This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
From the trailers, it looked like they are going more superhero with him. Renner was jumping off buildings, climbing up walls, and there was talk about different genetics? Really made me not want to watch this one.
This sequel is like Iron Man 2 - in that it was largely what I expected and did it pretty well. He's not superman, just taking meds.
Yeah, mildly entertaining is accurate. I was disappointed after some good reviews in this thread. A couple of chuckles, his friend was annoying as hell, I wound up fast-forwarding through most of the scenes with his girlfriend, the fights were just silly. The hockey action itself was filmed very well and it did give what I assume to be an accurate feel of life on a team like that. It just wasn't very funny. All that without even getting into the performance of Sean William Scott. 2/5eta: I thought Liev Schrieber had a better career going. He was the highlight of the movie, imo.Thought the movie was mildly entertaining despite the horrible performance by Sean Willliam Scott. He passed goon territory and went into mentally handicapped.As many others stated - really enjoyed this movie, not the funniest movie out there but a very solid flick.For any one with Amazon Prime it's part of prime streamingSeann William Scott has quietly made a pretty good acting career since American Pie, almost solely in comedies. I have no clue how much money he's made, but Id guess its been pretty good and I wouldnt be surprised to see him in comedies 20 years from now.Jay Baruchel also wrote Goon, which has my interested as well since he's usually solid. Looking forward to seeing this.Yeah this was pretty good. I'm not any more sold on Stifler as an actor than I was before but it was a fun B movie with an excellent supporting cast. Jay Baruchel, Liev Schrieber, Alison Pill all had good roles, and most of his teammates were pretty good too.Goon (2011)
Seann William Scott plays the character Doug. A dim-witted but kind-hearted bouncer that finds his true calling as an ice hockey enforcer. If you liked "Slap Shot" you will love this movie. Goon is an enjoyable sports film.
3.5/5
ETA: Just realized this is streaming on Netflix. I found at least 1 thing to do this weekend
After watching the movie with my family who are in 
with the series I decided to read the first book as parts just made no sense to me. You are correct in that they assumed people watching the movie had read the book as things that happened in the movie made more sense once I read it.
So you're saying it's a must-see? I actually like most Broken Lizard films for what they are, but if Babymakers is worse than Club Dread then that's saying something.
Here's a thought: don't see the movie or read the book
So I guess if I am going to go see the 2nd movie I'll need to read that book first so as to not walk out
I thought the movie was pretty bad. The main rule of fiction is to be consistent to your own premise, and I didn't feel like it was. Or maybe it indeed was, but they just didn't explain the premise at all. I had nothing but questions about why things were happening the way they did. It was just frustrating and annoying. I don't get it I guess.
The girlfriend had read the books so she was was able to answer any questions I had. The basic premise of the movie was simple enough without the backstory but if it had been properly explained, I'm sure it would have been even more enjoyable.
So I guess if I am going to go see the 2nd movie I'll need to read that book first so as to not walk out
They could have spent more time on a sensible plot, and less time on teenybopper love triangle nonsense, but it's clear they've chosen their direction. OK with me, nobody ever forced me to watch Twilight and no one will force me to watch anymore of these.
I've like all of their movies until this one and really don't get the hate for Club Dread. Yeah, it was a giant letdown compared to Super Troopers but that is a pretty tough movie to follow up. Not having Stolhanske and Lemme in Babymakers was a huge mistake. Ranked:
I had a vague idea of the plot going into it (that a bunch of people were going to be killing/hunting each other) and walked away entertained after my 2+ hours.
That's about as much as I knew going in too, and even on that level I was disappointed. Half the deaths occurred off-camera.
Does not compute. Michael Shannon didn't sell you on his breakdown in Take Shelter and teenie fluff like Hunger Games gets a better grade?
Can't get the target demographic in the seats, get a PG-13 rating, and show the kids taking an arrow through the head.That's about as much as I knew going in too, and even on that level I was disappointed. Half the deaths occurred off-camera.
