You see, that was his back up plan, but he blew his chances by pissing off the porn industry. How are they supposed to make a porn parody of his action flicks when the movie is already called XXX?Grey_Focks said:Personally, I think you should've kept your original name (Mark Vincent, I think?) instead of that pretty stupid stage name you carry about nowadays. It just makes you sound like a porn star.
quoted for truth.palsma_rifle said:You can't pull off bloody, Bob. Also, I liked Cars.
DUKENUK3M said:Bob doesn't like this movie because all the characters remind him of people that picked on him in high school.
No-one can pull of bloody without having British accents (that means English, Scottish, Welsh or any of the Irish accents). It just does not work.palsma_rifle said:You can't pull off bloody, Bob. Also, I liked Cars.
Also, it had a LOT of CGI that looked out of place. So it is kinda weird for him to say that one OTT action movie is OK, and another one isnt. Heck, the main protagonist quotes Vin's characters line from The Fast And The Furious in the Torque. So that kinda makes many things he was complaining about pretty useless and make him look a bit of a hypocrite.Scars Unseen said:I know I'm a bit late to the game, but did Bob actually imply that there was something good about the movie Torque? Because I was able to suspend my disbelief for that movie about as easily as I could for wire-fu performed with neon orange anchor line.
Sorry but Bob gets paid for this so he is a proffesional critic and therefore should be judged as one.mojodamm said:Critic - a person who judges, evaluates, or analyzes literary or artistic works, dramatic or musical performances, or the like, especially for a newspaper or magazine.Deathninja19 said:I'm sorry to disagree but in an age of angry reviewing and such you forget that reviewers are meant to be impartial and judge a piece of work on it's own, they can use comparisons to past work etc but that should not affect the score of the product they are reviewing. They can bring predujices of course they are only human but they should not wear them on their sleve like Bob does it makes them seem unprofesional and biased.mojodamm said:He did judge it on its merits, and found it lacking. Also, perhaps you're confused over the term 'critic', for a critic is not supposed to be impartial. A critic's primary job is to pass judgement on something, and subjectivity is necessary in order to do that.Deathninja19 said:This kind of ignorance is especially galling for a reviewer who is meant to be impartial and to judge a film by it's merits and not by the things you associate it with.
Judge - to form a judgment or opinion of; decide upon critically.
Critics are not meant to be impartial. In order to critique something, one must make judgements as to the merits and faults of the thing being critiqued, and as such must form an opinion of the subject matter. This is not news, this is not journalism; this is one person's critique and should be treated as such.
"...draws the attention of the Rock leading what appears to be a crack FBI wetworks squad exclusively devoted to hunting down streetrace punks for some reason."Deathninja19 said:Also I heavily disagree that he said anything that was wrong with this particular film, all I heard was him ragging on the franchise. Only once did he use an example from this film refering to a fight which he bashed because people may enjoy a Vin/Rock fight not judging it on how it was filmed or the choreography and so on. He may of mentioned others but it was so drowned out by him insulting the films audience (which includes me) that any possible well made point became moot.
"...In the Fast and the Furious universe, being reasonably good at driving an import car suddenly turns you into an unstoppable adamantium-boned ninja capable of outrunning, outfighting and outshooting an entire army."
"There are two big crazy chase scenes at the beginning and end that are pretty good..."
"Just another mediocre, uninspired action sequel..."
Maybe we only see what we want to, but I saw many more points touched upon than your one "Rock vs. Diesel" fight scene.
See also, his review of the expendables.DUKENUK3M said:Bob doesn't like this movie because all the characters remind him of people that picked on him in high school.
Not quite sure I get the Jason Statham thing at the end. Care to clarify?MovieBob said:Fast Five
More Pinto than Porsche.
Watch Video
He has the acting ability of a lawn chair with a missing leg.Arqus_Zed said:It's a real pity Vin Diesel's career didn't take of like it should have; you know, after Saving Private Ryan, The Iron Giant and Pitch Black...
I would love to see him in a Zack Snyder flick or something along those lines.
Well, at least "Rio" was good propaganda.NKnight said:Brazilian viewer here. Only one comment: I'm kind of tired of seeing favelas being portraid in movies... seriously, even in brazilian cinema. Not the most proud aspect of the country, you see... it's like living in LA and having a thousand of movies about drug use in LA and... wait a minute... yeah...
Well, the problem here is that people are so sick of seeing the criminals winning that any kind of victory or stand-up against them is celebrated. Even if it is brutally inhuman.SandroTheMaster said:Really? Then try to get your hands on "Tropa de Elite (Elite Squad)" and the sequel. Both are action movies (the second is more of a thriller/drama though) about BOPE that are quite visceral and approach the theme with some interesting degree of insight (like addressing the fact that violence generates more violence... most Brazilians didn't get that one though).PunkRex said:HAH your right, you learn something every day. To be honest I know that Rio does have a big crime problem but the idea that one man runs it all is kind of dumb, not to mention I saw that Chris Ryan documentary thingy with BOPE which was awesome. There was no need for the Americans to get invovled, BOPE would have wrecked poor Vins shit up. The movie mocks the goverments efforts and the expert soldiers more then anything simply by ignoring them.
Oh, and as an added bonus the second one will teach you what is and show you the capital of Brazil. I'm a proud resident in it... but no, I'm not a politician, you Brazilians out there.
****Spoiler**** Okay, if you have watched the entire series. The order is as such, 1,2,4,5, 3. Why? Because you see Diesel at the end of 3 and that occurs after Han bites the bullet. Thus, Han cannot die until after the 5th movie. But I agree, the Franchise is to promote some of the hottest cars to come out and watch them out drive/destroy all the crappy cars from 10 years before. Sorry, but I disagree with Bob, this movie was not meant to be a nominated for an award. Hell, it's just car junkie food. Not douchebags, just car fanatics.VanityGirl said:Question, when does this movie take place in the universe? I mean, Han's clearly in it and supposedly died in Tokyo Drift, so does that mean this took place before Tokyo Drift?
Other than that, Fast and the Furious has always been more about the cars they show than anything else. It's an opportunity for car nuts to go "OMG a Nissan Skyline r34!" The movies have and always will be subpar, but I am impressive with the cars they manage get and destroy for these movies.
That's like saying Intolerable Cruelty isn't as good as the Coen Brothers other movies... Might be true, but it is still a Coen Brothers movie and thus better than almost every other movieLordBojangles said:Why do you have such a low expectation for Cars 2? Cars 1 wasn't bad, it was just the least-good Pixar film, if that makes sense.