Escape to the Movies: Red 2

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Retrograde:
I'd bet a shiny new penny that Bob felt left out of the 'internet critics piss on Man Of Steel' bandwagon and has since decided that swaying from consensus on this is just too much. I thought it was badass, surprised the guy that loved Pacific Rim hated that, the last 40 minutes was exactly what he loved about Pacific Rim. That film is Godzilla made life? Well that last part of MoS is DBZ made life, and its awesome.

Oh yeah this film. Meh. If it makes money it's off of people that have surely already seen Pacific Rim twice, otherwise why exactly would you choose this over that?

And this guy nailed it.

I've been on the fence about the conjuring, and congratulations bob i think you pushed me into seeing it LOL.
I've been intrigued, that generally makes watching it more like a home work assignment than actual enjoyment,
curiosity is a crap chute with movies,

and bob heaped alot of it on me. I liked Red so fuck bobs back handed complements. I expect to like red 2.

Hilarious that people who through some herculean mind gymnastics have managed to convinced themselves that MoS was "good" are getting their feathers so ruffled because Bob listened to reason and finally saw it for what it was.

Can anyone tell me what's wrong about Butler besides it being Oscar bait?

This movie does remind me of a strange comic I read once. It was about an eclectic group of old folks from various countries arming up and fighting another group of old enemy farts that have formed a terrorist group. The "Red" comes in to it since they're all sistas and bros from the Spanish Civil War volunteer brigades. Old people sharing a gunfight does have a weird charm to it, I can't say why.

To be fair, what I like about this flick from what I've heard so far is the honesty of it. They wanted to bundle a few grey old wolves up again and sprinkle some Asian spice over it, and I can respect that. Open simplicity by heart isn't so bad.

Not to mention, seeing Bruce Willis' bald head bob up and down between some explosions just feels right.

Retrograde:

Fair enough.

I imagine I'm probably one of the few whose primary Supe exposure is actually cartoons rather than films OR comics, and the film is much closer to a big chunk of cartoon series than it is to previous movies or comics, so I can see why I'm in a niche. And you do indeed expound on the points further. Good work.

I was actually looking forward to Superman but the middle act which seemed like it want to have me connect with Clark and Lois just never connected with me. I personally think that Amy Adams and Henry Cavil would have been brilliant in the rolls if there was bit more meat on the script and if the movie had given them lines that were expositiony and more like real people talking. I think that it could have been a grand film with the theme of bringing hope to a world where hope was passe which have a perfect way to keep Superman as the earnest boy scout I read about as a kid and still make him fit with today's expectations. So basically I am judging MOS for not being the film I wanted but I just can't help myself. Same thing happened with Star Trek imo.

Kinda bummed that after Pacific Rim last week he didn't get around to reviewing The Heat, another original-attempt-at-a-tired-genre movie that's largely being ignored. Instead it's Just Another Bruce Willis Action Sequel.

Chris Mosher:
I think that it could have been a grand film with the theme of bringing hope to a world where hope was passe which have a perfect way to keep Superman as the earnest boy scout I read about as a kid and still make him fit with today's expectations.

And they wouldn't have to start out the movie with him being "an earnest boyscout" if that's what people keep whining about in terms of Superman's character.

If he STARTED OFF the movie as a Daily Planet employee, all the nonsense they were doing in that movie would have actually meant something. Pa Kent's insistence on having his son hide who he is would have made him do just that; hide away as the meek/unremarkable/blend-into-the-background Clark in the NYC allegory of Metropolis where no one notices anybody. Where nonchalant cynicism is the status quo, something that HE HIMSELF buys into. And Clark, as well as the audience, could EXPERIENCE what his dad was talking about; we could see people getting treated badly for being too different or celebrities getting dragged off their pedestals for being too "good" or just giving Clark shit for being a "goodie goodie" since in this day and age, good =/= kewl. Don't TELL us "yada yada humanity sucks", SHOW us.

But yeah, that woulda been the main narrative arc. He starts off cynical and fearful, but by the end he overcomes his trust issues and becomes more optimistic and brave. Clark begins to see a better side of humanity (mostly in the form of Lois) and discovers that he can use his powers to do great things (after the pep talk from Jor-El). So by the time Zod comes around with his "RAWR FUCK HUMANS" attitude, Clark can be like "No! I now see hope for them! Krypton blew it, now it's Earth's turn!"

