LOL no it's nowhere near that good.
Not the worst movie I've ever seen, but that's about all I can say for it. The acting was decent I guess. The writing was weak, which was disappointing because it was written by Mark Boal who did Zero Dark Thirty.
Films rarely remain over a 7 or 8 on imdb ..and most will fall below.
Irregardless of any spamming or rating manipulation films don't get the critical balance of a continuing tv series.
This is definitely an above average film to me though..
>> Films rarely remain over a 7 or 8 on imdb ..and most will fall below.
Are you serious with this comment?
He's at least right that there aren't a whole lot of films that go over 8.
There are some great films that are underrated on IMDB. The Karate Kid right now is only a 7.2. The 1999 version of The Mummy is only a 7. Top Gun is a fucking 6.9 (?!).
I would give all of those films at least an 8, if not better.
It's hard to get an 8 on IMDB and sustain it. Even straight up classics like Jaws and The Exorcist are barely hanging on with a score of 8.0 flat.
>> He's at least right that there aren't a whole lot of films that go over 8.
Only the really great films reach that level. 7.7 and up. But boy oh boy was he wrong when he said that films rarely remain over 7. That's a ludicrous statement.
>>The Karate Kid right now is only a 7.2. The 1999 version of The Mummy is only a 7. Top Gun is a fucking 6.9 (?!).
We certainly disagree here. Karate Kid should be about 7.5 - 7.6. It's a classic. 1999 Mummy should be below 7.0. It should be around 6.5. I never liked that movie, even when I saw it in the cinema back in 1999. Top Gun is cool but should not go above 7.4. It's not a great movie, but it's a legendary movie.
The Exorcist should be muuuch higher. We're talking 8.5 level.
Other movies that are too low on imdb. Jerry Maguire (only 7.3), An Officer and a Gentleman (only 7.0), About Schmidt (only 7.2). These are high profile movies that are undervalued, don't get me started on the really underrated movies.
I did say "7 or 8" ..
shareYes, I am..go check it out and tell me it ain't so.
I'm not sure why you seem to think it's so incredulous.
You can also find some decent films rated as low as 5 but that could be due to the age of the film, or a low # of people having rated or viewed it. But tv shows are different. Nothing ever rated that lowly in tv shows has been anything other than a stinker to me. TV shows need to at least be in the 7's.
>>Yes, I am..go check it out and tell me it ain't so.
I'm not sure why you seem to think it's so incredulous.
I wonder what kind of movies you watch, if most of them are under 7 on IMDB. Most of the movies I watch, maybe 80 % are above 7.0. These are both old movies and new movies. If you enjoy only new movies, mainly blockbusters, in the vein of Transformers and stuff like this, then yes, probably most of what you see will be below 7 (for a good reason). If you are a bit of a cinephile, and have a more varied taste in movies, then 80 % of the stuff on IMDB is 7 and above.
I thought it was decent. Not the greatest, but I enjoyed it. I was pretty shocked at the "big moment" towards the end of the movie. Didn't expect that at all, so they got me there.
It was a nice throwback to the bad ass action hero days, you know, when it was cool to be masculine. Explosions, plane crashes, gun fights. No tag along 4'8" female PC sidekick beating the shit out of 6'8" cold blooded mercenaries with ease, haha.
Having Pantera on the soundtrack gave it extra points.
I thought it was a surprisingly good film. I don't understand all the negativity on this board.
The plot was legitimately fresh-feeling and went in some unexpected directions. I'd give it a 7.5.
BTW, not sure I heard Pantera. I did hear Metallica, though.