Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews6
mrmikemaxfield's rating
Seriously, am I the only person who is bored already with this script? And STILL another version of the same crap will be out this summer with, "King Arthur." Hey, that might be good, just the same way as "Troy," by definition, IS good. My problem isn't in the regular way of saying, "oh, I didn't like it." My issue is that I'm just bored already with the same basic EPIC-storyline, in an extremely VAST setting, with some gigantic, humongous, battle-scene. (and there's always a wizard in these friggin' movies!!) Anyway, this "Troy" crap is just the same. There's a semi-huge "teaser" battle at the beginning, followed by tons-and-tons of dramatic characters interacting, (again, usually involving a wizard...) with way too many looooooong epic shots of the "setting-up" for the big war that is eventually going to take place. In this case, we see about 74 different pans and sweeps of the ships coming to Troy. Anyway, blah, blah, blah... there is tons of love story crap, and tons of Brad Pitt's butt. Then there is the giant battle-scene, which of course is cool and everything, but I'm just done with this deal already. And you know what else? These epic-war, before-there-were-guns, movies, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS are 3 hours long!!! Why do they need to be 3 hours long? Trim it down people! That's right editor's, use the friggin' "trim-tool!" I don't mean I don't like certain scenes or anything. You can keep every single scene in Troy, in the final product. I just think if we didn't have to see 87 angles of the ships coming in, or sit on everybody's eye's really long, while zooming in super slowly... then the movie might only be a hefty 2 hours, instead of 3 grueling hours.
Honestly, I probably still wouldn't have loved it, even if it was only 2 hours. I don't really know why exactly. I just know I'm completely done with wizards, swords, and thousands of people running directly into each other with shields and axes. ...MOVING ON!!!!
Honestly, I probably still wouldn't have loved it, even if it was only 2 hours. I don't really know why exactly. I just know I'm completely done with wizards, swords, and thousands of people running directly into each other with shields and axes. ...MOVING ON!!!!
after "Road Trip," i was positive that Todd Phillips new movie "Old School," would be fantastic. and maybe because i expected perfection, it just couldn't quite live up to my own personal hype. so for that reason, i do want to see it again... however, in my first outing, i felt that although it has GREAT, GREAT scenes, including a fantastic cameo by craig kilborn, overall it felt like your average stupid comedy, with jokes that are not very realistic, and kind of dumbwitted. and the problem i had with that, is that after "Road Trip," i expected more than an average, dumbwitted movie. allow me to explain: in the movie "Road Trip," you have what i call, realistic-comedy. what that means, is that everything in that movie COULD conceivably have happened. and therefore you feel like you are going through this awesome, fun, and hilarious adventure with these kids who have to go on a road trip. and this is exactly what was wrong with "Old School." many of the jokes were slap-stickish, and definately couldn't happen in reality, and therefore the movie automatically tells you to suspend your logic at the front door. i expected, and WANTED a realistic type of comedy, but it was slapstick-ish, with more hits than misses. although you will have a couple belly laughs. it was alright. but due to it not being what it should and could have been, i give it a 2 out of 4. (on the comedy scale.)
ok ok ok... so it was almost 3 hours long. and yes, some of it gets redundant. and yes, i know it was one GIANT music video. but you know what??? it was AWESOME! i had to comment on this movie myself, because too many people did not appreciate it. everyone knocks it for stupid reasons, yet no one seems to acknowledge the intensity of this movie. i mean, no matter what someone thinks of this film, even those who hated it, should still have been able to say one thing about it: it is intense. maybe you find yourself not caring too much about the characters, but i don't know if Stone was necessarily going for that anyway. i think he wanted you to FEEL what it would be like, to be in that situation, at that particular moment, as that particular character... for instance, you can FEEL the pain "Cap Rooney" feels when he is laying out on the field in extreme pain, in the opening of the movie... you can FEEL what it would be like for "Willie Beamen" to come off the bench as a third string QB and suddenly be the leader of the team... and it's through the editing, the music, and the cinematography that all of this comes so alive. overall, if you ever wanted to know what it would FEEL like to play in the NFL, watch this movie. i LOVED it... a beautiful film. nice work mr. stone.