The Expendables Review

Off Topic
201

[quote]Jereth127 wrote:
Fuck…
Why do some of you guys bitch about dialogue and character development in what is obviously meant to be a homage to the great action movies of the last 30 years…? Are you actually so far up your own ass that you can’t just accept that some movies don’t thrive to beat Tarantino and Shyamalan on dialgogue and plot twists?

It was the kind of movie I haven’t enjoyed since I was about 10. Simple story line where a badass(in this case, a bunch of badasses) takes on some dickheads and wins while cutting down lots of pawns and blowing shit up left, right and centre. The baddies always have terrible aim and the good guys happen to have awesome aim and never miss. Some of the fight scenes had me smiling and laughing they were so badass.

It was a film made to salvage some testosterone in hollywood.
Only gripe was there was no tits.

I had a 22oz steak not long before seeing it though so I happened to already be having a good day when I saw it.

Awesome stuff. Haven’t enjoyed a movie like that in such a long time. Statham stole the show.[/quote]

I like what you post Jereth (not just here but in other forums too). But I got to draw the line at calling M Night Shyamalan on his plot twists. There are better comparisons out there :slight_smile:

The rest of what you said was spot on. And Fuck, I ate a hamburger steak and Sirloin steak with a friend before going to the see the movie as well. I guess you can’t get more of a BLOKE (macho) film than that!

It was like playing Duke Nukem 3D or Doom in a live action movie.

202

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]sardines12 wrote:
not at all [/quote]

Do your research. Emos didn’t pop out of nowhere.[/quote]
Ok know it all, even though your wrong.[/quote]

LOL. You’re the guy that said the Joker’s choice of getaway vehicle was a major flaw in The Dark Knight, that Inception was a typical summer blockbuster, had no depth and was therefore perfectly straightforward, then you told me that my predictions for Thor were “all in the comic” even though Branagh has gone on record as having gone outside of the comic book for inspiration.

Then you have the nerve to call me a know-it-all? If reading around on the subjects which inspired a movie I’d like to see qualifies me as a “know-it-all” - something you see as a negative thing, even though it allows me to read into a movie with greater depth than if I hadn’t bothered, and makes the experience more enjoyable than just sitting there expecting the scriptwriter to spoon-feed all the facts like a toddler would be fed by his mother - then I guess that makes you a know-nothing…

If only there were more know-it-alls in the world: maybe then people wouldn’t offer up botched opinions of movies and whinge endlessly about plot holes, flaws and coincidences when the director didn’t manage squeeze the entire universe into a two-hour movie.

Forgive me if I don’t take your word on anything movie related.

203

Machete!! Ok I’m only bumping this to push out down the sacrafice thread. hahaha Yeahhhh

Edit: I might as well add something of interest. Below is a interview Sly did over the weekend, since his Movie came out number 1 for the sec week in a row-

Now that Sylvester Stallone’s “The Expendables” movie is a big success, the actor/director is already planning a sequel and is reaching out to famous action stars to join him.

“If you’re on a winner you just stay with it,” Stallone told KISS FM. “It would be great to get the guys back, and maybe get some of the other guys who weren’t in it - like Van Damme and whatever - to be in it, and then bring in some young bloods, and have Bruce Willis as the villain. I said 'Bruce, chasing you for two hours? that would be great! I can get behind that.”

Stallone also wants Arnold Schwarzenegger to return in a bigger role. Other names that were previously thrown around were Kurt Russell, Steven Seagal and Danny Trejo, who was set to star in the original until Stallone screwed him over.

Source: Moviehole, KIIS FM

Read more: http://worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=18723#ixzz0xQi5P2NY

204

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]sardines12 wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]sardines12 wrote:
not at all [/quote]

Do your research. Emos didn’t pop out of nowhere.[/quote]
Ok know it all, even though your wrong.[/quote]

LOL. You’re the guy that said the Joker’s choice of getaway vehicle was a major flaw in The Dark Knight, that Inception was a typical summer blockbuster, had no depth and was therefore perfectly straightforward, then you told me that my predictions for Thor were “all in the comic” even though Branagh has gone on record as having gone outside of the comic book for inspiration.