We'd get to SEE that transformation unfold instead of, again, just being told that he changes. And I'm not even sure if they did that. The movie just kinda ends with "AND NOW HE'S SUPERMAN! K bai naow." without much closure on anything...

I would have expected Moviebob to be all over The Butler, wonder why he doesn't seem to excited about?

Also, I really hope all of you are right about Pacific Rim. I'm going to see it tomorrow, and I really don't want to get disappointed.

Hey Bob! Great review as always, can't wait to get a copy of your book, really wish I lived close enough to get it signed. I've also been looking into Mario game history lately, and intend to do some sort of series, so I hope your book's contents will be helpful, if not lots of fun to read. Good luck next week!

The first RED was pretty damn forgettable, even for me...and I don't usually forget films! Your problem with the second one being forgettable as you're watching it was the same problem I had with the first, so I'm not going to be seeing this.

As for Man of Steel...I loved it, but probably because I actually liked the grim tone of it all. Probably because I hate Superman (something about having all those powers just annoys me, call me childish), but I dunno.

This summer's line-up of films isn't great, but it does have some gems such as Pacific Rim (seeing Sunday), The World's End (seeing Wednesday), Kick Ass 2 (seeing it when my housemate comes back to uni), Monsters University (probably not gonna see as I don't have the time)...it's not chock-a-block with viewable films, but it's got a couple of good ones! Surely that's enough?

ToastiestZombie:
I would have expected Moviebob to be all over The Butler, wonder why he doesn't seem to excited about?

http://moviebob.blogspot.com/2013/05/gump-harder.html

The Butler looks to be just WAAAAAAAAAY too maudlin and melodramatic for its own good.

If you took out Tyler Perry's bad comedy and mid-movie church sessions, you'd pretty much get Lee Daniels.

All I took from this was: Disney Planes.

WTF? o.O

The Dubya:

GSP66:

No you said that any one with decent taste pissed on Man of Steel ergo implying he and anyone who liked Man of Steel does not have decent taste.

Doesn't mean you aren't allowed to like bad movies. Someone like my mom is going to find a movie like Malibu's Most Wanted a masterpiece; and though it had all the critical beating it took coming for not being a quality film, it doesn't mean she isn't allowed to like it. I'm just not going to take her opinion on film and film-making very seriously over guys like, say, Roger Ebert, who have a better understanding of what they're talking about and what separates the good from the bad.

Some people like munching on healthy food; some people like scarfing down junk food. Don't confuse a Caesar salad with a bowl of puffy Cheetos is all I'm saying...

*shrugs*

Look guy, I don't wanna get into some internet slap fight but I tend to agree with people like me. Bob's taste tend to be similar to mine but we differ on alot of stuff. Zodiac, Drag Me to Hell and Predators were all films I remember him liking yet I hated the crap out of them (granted I havn't seen Drag me to Hell all the way through), the arguments he made in his videos were strong but I still thought they were crap.

Its just the way you said 'Don't confuse a Caesar salad with a bowl of puffy Cheetos', I know there are people more qualified to judge but Art and Science tend to butt heads in terms of oppinion, salad is proven to be good for you, movies effect different people in different ways.

I know it's nitpicking, sorry, i'm not trying to get aggressive.

Personally I thought Man of Steel was meh at most.

Retrograde:
I'd bet a shiny new penny that Bob felt left out of the 'internet critics piss on Man Of Steel' bandwagon and has since decided that swaying from consensus on this is just too much. I thought it was badass, surprised the guy that loved Pacific Rim hated that, the last 40 minutes was exactly what he loved about Pacific Rim. That film is Godzilla made life? Well that last part of MoS is DBZ made life, and its awesome.

I would love a real DBZ made life and not that POS that was launched, but the problem here is that MoS should be a Superman movie, and it should aspire to be more than punching the villain in the face. Actually, even in DBZ, Goku always convinced the bad guys to go *away* from any nearby city to avoid waton destruction.

I wonder if MovieBob would encourage going to see RED 2 just so Hollywood knows that it was preferred over the other shit that was out? Though I guess he'd prefer everyone went to see Pacific Rim over Grown ups 2 if we're doing that.

P.S. Anyone else noticed the cover to his book features the SMB 3 from super mario all stars which is different to the original SMB 3?

I have watched your star trek into darkness review 5 times and still don't get your point, probably my favorite film of the decade so far. Then again I must be odd as I cannot remember the plot of any iron man or the captain america film and fell asleep midway through the avengers.

