Did every miss it's point?

The movie stunk.


If you want to go with what the OP states, that's fine.


But then treat it like a lousy song with great lyrics. In the end, you still have a crappy song and it's not enjoyable.

Wow! I took my grandfather to see this yesterday. We walked out and I was telling him "it was like watching The Friends of Eddie Coyle if it had been made today!" I didn't know it was from the same author. Maybe I should check him out?
I loved this film. Both, actually.
I'm glad someone else mentioned Eddie Coyle.

It's hard to miss the point of a movie when it's screaming it at you in neon letters surrounded by exclamation points.

SPOILER ALERT

My references to Fast & Furious, Twilight, and Die Hard were less about those specific movies and more about the general public's need for inane entertainment in the form of sex and violence. Which I gather you knew and picked up my meaning judging by your general good grammar and ability to retort intelligently, but something you chose to ignore only to add fuel to your baseless arguments against a good movie.

And never did I say that any of those movies were stupid. Each one in it's own rights serves a purpose and obviously entertains enough. I myself have seen my fair share of Die Hard/Lethal Weapon/Expendables testosterone infused movies. Also on more than one occasion. But I don't deny the recognition other genres of movies deserve.

My argument is only that as soon as a movie pushes those same people looking for a violence ridden, boner infused cinematic roller-coaster ride out of their norm they don't give the artistic credit due to a movie they themselves misinterpreted.

The "lead brick subtlety" was purposeful and only adds to the mood of this allegory's concepts.

The fact that you say Brad Pitt's hit man character was totally cliche and born of the hundreds of other character hit men that came before only proves your lack of understanding of the movie's plot or dialogue, and furthermore it positions you with the rest of porno indulgent public.

Brad Pitt is practically incapable of playing a non-unique character. He always brings something. His hit man is not the copycat emotionless, ne'er-do-well that we see time and time again. Of course there is going to be machismo, I mean it's *beep* Brad Pitt, but he acknowledges the fact that even with a business mindset there is an emotional investment in each murder- he says as much in the car with Richard Jenkins. Pleading with Jenkins about the waste of time of a beating and asking to skip to putting him out of his misery. Even the two thugs who deliver the beating talk about the emotional toll of Ray Liotta's character making it hard on them.

The only thing cliche about the movie- I assume you agree- was the music. But I didn't feel it was as bad as some. At least it related to what was happening on screen and plot.

As for audience's not buying the "lame" "angsty freshman" bit, it is less about cliches or bad acting, but more about the publics need to deny what's in front of their faces simply for the sake of the self-preservation of their egos- i.e., "That can't possibly be the case. I couldn't be taken for that big of fool. I would have caught it by now." It's a pretty common psychosis.

I by no means love this movie. It was only well done flick. But definitely one of those that I'd only watch once in a lifetime.

You pretty much summed up all of my thoughts about this movie. Thanks.

nice conclusion. well said

Hear hear! I felt sick when I saw that apostrophe.