Ebert is irrelevant without Siskel. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 53% splat.Roger Ebert gave it 3.5 stars out of 4.
Ebert is irrelevant without Siskel. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 53% splat.Roger Ebert gave it 3.5 stars out of 4.
I watched Jack Reacher and it was alright. It was one of those movies that seemed like.. I think I've seen it before.. but.. maybe not. Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise hmm. Can't remember.
I'm a bit more into suspenseful thrillers with a touch of mystery thrown in, so this movie had my attention. But yeah.. I kept thinking "Have I seen this before.. or.. hmmm". Then when the big reveal came, I was like: "Hmm. I've been thinking about this so much I don't know if I fully understand the plot now. And I'm still not sure if I've seen this before or not"
This kind of comment deserves nothing but two thumbs down.Ebert is irrelevant without Siskel.
Its all the same MCU "prime/sacred" timeline/universe, whatever... in other words, yes they're the same.Shang Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings to rule them all. Entertaining film.
Spoiler :So this is all the MCU? The tens rings organisation exists in parallel with S.H.I.E.L.D. and Hydra? Or are there alternate earths existing concurrently within the MCU? I have watched most of the films now, but I still am not sure I really get how it all works. Perhaps I either should actually concentrate on the films rather than watching them a bit half cut, or not think at all about the logic of them.
Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise hmm.
Nailed it again Warpus... this is exactly how I feel watching most Tom Cruise movies.I kept thinking "Have I seen this before.. or.. hmmm".
NO YOU get two thumbs down! YOU!For people with good taste only: The Maltese Falcon (1941), starring Humphrey Bogart et al., also well-esteemed by Roger Ebert.
NO YOU get two thumbs down! YOU!You're way too young to be reviewing black-and-white movies. Or way too old... or both. Movies that old are not subject to review. They're already established as either masterpieces... for their time, cult classics... for their time or trash that's been resigned to the dustbin of history...and even then, they always have to be given a pass for their outdated/offensive depictions of XYZ. Nothing original is going to be said about them and you should feel bad for bringing it up... so there
. I sure told you off...hrrmf.
If you want to watch some old black-and-white movie... just read a book instead.
Quod non erat demostrandum, as any Latinist would say.NO YOU get two thumbs down! YOU!You're way too young to be reviewing black-and-white movies. Or way too old... or both. Movies that old are not subject to review. They're already established as either masterpieces... for their time, cult classics... for their time or trash that's been resigned to the dustbin of history...and even then, they always have to be given a pass for their outdated/offensive depictions of XYZ. Nothing original is going to be said about them and you should feel bad for bringing it up... so there
. I sure told you off...hrrmf.
If you want to watch some old black-and-white movie... just read a book instead.
Shang Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings to rule them all. Entertaining film.
Spoiler :So this is all the MCU? The tens rings organisation exists in parallel with S.H.I.E.L.D. and Hydra? Or are there alternate earths existing concurrently within the MCU? I have watched most of the films now, but I still am not sure I really get how it all works. Perhaps I either should actually concentrate on the films rather than watching them a bit half cut, or not think at all about the logic of them.
Which, of course, I did. Two episodes of Beavis and Butt-head and then Citizen Kane (1941), a brilliant film. Just to annoy our lawyerly friend I shall say that I liked the reference to The Simpsons which it contained.After my present Beavis and Butthead marathon I shall watch Citizen Kane, just to annoy you, and then resume the viewing of Cynthia Rothrock flicks.