So how long are you going to keep plugging your book? Anyone who would've bought it would've known that it exists right now and anyone NOT interested before isn't going to stay after the credits to watch it.

At this point, it's inconsequential.

You know things are looking bad this summer when you get a reviewer saying "WOO-HOO! MEDIOCRITY!!!" All in all, that's about what I expected to hear out of this review considering the duds that Bob has been reviewing lately.

I'm hoping he does this RIPD - which is an unfixable acronym if you ask me...shouldn't it be RIPPD since they're...apparently ghost cops? But "Rest In Peace Police Department" makes about as much sense as Rest In Peace Department - that's been all over the internet with it's ads (hey, it's a hell of a lot better than those annoying The Sub ads so I'll gladly take it). I'm wondering if it'll turn out as lame as it seems it will.

I'm still looking forward to seeing this movie. I think Bob has been hyper critical of movies this year. Most of the ones that he has found to complain about I have actually liked. I have no problem with Man of Steel for instance, I thought it was excellent. And as far as this movie is concerned, I am with him in a lot of ways. The first film was extremely good during, but the after is largely a mystery. I can't tell you the order of events and I can only tell you pieces of the overarching plot, but it was still extremely enjoyable during. I'm not even old, but it was good. People have two selves, so to speak. Kahneman and Tverski wrote of this in their works. There is the remembering self and experiencing self. Some things are only good for one of these two. For instance, we'll use climbing Mt. Everest as an example. The experiencing self will not enjoy that particular adventure. It's well documented that it's a completely miserable experience. That is something for the remembering self. The remembering self looks back at an event and sums up the general feelings of the act itself. So, in remembering, climbing Mt. Everest is a once in a lifetime experience and an accomplishment that is worth respect and admiration. I feel like the film RED and probably RED 2 is one for the experiencing self. It is largely a mystery for the remembering self, but the experiencing self eats it up.

Yeah I'm getting tired of: I love Iron man, I love pacific rim, Spiderman sux, Man of Steel sux, buy my book.

Even while talking about other movies........ I'll have to look for another movie critic I guess.

This week on Escape to The Movies with MovieBob, MovieBob's fans learn an important lesson in the relative nature of quality in the entertainment industry. Or just one reviewer's opinion thereof. Decide which by arguing about it in the comments!

You know, looking at the Iron Man 3 and Pacific Rim posters right next to each other, does anyone else think they look like they're all in the same scene? Even the skies look like they match up.

Pleaaaase...

Every halfway intelligent individual knows that the MPAA is a giant shill of a "ratings board". By the standards used to select those on the board, none of them should even still be there in the first place. Heck, I recommend "This Film is not yet Rated". It's on Netflix, and it's an interesting and fun examination of just how hypocritical and pointless the MPAA really is.

Seriously, go check it out.

And I feel a little bad in that I haven't seen the first "Red". I caught a chunk near the ending, sure, but not the entire movie. Enjoyed it though, for what it is, so I might have to look around on Netflix. I'll probably wait til this is on DVD though, I still need to see Pacific Rim!

Because god dang does Guillermo del Toro deserves money. Lots of money. Enough to make Hellboy 3, because that needs done.

The Dubya:
This thread is so going to turn into a Man Of Steel vs. Iron Man 3 turf war, I can already tell...

...and this response probably won't help any:

Retrograde:
I'd bet a shiny new penny that Bob felt left out of the 'internet critics piss on Man Of Steel' bandwagon and has since decided that swaying from consensus on this is just too much.

Anyone with decent taste in film has pissed all over Man Of Steel.

Even in the initial review it felt like he KNEW it was bad, but just couldn't admit it to itself so he employed all the mental gymnastics he could to avoid saying it.

So I have no taste in film because I enjoyed a movie you didn't like?

You do realize how stupid that sentence of yours sounds, right?

The original superman movies:
-Are blatantly sexist! Lois gets a Pulitzer for what? Being a woman superman likes? It's never explained, and is instead lazy exposition, but even better, it's exposition superman will use to do stupid stuff. How stupid? The original superman(and the only good one by my account) has superman fly around the world to reverse time to save Lois from an earthquake. He saves NOBODY ELSE in that time! We watch a gas station blow up, we watch cars hit water, and where as Superman gets to the scene and saves who he can, he only goes BACK IN TIME FOR THE GIRL! It gets steadily worse every film after that, even including Superman Returns which tried hard to pander!
-Has superman erase Lois's Mind with a KISS!
-Superman still kills Zod. He kils Zod, Zod's girlfriend, and a retarded gentlemen. Superman uses Texas Justice!
-Has Lex Luthor scheme up a Land Trade by sinking part of america! -_-
-In Superman Returns, superman has still erased Lois's mind, but Lois is still total down with her baby obviously being superman's even though she can't recall them ever doing the nasty! She's in fact happy they did it even though SHE CLEARLY CAN'T RECALL IT!!!!!!

