The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
On now on ITV. Very good film in my opinion, takes a more scientific approach to the whole comic book hero/villain scenario.
Excellent parts played by both Jackson and Willis.
Watch it!
Excellent parts played by both Jackson and Willis.
Watch it!
Page:
It wasnt too bad, although i twigged about elijah being the arch-nemesis long before he actually admitted it.
Capiche.
And it certainly was not justifying why America reads comics, for heavens sake have you actually seen current comics?
And it certainly was not justifying why America reads comics, for heavens sake have you actually seen current comics?
A fantastic film with a neat little twist there at the end, and the text trying to convince you it was real...
It was slightly pondrous and was really a film to justify why America reads comics.
Fantastic.
It was slightly pondrous and was really a film to justify why America reads comics.
Fantastic.
well I enjoyed it anyway, capiché?
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> that makes no sense. a film can have a twist whether or not it has
> hints. and what do you mean by hints anyway? there are hints
> everywhere if you look hard enough. maybe these passed you by ....
For starters what El Blokey says are not hints, he simply states what he has done.
What I mean is that the hints should be interpretable when they happen or after a few times they have happened - they shouldn't need outright explaining at the end of the film by a character because that's just crap writing.
The way in which he sees that Samuel L Jackson's character is the villain is inconsistent. He sees it when he shakes the guy's hand - and yes this is the first time he has physically touched the guy - but at the station and at the stadium he has seen what people have done without touching them - the guy with the gun for instance.
More to the point, it doesn't even matter what Samuel L Jacksons character has done because the viewer has no connection with any of those killed by him. Even the train wreck was done in a crappy low budget way. In short the viewer has no real reason to even give a toss. The whole thing was crap through and through - and that#s leaving aside the other plot holes. Like Jackson in the comic shop - this is a guy who claims to know comics like his back hand and to have studied them, yet it takes him aggggeeesss to make his statement that the 2 of them are connected but at opposite ends....come on!
> that makes no sense. a film can have a twist whether or not it has
> hints. and what do you mean by hints anyway? there are hints
> everywhere if you look hard enough. maybe these passed you by ....
For starters what El Blokey says are not hints, he simply states what he has done.
What I mean is that the hints should be interpretable when they happen or after a few times they have happened - they shouldn't need outright explaining at the end of the film by a character because that's just crap writing.
The way in which he sees that Samuel L Jackson's character is the villain is inconsistent. He sees it when he shakes the guy's hand - and yes this is the first time he has physically touched the guy - but at the station and at the stadium he has seen what people have done without touching them - the guy with the gun for instance.
More to the point, it doesn't even matter what Samuel L Jacksons character has done because the viewer has no connection with any of those killed by him. Even the train wreck was done in a crappy low budget way. In short the viewer has no real reason to even give a toss. The whole thing was crap through and through - and that#s leaving aside the other plot holes. Like Jackson in the comic shop - this is a guy who claims to know comics like his back hand and to have studied them, yet it takes him aggggeeesss to make his statement that the 2 of them are connected but at opposite ends....come on!
You genius.
YOU GENIUS.
YOU GENIUS.
The twist for me was that it was a true story.
Never knew that!
Never knew that!
Belldandy wrote:
> Absolute crap. It is NOT a twist if there is no hint.
that makes no sense. a film can have a twist whether or not it has hints. and what do you mean by hints anyway? there are hints everywhere if you look hard enough. maybe these passed you by ....
> Absolute crap. It is NOT a twist if there is no hint.
that makes no sense. a film can have a twist whether or not it has hints. and what do you mean by hints anyway? there are hints everywhere if you look hard enough. maybe these passed you by ....
Belldandy wrote:
> Absolute crap. It is NOT a twist if there is no hint. Sixth Sense had
> hints, this didn't.
"There have been many accidents."
"Lots and lots. Recent ones, terrible accidents."
"I've studied all these recent accidents."
"Studied them."
"Eh? Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more. STUDIED them, get it?"
> Absolute crap. It is NOT a twist if there is no hint. Sixth Sense had
> hints, this didn't.
"There have been many accidents."
"Lots and lots. Recent ones, terrible accidents."
"I've studied all these recent accidents."
"Studied them."
"Eh? Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more. STUDIED them, get it?"
Absolute crap. It is NOT a twist if there is no hint. Sixth Sense had hints, this didn't. And who cared if he was the villain anyway? A waste of two hours.
Page: