MovieChat Forums > Far Cry (2008) Discussion > First watch, then rate

First watch, then rate

posted 16 years ago by Orki72
66 replies | jump to latest

Sorry, but this sucks....please do not rate movies because you saw the trailer or hated the actor/director whatsoever. Imdb was(!) a good information site with "normal" ratings, now it just sucks often.

Uwe Boll isn't the best director in the world, but if you didn't see this movie, do not rate it with a 1 or else only because it's his work.

And second of all, not every goddamn new movie deserves a 10! The ratings should be related to movie "history", too. So please ask yourself twice before you rate.

And this movie is just average. 5 out of 10 or 6 if you like action movies, but as it seemed to be censored in Germany, which is dumb, btw not to blame the director this time but the distributors - it gets a 5 from me for now, as it wasn't boring but not spectacular as well - just average

[–] magen-david-adom 15 years ago

I ve seen it. Terrible. The only thing of this title /Far Cry/ is that it actually that it makes you wanna cry seeing how BAD films can today's audience and producers withstand. Another piece of crap from Uwe Boll. After Postal and Tunnel Rats, i thought that he may be improving. Sadly, I was wrong :/.

[–] Barney_Ross 15 years ago

You know what?Sometimes i like some cheesy action movie with some comedy,this one doesn't even feel cheap.

I can watch Scarface,just like i can watch Commando,
you just have to make the difference between style.

[–] Radalan 15 years ago

Two parts that had a huge negative effect for me towards the movie.

1) The filming location was the exact same place where they filmed House Of The Dead, with a $30.000.000 budget they could have at least filmed the movie in... I don't know Hawaii, and make it look like the pacific where the game is based, because the landscapes in the movie are just outright boring.

2) The comedy relief sidekick, just why did they have to go back in to the basics and add a sidekick that does a lot of ridicilous stuff and shouts all kinds of stupid *beep* it's not funny. They could have at least toned that guy down a bit, or taken him off.

[–] Tony_Hedlund 15 years ago

Yak yak yak... It goes on... Oh, I didn't mean you (That would be the original poster, NOT EVERYONE ELSE!!!!), just everyone else.

Everyone's got an angle of things, so do I:

This movie was awsome!
And I'd never rate a movie I've not seen either, that's just F.U.B.A.R, plain and simple.

I don't get it with Hollywood. It's not the movies themselves that determines how good it is, it's how good reviews it gets. Now That's -Bleepety-bleep:ed- Sh-bleep!

I don't understand how/why ppl. are always comparing movies to each others, depending on who the -Bleep- made it, that makes a worlds difference. Why?

Here's a thought: We humans like to not think for ourselves, we need to be told what to like, and what not to like. If we don't, we're barely worth our weight in -Bleep-t, and were neck-deep in it for that.

The things I liked almost best about this one what the (Action) opening-scenes, where he did those things we (Audience) normally would go "-Yeah, sure. I'll buy that (With a whole bunch of sarcasm)", and he really pulled it off / delivered it. It looked credible, not a 10000000:1, as it usually does.
Think the stunts they pull off in movies such as The Matrix (That movie does explain why they're able to do what they do, but it was the simplest I could think of) when they leap from roof-top to roof-top and stuff like that.

The only exaggerated part that annoyed me slightly, was the adamant skin they had. This remained unexplained to my disappointment. I'd like to know why it was bullet-proof, like down to the smallest detail.

Otherwise, the fx was outstanding, the gore and so I mean. Like when they inserted, what-was-it-probe? into his cerebellum or something like that.

Top of every forum:"View: ... | ... | ... | nest" <-Choose "nest"!!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Strazdamonas 15 years ago

so you are actaully confessing in being retard who doesnt not use brian at all and rate movies witohut seeing them? Because of guys like you world is turning into a *beep*

----------
I'm very responsible, when ever something goes wrong they always say I'm responsible.

[–] tiboine 15 years ago

word.

But i'm still gonna rate it a 1.

[–] derekjay 15 years ago

This movie is about a 6 for me... Honestly I never played he game, and I know it's a Uwe Boll film. I just don't care, I pay my money to rent it and have a good time. And it was actually pretty entertaining and action packed. This movie is like the newest Rambo. You have an idea what to expect, and you enjoy it, however it's not memorable like Predator or anything like that.

[–] aletannu 15 years ago

It is very undrrated. The movie is pretty good. I liked it.. 6/10
There are lots of idiots who rate it without watching it. They gave it a low rating because it is directed by Uwe Boll.
But the movie is quite good and worth watching. It is a very entertaining action movie

[–] Radalan 15 years ago

They gave it a low rating because it is directed by Uwe Boll.

Well gee Mr./Mrs. Obvious, thanks for that information.

Let me put it this way.

If you were a food critic and you would have to give a rating from 1 to 10 to a cook after eating a piece of this cake.

Now the first 5 cakes you had tasted were basically baked from *beep* and so you gave each of them 1 out of 10.

Now few months later you had to give him a rating again, wether the new cake was made of strawberries or *beep* would it actually matter?

You would give it 1 out of 10 and preferred to not even have a taste of it.

And that's what the last zillion movie from Uwe Boll have been, made from *beep*

[–] joshuak47 15 years ago

Casshern, in all fairness, have you seen all of his other movies? I haven't, admittedly, but this movie was not bad (for an action, and only action film). It used a few cool effects actually, and had some funny parts (and they were funny on purpose--non sequiturs).
One thing I recommend is introspecting, figuring out why you're so full of anger.

[–] aletannu 15 years ago

No, my idiot friend, I wouldn't rate it before seing it. I saw 90% of Boll's movies and most are garbages, but there are some pretty good movies made by him.
And for the "cake part"... If I have tasted 5 cakes made by that cook and I gave each of them 1/10 because they were very bad, after a few months I'd rather refuse to taste the sixth one, but I won't rate it, either. This is the difference between you and me: I am fair and I judge the things as they are. You are an idiot and you judge things as you think they should be. You saw a bad movie made by Boll and that means every movie he'll make, till the rest of his life, will be a bad movie, but you won't even watch another one. You will just rate it. And that's painfull
Anyway, why am I trying to explain you this kind of things when you just proved you're an idiot and an ignorant and you're voting for movies without taking a look ?...

[–] liakyh 15 years ago

Just watched it with the lowest expectations, and I still managed to be disappointed. Rated one. This movie has perhaps the most atrocious script and editing I've ever seen. Fan videos for computer games on Youtube were scripted better than this.

[–] akcanakpinar 15 years ago

olkan duygulandın galiba credits'te yerli kardeşleri görünce.Film bi sikime benzemiyor kusura bakma ama 3 bile etmez.Rol yapma sıfır ada tropik diil adı far cry sanı yok.