The new Superman is not perfect, it's far from it. It's symbolic, expositional, and showy. It's still the best Superman that has hit film...sorry.

ShadowHamster:
The original superman movies:
-Are blatantly sexist!

Gonna stop you right there.

And MoS isn't? The film where a married woman saw the love of her life and the father of her child murdered infront of her and we're expected to believe she just... cried about it?

The film where the main love interest is saved by the hero four times and continues to be relevant to the plot only because Jor'El didn't bother to take the two-three seconds necessary to explain "Hit object A with thing B to win" to Clark... And despite it being one of her only decent lines in the film, that wasn't just either setting up a better line from someone else or responding to Clark, she never once wore or considered wearing a flak vest or kevlar. At all. Even when tagging along onboard an aircraft intending to fly at the alien superweapon and then drop a bomb of sorts on it... Eh? I don't see how that is an improvement on her 70's counterpart.

There are other elements to it but where the original Superman films were hamstrung by their time and setting the recent outing in the form of MoS doesn't deserve that excuse. I'd like to call it just sexist but there were points where it was blatantly misogynistic.

AJey:
Sorry, Bob, but the last Iron Man was not good. It was the messiest of them all and outright silly.

I enjoyed that film, but even so, it wasn't as good as Into Darkness. That's still the most enjoyable film I've seen this summer (yet to see Pacific Rim mind).

To make a long story short. Just because Super Man can level a city just from fighting, doesn't mean he does if there is a possible second option to prevent the lose of lives. Super mans "theme" was that even with all of his power to level an entire city, he does his best to limit the casualties or damage. He uses his brains first before his brawn. Fans of Super-man have already made a list of possible options he could of done to limit collateral damage, but in the end it just ended up unnecessarily leveling an entire city. Which is what Super-man tries not to do unless his all options have been negated.

Always a pleasure to see your stuff, Bob.
Sorry I won't be at your book signing, but keep that shit up: you are an eloquent, well informed voice in an otherwise overwhelming shouting match of opinions, and I'm glad to hear you over the din.

PuckFuppet:

ShadowHamster:
The original superman movies:
-Are blatantly sexist!

Gonna stop you right there.

And MoS isn't? The film where a married woman saw the love of her life and the father of her child murdered infront of her and we're expected to believe she just... cried about it?

The film where the main love interest is saved by the hero four times and continues to be relevant to the plot only because Jor'El didn't bother to take the two-three seconds necessary to explain "Hit object A with thing B to win" to Clark... And despite it being one of her only decent lines in the film, that wasn't just either setting up a better line from someone else or responding to Clark, she never once wore or considered wearing a flak vest or kevlar. At all. Even when tagging along onboard an aircraft intending to fly at the alien superweapon and then drop a bomb of sorts on it... Eh? I don't see how that is an improvement on her 70's counterpart.

There are other elements to it but where the original Superman films were hamstrung by their time and setting the recent outing in the form of MoS doesn't deserve that excuse. I'd like to call it just sexist but there were points where it was blatantly misogynistic.

I'm tired of people making excuses for the originals. I look at Tim Burton's Batman today and I see a terrible movie. IN IT'S DAY it did what people wanted it to do, which was take away the Adam West cheese.(Until Batman and Robin baffingly tried to return it) Are you talking about Jor'el's wife? Who did the RIGHT THING, and confronted her attackers in court? What did you want her to do? Murder them on the scene? Which even Jor'el avoided doing?

Lois is saved several times BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE POWERS LIKE SUPER SAYANS!!!!! In the mean time she shows herself to be observant, smart, and honorable by being the only person capable of tracking Superman's origins and only relenting when she saw the bigger picture. In the meantime having to be saved means nothing to her trying to go back out and win the fight, right up to flying into the heart of what was a suicide mission! Jor'el was never actually there, only a simulation, and managed to give the info to the one the badguys weren't guarding heavily. The one they wouldn't think to double check because they underestimated her. If you consider all of the 4 times she was saved, she isn't even saved from imminent and hopeless threat, but from objects and security systems. At no time did I get the impression that Lois was incompetent, and actually quite the opposite.

