Movie: Stand Up Guys: Is it just me, or....

[SakarGuy]

I think that I am a pretty good movie critic, but the real critics seem to disagree with me on this one pretty hard.

I really liked Stand Up Guys. I think a good IMDB out of 10 rating should be mid 7's, but wouldn't be surprised if it was in the low 8's. It is 6.6, however. And has a 36% on Rotten Tomatoes, with some fairly harsh reviews from "legit" critics.

I am pretty hard to please regarding most movies, and as of late, have been having a hard time even finishing a movie.

I think the most offensive act a movie can commit is to be uninspired, to be have a paint by numbers script and direction. I don't think SUG's suffered from this at all.

Like the movie Sahara. The fucking climax of the movie was Zahn trying to decide whether or not to cut the red or green wire on a bomb, whilst McConaughey had a fist fight with the lead bad guy while the damsel in distress helplessly watched from the side lines.

Give me a break. That's honestly the best they could write? Then fucking hire new writers. I promise you that there are millions of unknown writers, dying to break into Hollywood, that would have written a real script for the minimum $50K.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Okay

 

[faustian]

Movie was garbage. Not a big fan of Marky Mark, especially in comedies.

 

[SakarGuy]

Movie was garbage. Not a big fan of Marky Mark, especially in comedies.

Wrong movie.

 

[faustian]

lol I was thinking The Other Guys. Point stands though, The Other Guys was awful lol

 

[SakarGuy]

lol I was thinking The Other Guys. Point stands though, The Other Guys was awful lol

I agree the movie was shit, and it took 2 tries for me to even finish it, but it had its moments.

 

[HARRISON_3]

I wanna see that one.

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

Wrong movie.

Lol. I'll help you out TS:

STAND UP GUYS

Release Date: February 1, 2013 (Limited Release)

Genre: Crime Comedy Drama

Director: Fisher Stevens (Crazy Love)

Cast: Al Pacino, Christopher Walken, Alan Arkin, Julianna Margulies, Katheryn Winnick, and Mark Margolis

Synopsis: Val (Al Pacino) is released from prison after serving twenty-eight years for refusing to give up one of his close criminal associates. His best friend Doc (Christopher Walken) is there to pick him up, and the two soon re-team with another old pal, Hirsch (Alan Arkin). Their bond is as strong as ever, and the three reflect on freedom lost and gained, loyalties ebbed and flowed, and days of glory gone by. But one of the friends is keeping a dangerous secret- he's been put in an impossible quandary by a former mob boss, and his time to find an acceptable alternative is running out. As the sun rises on the guys' legendary reunion, their position becomes more and more desperate and they finally confront their past once and for all.

Critics' Review of STAND UP GUYS

Rotten Tomatoes: 36% Approval Rating (28 out of 77 critics liked it)

Consensus: Stand Up Guys largely wastes its talented cast in a resolutely mediocre comedy hampered by messy direction and a perfunctory script.

Rolling Stone - 2.5/4
Some actors don't need top-shelf material. Just the pleasure of their company is enough. And so Al Pacino, Christopher Walken and Alan Arkin turn the insubstantial Stand Up Guys into solid entertainment. Just watching them riff off one another like a prized jazz combo is a kick. Arkin is a master of the slow burn. Pacino shows off shamelessly. And Walken's deadpan is a constant delight.


Los Angeles Times - 3/5
Stand Up Guys is one of those scripts that had been knocking around Hollywood but never quite jelled until director Fisher Stevens became involved. It was the right time and the right alchemy to make the comedy as amiable as its cast. Despite some predictable predicaments

 

[SakarGuy]

I wanna see that one.

It's not fact paced, but it has character. It's inspired, and even though it's not an extremely intricate movie, it does suck the viewer in; a mark of any good movie.

Lol. I'll help you out TS:

Thanks, did you see it?

 

[Bullitt68]

Don't care about the observations being made about the particular film in question, but I just wanted to say:

I think that I am a pretty good movie critic [...] harsh reviews from "legit" critics.

Professional critics get quotes but you don't? Film criticism is a profession. If you don't work in that profession, don't call yourself that, especially not before trivializing that very profession (and mainstream cinema as a whole) :icon_neut

 

[SakarGuy]

Don't care about the observations being made about the particular film in question, but I just wanted to say:



Professional critics get quotes but you don't? Film criticism is a profession. If you don't work in that profession, don't call yourself that, especially not before trivializing that very profession (and mainstream cinema as a whole) :icon_neut

I chose my words carefully, and did not choose the word "professional" for a reason. But you did, you chose it for me - putting words into my mouth. I never said professional. Maybe re-reread what I wrote before diarrheaing off at the mouth to me.

Let's read the entire sentence again, "And has a 36% on Rotten Tomatoes, with some fairly harsh reviews from "legit" critics. "

I am/was referring to the critics on Rotten Tomatoes. I actually paused for a moment when thinking what to actually call them. I thought professional, but many of them are not professional critics. I then thought "legit" was a better word, but while many of them are good, many of them not. My right to disagree with other's views.

So I figured the easiest thing to do would be to just put quotes around "legit", not thinking that some self-righteous petty minded person would get all bent out of shape over such a trivial chicken shit thing.

Anything else?

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

Thanks, did you see it?

Haven't seen it yet.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

lol I was thinking The Other Guys. Point stands though, The Other Guys was awful lol

The Other Guys was awesome.

I don't want no scrubs