Page 1 of 1
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 10:57 am
by Leisher
This looks like it might be decent.
<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/-OGvZoIrXpg?version=3 ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/-OGvZoIrXpg?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:06 am
by GORDON
Shia .... I didn't even recognize him until I saw his name at the end. Negative two stars.
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:10 am
by TPRJones
I also didn't recognize him. I think that's worth a positive two stars, myself. I don't want to recognize him if I can avoid it.
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 11:14 am
by GORDON
Brad should have put the terrible Tennessee accent back on and called this Inglorious Basterds 2.
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:16 pm
by Malcolm
Check out Shia LaBouef's fury.
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:07 pm
by GORDON
What a fucking douche.
Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2014 6:49 pm
by TheCatt
I didn't recognize Shia, and didn't know it was him until after the movie.
The movie was acted decently enough. It was kinda a "WW2 was messier than you think," type of movie.
I just didn't find myself caring very much.
5.5/10
Thanks, North Korea, for the invite.
Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2015 12:13 am
by Leisher
Very solid film, and like Catt said, well acted. Pitt is really good in it.
It's not as powerful as other war films (Saving Private Ryan), but it's not a bad one (The Thin Red Line).
It's actually kind of slow in pacing as they spend more time showing us how much war sucks rather than action.
It's not one I'd watch again, but it's worth watching once.
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2015 9:59 pm
by Malcolm
Kept waiting for Shia to get perforated. A couple too many action cliches. I've also got no idea why you get shots of troops marching with panzerfausts, then a few minutes later you get shots of them unloading ... more panzerfausts. Wtf did you do with the ones you had out? How the fuck does it take 8 AT weapons or more to nail a stationary target when you've got it completely surrounded and you still suffer 1000% more casualties than your opposition? Lastly, in '45, there wasn't an American tank crew stupid enough to waste ammo blasting directly at the front of a Tiger.
Felt like an average, predictable movie. Better cast than it deserved. Except Shia, fuck him.
Re: Fury
Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2016 11:33 pm
by GORDON
Darker than you typically get in a "Rah rah Europe 1945 Greatest Generation!" movie. "Bleak" isn't too far off the mark.