What's more, the second most shown woman in the movie is Zod's lieutenant, who in the original movies was obsessed with Zod(watch superman II again and they actually just tell you this in the OPENNING!!!! OBSESSED WITH MAD INFATUATION WITH ZOD!!!) Here she is a strong military mind who obviously rose to power due to her competence and power. She overpowers every enemy that's faced and is only beaten in the face of a friggin black hole!

So yeah, MUCH better track record so far!

The thing that really bugs me though, is people who don't like MoS don't really give many reasons. I didn't even see the stuff people keep pointing out as definite fact:

"It's dark and grim tone doesn't fit the material! The movie feels depressing!" I'm sorry, but at no point did I find the movie depressing. I'd like someone to point out what elements of this film depressed them, because to me it was the classic messiah movie with Superman playing that role, while the ghosts of his past put his desired future at stake! They represent superman beautifully here, a force more powerful than you could imagine choosing to walk as an equal rather than bask in any kind of glory. A physical power balanced by a philosophy that preaches good for good's sake, with the award being people not dying. I'd even point out that he consistently breaks his father's wishes since he still saves people left and right, he just does so undercover.

"Zod is killed!" Moviebob's only legitimate argument to the film, yet Zod has died in every other medium superman has been in, and in each one has died by superman's hand! So they broke his character by having him do to Zod what he's been forced to do in EVERY OTHER INSTANCE WITH THE CHARACTER?! In Superman II he kills them AFTER depowering them, meaning he could just as easily have locked them up in a prison! In the comics, killing them is the reason for his sabbatical from earth. In MoS, they don't just kill Zod, they also show that Superman fought really damn hard to NOT kill Zod. He pleads with Zod AND ALL HIS FORCES to stop their plans about 3 times before enacting a plan to save earth at the cost of their lives. He only takes Krypton life when the Kryptonians make it very clear this is war.

"Superman doesn't need realism" and this movie has any? MoS is incredibly stylized and is painted in tones that scream "EPIC EPIC EPIC!!!" at the top of their lungs. On the other hand at no point did I think they were going for realism. I thought they were going for "larger than life" which is something superman should frankly fucking radiate! And HE DID! I'm not even calling this film at all perfect, I'm just saying it's the best representation of the character IN FILM! and I stand by that statement until someone reveals what I'm missing. I don't even think it's the best representation of the character, for that you want comics.

Seriously, what did people want out of this? My hopes weren't all that high, because Warner Brothers has DONE ZERO to make them high. I was more than happy with what I got, which I would rate as a better than average movie with a lot to say on the material. It fleshed a lot out, giving us a look at the ridiculous technology on Krypton. Telling us what made Krypton blow up.(Core Mining caused the planets Core to become unstable, and thus it lost it's center of gravity and collapsed.) It felt researched, and I've read the HELL out of superman. I'm a pop culture junkie and my favorite fix is comics man!

I just don't get it. If this was a marvel film I don't for A SECOND think that moviebob would be so troubled. It's this sacred cow thing because Superman isn't a character, he's a god damned icon, to the point where you just can't please everyone. This was very in flavor with the cartoon from the 90s, it's also very in flavor with Silver Age superman. I enjoyed the hell out of it. Sorry.

Bob's been leaning more towards being whinier and less about being informative lately. I'm finding his reviews a lot less interesting to watch as time progresses.

Come on Bob, where's the old Escape to the Movies I used to love? :(

ShadowHamster:
snippity snip

im fully behind you.
The old suprhero movies are glorified to no end and when you actually look at them with a fresh look, they are far from being good. to begin with. In the original superman movies most of characters were blatantly retarded......

ShadowHamster:
I just don't get it. If this was a marvel film I don't for A SECOND think that moviebob would be so troubled.

I kind of feel this is the reason why Bob trashes Superman and Batman so much.

I had two problems with Man of Steel: 1) It was way the heck too loud. There was no reason for the insane level of noise just to fill the noise. Heck, I'm partially deaf in one ear and it was still so overbearingly loud...
2) The scene where Superman goes to talk to the preacher, and then we get that pan up to the stained glass window of Jesus. Subtle!
Those being said, I still enjoyed the movie, just... gonna wait until I can control the volume myself to see it again.
Oddly enough? I had no trouble with how loud Pacific Rim was, but it wasn't just loud for the sake of loud. It fit the moments.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 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