Here's a thought: don't see the movie or read the book
So I guess if I am going to go see the 2nd movie I'll need to read that book first so as to not walk out
actually enjoy the premise, ala running man.Enjoyed the book and am looking forward to seeing the movie again now that I read the first book. It's nice to be able to read/watch a story and talk to my wife and daughter about it since I refuse to get into the twilight series.
So, was the deathmatch on some sort of Holodeck or something? It showed a woman designing these things that were half pit-bull/half Terror Dog from Ghostbusters, and they just materialized in a precise selected location. Were they real or fake?The girlfriend had read the books so she was was able to answer any questions I had. The basic premise of the movie was simple enough without the backstory but if it had been properly explained, I'm sure it would have been even more enjoyable.
So I guess if I am going to go see the 2nd movie I'll need to read that book first so as to not walk out
Real.So, was the deathmatch on some sort of Holodeck or something? It showed a woman designing these things that were half pit-bull/half Terror Dog from Ghostbusters, and they just materialized in a precise selected location. Were they real or fake?The girlfriend had read the books so she was was able to answer any questions I had. The basic premise of the movie was simple enough without the backstory but if it had been properly explained, I'm sure it would have been even more enjoyable.
So I guess if I am going to go see the 2nd movie I'll need to read that book first so as to not walk out
So do they have transporters or something? How did she get the terror dogs from her computer display to where Katniss was? It appeared they grew out of the grass.
They have some type of technology to allow for this. Maybe they borrowed teleporters from Star Trek. You're thinking a little too deep for this movie. It would have been nice for them to explain a little more thoroughly how their society came to be but you really don't need a break down of all their technology, do you?
buddy of mine is kind of a omnivore when it comes to most culture. tv, movies, books and games are all fair game for consumption. he has a soft spot for sci-fi though and recommended it to me. his point was that while it was YA lit, it was just good enough for adults. kind of the equivalent of an airport read.he gave me a copy to read. i tried it and got maybe 3-4 chapters in before putting it down for good. it just isn't for me. i'm not against YA lit, per se, but that was some terrible writing.
'Cliff Clavin said:'Sarnoff said:
You're thinking a little too deep for this movie. It would have been nice for them to explain a little more thoroughly how their society came to be but you really don't need a break down of all their technology, do you?
Like I said before, the one rule of sci-fi especially is that you have to have a consistent premise. It just begs so many other questions... if they could do this, why didn't they do that, etc. I don't need the whole backstory or history or anything broken down. But I do expect at least some kind of nod to the rules the fiction is operating under. I don't think that's thinking any too deep at all. All I wanted was something, even on the surface level. Asking "Where the hell did that come from???" isn't really "thinking too deep", is it? If the most basic level of the premise is just hand-waved at with "Oh, it's the future, they can do that", then the whole thing is pretty pointless. Imagine watching a baseball movie, and in the climax the hero is down 10-0, but in the last at-bat he hits a home run and the umpire yells out "That counts for 11. Hero wins!!!!1juan!" and the explanation you get heading out of the theater from some dude was "Oh, in this movie, baseball can do that."
With this type of movie, surface is everything. Yeah, if I'm watching a movie about baseball, I want it to be consistent with reality because the movie is based on reality. If I'm watching Michael Jordan playing basketball against aliens, I'm not expecting the rules of basketball to be follow too tightly. A movie about transforming robots or giant blue people or any other sci-fi movie, consistency is what the writer/director wants. This was a movie targeting teenagers (I'm guessing mostly chicks) not guys like you or me (I'm assuming you're a male 30+). Its strength are pretty costumes and teenage love.'Cliff Clavin said:'Sarnoff said:
You're thinking a little too deep for this movie. It would have been nice for them to explain a little more thoroughly how their society came to be but you really don't need a break down of all their technology, do you?
I'm not asking for great art or anything. I get it's a popcorn movie. But not having any internal logic is insulting.
Another
I'd love to know what the writers think they were thinking when they thought this up.
M'kay.Not sure about all that but it did remind me that the 1990 film Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead with Tim Roth and Gary Oldman was an excellent film.
