. hot. And kill things. And be hot. And generally just.. Huh.

Maybe.

She is not hot.

I look at her, nothing happens to me. I watch her on TV, ziltch. No difference between her and Megan Fox except that she's a much better actor.

And it's not like it's just her. I've never understood the sexual appeal of ANY female celebrities, or even the widely-accepted concept of "hot" at all. All I can get behind is the less popular kinky stuff. I swear to GOD I am a Japanese person in a caucasian body.

Bob has fallen so in love with those now dated stills of Jolie that he can't see how haggard she is in reality now. She looks pasty, stick-like and aged in the actual movie clips.

Big difference from the stills.

At least Bob's happy I guess.

Every time I read "Who is Salt?" on the promotional material, I can't help but remember "Who is Keyser Soze?" What a good movie that one was.

So let's see what Movie Bob told me about this movie.

There are running spies involved, who will be shooting and having fight scenes.

Russia is the bad guy.

Angelina Jolie is in it.

And, while this isn't really relevant to the actual film, Movie Bob is really hot for Angelina Jolie.

The first and third were immediately obvious from the trailers, and the second isn't exactly useful in determining whether or not I should go see it. The fourth is, in my opinion, a symptom of the reason why Movie Bob is never going to be any kind of reliable critic. Seriously, get laid, or get a porno collection, or maybe lay off the porno collection a bit, or something, but just stop spending 2-3 minutes of your 5 minute reviews on the sex appeal of the characters involved. I can SEE the sex appeal of the characters involved by watching a trailer, or punching the names of the actors into Google Images. Tell me about something that ISN'T immediately obvious.

Although I will say that I find his written articles to be more interesting than his videos, most of the time, as he usually doesn't feel the need to go on about how hot or not person X is when he hasn't got pictures on hand to prove his point.

So the ambiguity works? Interesting.

Oh dear. I just lost respect for you MovieBob.

You recommend Equilibrium? That film was dire!

lol Angelina hot, NO. she is just a more talented version of Megan fox.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here