It's Claudia, the clear winner of the "Person Most Likely to Peruse the Movie Chaos within IMDB to Rebuff Anyone who Dares Question the Movie" Award!! Someone tell her what she has won!! You must check back hourly to ensure no one has posted something negative against this movie - for that I commend you! First off, my Title "Atrociously Bad" is a play on words. "Atrocious Bad" would be a double negative, however the use of atrociously (which is an adverb) makes it an acceptable use of the form of atrocious to describe the adjective "bad." The mere use of the word "bad" was not enough in the case of this movie. Second, please stop right now with the condescending "congratulations" and the comment of my "cool catch." I didn't catch anything that 100 other posters on this site and countless (mindless?) others have who have seen it have caught. Whether or not it took place in a day, and Statham was gone before the autopsy occured, is not the point. The point is the plot "twist" was revealed and it was clear that he had escaped the building and was involved. The semi-concious viewer at that point had it pegged. Any 8th grader could then make the jump that his partner from the bridge most likely was Snipes and they were in on it. This was an intelligence insulting movie, similar to all of Statham's lead "actor" work. This movie failed on all levels - from script, to casting, to performance, to editing, to suspense building, to drama, to character development, to effects.
This will be the last I post on this movie, because it really isn't debatable. It feels like I am debating the merits of professional wrestling with a person who loves it so much they legitimize it (I have tried this by the way). At the end of the day, I can find all the holes/gaps/implausibilities I want in professional wrestling, and try to edjookate the person and "change their mind" about it, but it will be moot. The person who is enamored with professional wrestling will stay enamored with it no matter what I say or what points are brought up.
Come to think of it, I am thinking most professional wrestling fans would love this movie.
reply
share
Sweet_and_Lowdown77
15 years ago
it's quite cowardly to attack someone personally then state "this is my last post on the subject." If you have the audacity to attack someone, be man enough (or woman enough) to allow a response. But from someone who is a milksop, I would expect nothing less.
And you are wrong. It was the point of your original post. You were trying to back up your point that you believed the ending was predicatable. You could have left it at that. But "no", you chose to cite examples and they came back to bite you hard on the a$$. And instead of bascially saying, "Yeah, you're right. It was addressed in the film and autposies do take a lot longer than the film lasted. I still hated the film." You choose to say, "It wasn't the point that dental records weren't used or an autopsy was performed." How lame.
If you recall (scroll up), you wrote:
Doesn't anyone check dental records anymore? You can damn well bet an autopsy would be performed on a guy like Conners.
If it wasn't the point (as you lamely stated in your 2nd post); then why bring it up at all?
I simply pointed out what was in the film and that the police would most certainly perform an autopsy but those things take days/weeks to finsih. And it most certainly is the point when a film takes place in less than 24 hours and you are crying/whining about no autopsy or dental records to prove the body wasn't him.
If we're giving out awards... What do you win for "Worst Spin of their original post?"
Now... I clearly stated I had only one problem with your original post. Did I attack anything else? NO. You are completely free to like or dislike and I have never said anyone they had to like the film. I only addressed your specific note which was, whether you like it or not, wrong. Did I say the film wasn't predictable? No. Did I say I couldn't see Statham coming back? Or that you were wrong about seeing Statham coming back? NO. I only commented that the points you were using to back up your opinion were wrong.
And they were.
You claim I go out of my way to defend the film. Well you have gone deliriously out of the way to defend your point which I proved was wrong.
You are still entitled to your opinion and if the ending was predictable to you, fine. Just when you are trying to be all cool and smart, but get caught - be a stand up person and accept it.
Please do not respond. Not because I "fear" you or that I am trying to silence/censor you. But stay true to your cowardly word.
reply
share
Rick_Gershman
15 years ago
I just wanted to applaud Claudia for her intelligent, thoughtful and well-reasoned replies, especially after PJ's ridiculously obnoxious response. I disliked PJ's post for another reason: I haven't seen Chaos yet, and think PJ certainly should have put a Spoiler Alert at the top of his (or her?) post.
Regardless, I'll be paying closer attention to Claudia's comments: I like the way she rolls. :-)
reply
share
15 years ago
[deleted]
Sweet_and_Lowdown77
15 years ago
Coming from you, I consider that a compliment. Once again, people can't simply talk film. They (weakly) make personal attacks and cowardly run. Great use of your time.
reply
share