Yeah - the arena was a little odd with their technology. I thought in the book they: 1. came up from platforms like the contestants, and 2. they were genetic freaks (like the hornet thingys) and had the faces of the dead contestants on them.'Sarnoff said:
dude's name is Gale. can't be very macho by name alone. this has been proven.
they tried (unsuccessfully).
I'm looking forward to this one.
i did not have a problem with the movie. for what it is, it's ####### awesome.
Do not go into it expecting anything different from what you see in the trailer. In fact, if you watch the trailer you've seen the movie. Action, action, more action. 5 seconds of dialogue that moves the quasi-plot along. More action. More action. More action. That's it. Rinse, repeat...and at some point it just kind of comes to an end.I was a bit tired after watching this movie and wanted to take a nap. That said, if you take it for what it is, it is absolutely awesome!1!!1!!! Seriously. So much fun. Watch it with buddies and take a shot every time someone dies. You'll pass out within minutes.
You know what a pain it is to fly all over the universe to rescue people every time there's a cataclysmic event?Knowing Nic Cage. Couldn't sleep last night. It was on. Why not.
Why? That's the question. I still don't know what I watched. It seemed like it had some potential, Cage aside. I like him for what he is. His Con-Air type movies are stupid fun, although usually for the other people in the movie. Like The Rock. Very very fun movie. But that's because of Connery and I love the chick in it.
But back to this one..... I don't know if I would call them plot holes as much as what appeared to be 5 different movies wrapped into one, and not in a good way. The numbers being decoded and the events could have been a story onto itself, but it warped into something else, his religious family could have been a story, but it wasn't touched until two scenes at the end and for really no reason, the angels made no sense although we're talking about angels, so really, what does makes sense, and the ending tells you that the entire story was basically a version of Revelation but there was no Christ figure to start anew at the end of the apocolypse, instead they go to a new planet to start over, and there just happens to be a Eden on the planet with a tree to, I guess, start the process of humanity all over again. But then, why have all the kids go to the same planet?
I assumed they had the technology to put physical holograms into the real world. A little far-fetched but within the realm of possibility.
People really do this?
Finally got around to seeing this. Glad I did, thank you for the recommendation. Takes a little while to get going but then turns into a fairly straightforward and predictable movie. Some parts were laughable but I really enjoyed it overall. Very entertaining movie.
Also still recommend Detective Dee. One of my favorites I've seen from the past year. Going to be watching it with a friend next weekend so I'm hoping it holds up to a repeat viewing.
Wait... was this the one with Arnold as Mr Freeze? That was so bad it was... really, really bad.
hopefully nobody robs you or the federales don't toss you away where we can't find you... but we're omniscient, so wtf. But mostly- rig the breakaway glass, rig the giant balloon, and keep those fingers crossed when he plummets 40 stories that he doesn't jump off the other side of the roof, or just miss that skylight- OOPS! my bad!
We had a good time laughing at it. Probably have to be in the right company and the right mood. I'm in no hurry to watch it again, that's for sure.The cold and plant related puns were beyond brutal. My kids were very emotionally invested in poor Mr. Freeze's situation with his dying wife. They legitimately enjoyed the film and I was glad because as I said, the movies I queue up for them are usually epic fail this past year or so.
4/5I saw it yesterday. No standing ovation, but there was a moment at the end where I know if one person started clapping the entire movie theater would have joined in.I liked the movie a great deal. No big twists and turns as the ending is obvious from the start. But a nice job of acting by the cast and especially by the boy playing the starring role. Would recommend it without hesitation.
You liked it? My wife dragged me to this, and I found it very, very painful. I mixture of the seriousness of TLJ and MS trying to reinvigorate their marriage and a series of often-forced funny scenes ...all built around the premise <spoiler> that a good sex life will get their relationship going again. Thing is, a movie with a strong emphasis on TLJ's, um, needs and how MS can satisfy those was just too creepy for me.Wife & I went to see Hope Springs yesterday.. Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep were good together and Steve Carell as the therapist also did a good job.
Was entertaining and well worth the time if you have been married for any length of time.
