BORING, BORING, BORING


I watched this movie with my boyfriend and mother. We all decided to turn it off half way through. It was so boring, nothing kept our interest in the story. The acting was fine just a very dull movie.

reply

I really wish I could disagree with you. I think it had an excellent cast and all the makings of a great little movie.

I even watched it to the end. I probably shouldn't have bothered.

It was not the worst movie I've ever seen, but, if someone asked me to sum it up in one word, it would be: boring.

(I'm so sorry Cillian, Jim and Brendon)

---------------------------
http://www.thewrongtree.com

reply

I wonder if the genre isn't pretty much played out--postmodernist antihero scumbags who are occasionally funny and charming, and who do mostly despicable things. I don't think there's any way to sustain interest in that kind of thing forever. What's the import? What's the significance or meaning beyond the mere running time of the film? It all seems like pulp fiction (generically) to me. Some of it is well-made, but once you've seen enough of them, so what?

reply

i liked it

reply

I also liked it, thought it was pretty funny.

Also if somebody watches only part of a film, why would their opinion matter to anybody else? The final scene in most films is tremendously important in resolving the story/character arcs.



Don't make me laugh, your kung fu is so so.

reply

I liked it, too. I saw it at the cinema when it came out and enjoyed it and I've just watched it again online and found it even more entertaining than I'd remembered. It wasn't as good as something like "In Bruges" or, more recently, "The Guard", but it was funny, pretty exciting and the cast were all very good.

reply

same thing. couldn't make it to the end. so lame. a pity with this cast and some good ideas. terrible. if someone is reading it before buying or renting the dvd: spend the money for something else.

reply

I kept restarting it after falling asleep and eventually sent it back. Maybe in theaters it would have kept our attention better but I just couldn't do it at home.

"I'm a Puerto Rican from Queens. I speak better Yiddish!" -Juice, SOA

reply

I've been wanting to see it, but I can't take boring. I have a feeling I may feel the same way, but I will give the film a chance

reply

[deleted]




I don't buy that "You didn't watch it all, therefore you can't comment!" line. If it was so bad you switched it off, then of course you can tell us why. Who wrote these rules as to who can and can't comment? I've commented on things I have never seen nor ever will, because I hate someone involved in it and enjoy unburdening. We're not in a court of law here, it's for enjoyment purposes only.






No Guru, No Method, No Teacher.

reply

Not only is it FANTASTIC, but I have seen it close to 20 times! Brenda is someone I would be friends with! Michael is like guys I know and freaking Jim is outstandingly funny! Perrier was skippable- but Brendan is an amazing actor. Stop analyzing it and just enjoy it! Or maybe, for some of you, FINISH IT!

reply

I agree with "trishd525600". I was quite taken by this little movie, especially when both Jim Broadbent and Brendan Gleeson's characters appeared. Only a couple of times, I thought, did it fall off pace. However, that said, I don't mind some light and shade in a movie like this, especially as it was able to tie in each character and their story. I'd watched 'NOKAS' immediately before it and wanted to follow it up with something that wasn't heavy, just a good pace, good story and a laugh or ten along the way. And that was what I got, so no complaints this end.

On a side note: it was great to see Gleeson's son Domhnall playing Clifford. I'd only just watched 'About Time' which was roughly 4 years after this movie. A very talented and diverse young man!!


~ ~ View MY IMDb Lists ...


MY RATINGS: 6,270+ MOVIES ~ http://tinyurl.com/amoviefan-imdb-watched


~ MY 9/10's ~ http://tinyurl.com/amoviefan-imdb-9s
~ MY 10/10's ~ http://tinyurl.com/amoviefan-imdb-10s



~ ~ EVERY Movie Watched in its ENTIRETY! ~ ~

reply

[deleted]