Then you have the nerve to call me a know-it-all? If reading around on the subjects which inspired a movie I’d like to see qualifies me as a “know-it-all” - something you see as a negative thing, even though it allows me to read into a movie with greater depth than if I hadn’t bothered, and makes the experience more enjoyable than just sitting there expecting the scriptwriter to spoon-feed all the facts like a toddler would be fed by his mother - then I guess that makes you a know-nothing…

If only there were more know-it-alls in the world: maybe then people wouldn’t offer up botched opinions of movies and whinge endlessly about plot holes, flaws and coincidences when the director didn’t manage squeeze the entire universe into a two-hour movie.

Forgive me if I don’t take your word on anything movie related.[/quote]

Dude…

He was crappin’ your style, so you decided to cut his transmission faster than Lee Myles.

Wild…

205

[quote]WormwoodTheory wrote:

[quote]Jereth127 wrote:
Fuck…
Why do some of you guys bitch about dialogue and character development in what is obviously meant to be a homage to the great action movies of the last 30 years…? Are you actually so far up your own ass that you can’t just accept that some movies don’t thrive to beat Tarantino and Shyamalan on dialgogue and plot twists?

It was the kind of movie I haven’t enjoyed since I was about 10. Simple story line where a badass(in this case, a bunch of badasses) takes on some dickheads and wins while cutting down lots of pawns and blowing shit up left, right and centre. The baddies always have terrible aim and the good guys happen to have awesome aim and never miss. Some of the fight scenes had me smiling and laughing they were so badass.

It was a film made to salvage some testosterone in hollywood.
Only gripe was there was no tits.

I had a 22oz steak not long before seeing it though so I happened to already be having a good day when I saw it.

Awesome stuff. Haven’t enjoyed a movie like that in such a long time. Statham stole the show.[/quote]

i agree completely. Because when I was 10, these were the kind of movies i was into.

But making a Frankenstein’s monster out of a bunch of action movie scripts does not make for a classic, or even an homage to a classic. It’s just a laundry list of cliches.

Test yourself. Sit there, and think of each of the main characters names. What was the name of the island they were on for most of the movie? How many expendables were there? [/quote]

Actually during the movie I was wondering if some of the names were intentionally ‘non-badass’(eg, Barney, Christmas). Not exactly names that would strike fear into the heart of your enemies.
To each his own and all that, but this movie didn’t try to be anything more than it was; a cheesy action flick. That’s part of what made it so awesome.

[quote]XanderBuilt wrote:

[quote]Jereth127 wrote:
Fuck…
Why do some of you guys bitch about dialogue and character development in what is obviously meant to be a homage to the great action movies of the last 30 years…? Are you actually so far up your own ass that you can’t just accept that some movies don’t thrive to beat Tarantino and Shyamalan on dialgogue and plot twists?

It was the kind of movie I haven’t enjoyed since I was about 10. Simple story line where a badass(in this case, a bunch of badasses) takes on some dickheads and wins while cutting down lots of pawns and blowing shit up left, right and centre. The baddies always have terrible aim and the good guys happen to have awesome aim and never miss. Some of the fight scenes had me smiling and laughing they were so badass.

It was a film made to salvage some testosterone in hollywood.
Only gripe was there was no tits.

I had a 22oz steak not long before seeing it though so I happened to already be having a good day when I saw it.

Awesome stuff. Haven’t enjoyed a movie like that in such a long time. Statham stole the show.[/quote]

I like what you post Jereth (not just here but in other forums too). But I got to draw the line at calling M Night Shyamalan on his plot twists. There are better comparisons out there :slight_smile:

The rest of what you said was spot on. And Fuck, I ate a hamburger steak and Sirloin steak with a friend before going to the see the movie as well. I guess you can’t get more of a BLOKE (macho) film than that!

It was like playing Duke Nukem 3D or Doom in a live action movie.[/quote]

Haha yeah I was a bit hesitant to put in Shyamalan as an example here but I was tired dammit!

206

http://my.spill.com/profiles/blogs/expendables-2-to-have-vandamme

Yea I bumped an old thread get over it. :slight_smile: