 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.27.193.195
I'll be happy to forgive Mel Gibson for calling women cops 'Sugartits' if he keeps making movies this good.
"To Learn Who Rules Over You, Simply Find Out Who You Are Not Allowed to Criticize."
-Voltaire
Follow Ups:
I thought it to be VERY good. My Step-Father thought the violence was over the top as commented by another poster. How would we know? Were we there? I had no problem with the violence as this is war and based on a book and I assume recounted by those that WERE there... I thought Andrew Garfield was great in his role and was disappointed when he didn't win Best Actor... Mel Gibson is IMHO a better Director than an actor!
I didn't find the violence gratuitous. There was a story to tell, and to tell it truthfully, the full impact had to be shown. It was based on a book, which was based on accounts of soldiers who were there. The repeated attempts at the ridge had repeated costs. To soften that would reduce the value of the movie, do disservice to the participants, and let viewers walk away without understanding. Tarantino gives us blood as comic effect. I don't think that applies here.
In a sense, death was cheap; bullet hits man, man drops. Next. No swooning, no excess drama. Same for the Japanese. What was shown was combatants fighting without understanding. Just kill, pushed forward by officers who didn't understand much themselves. Telling a man to go die is tough work, and the effect of that was repeatedly shown.
And I think that's the bottom line of combat.
Doss's story was profound enough to get him the Medal of Honor. Again, the repeated efforts showed the magnitude of his accomplishment. He hauled down 75 men. You might think Gibson got carried away, but at least we understood what South Pacific combat was about.
nt
...
He rescued a lot of people I get it already.
I liked it otherwise...
... in its graphic excess and cartoonish nature at times. Wasn't necessary to tell the story. Same with "Passion of Christ".
I kinda remember that movie, but am drawing a blank on why it would be exceptional. Perhaps an explanation about your statement would peak my interest.
For a movie today that is better than ones you haven't seen in years, go see the incredibles 2. That will get you right up to date. If you have ever laughed at a cartoon, that is enough of reason to go.
I tried to retract my statements, thinking them unnecessarily argumentative. But they got posted in error. I wish to apologize.
NT
-Wendell
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
