you're*
-
huw-21 — 13 years ago(December 18, 2012 10:37 PM)
I still can't believe this wasn't intended as a parody. Viewed as satire, it's rather enjoyable and had us howling with laughter by the time it got to the completely OTT melodramatic puppy scene. If it's actually meant to be taken at face value though (and I'm having trouble believing that), it's far too ridiculous, pretentious, and predictable (we were often calling out lines before they were said). We still yell "Burn it!" whenever we see an image of the Mona Lisa! Ha, ha. In any case, I have to admit we enjoyed watching this film, whatever the intent of it was.
-
dovidovich — 13 years ago(January 30, 2013 06:35 PM)
Well said. I also love dystopian movies, and this film still couldn't keep my interest. This movie is terrible, and it's terrible for so many reasons.
Consider the fact that the first person to reply to you in defence of the film doesn't even realise this a dystopian film. Furthermore, he or she doesn't realise that dystopias/tyrannies are chasing after utopia. Although it seems paradoxical, utopianism invariably leads to tyranny in its pursuit to perfect humanity. I'll leave it there, as I imagine I've already gone far beyond the scope of the thread.
But yeah, this movie is TERRIBLE.
"I can outlearn you, I can outread you, I can outthink you, and I can outPHILOSOPHIZE you" -
the_la_baker — 12 years ago(May 05, 2013 04:41 PM)
This movie is god awful. The fact so many people think this was even decent let alone good is truly disturbing. There isn't one iota of originality and completely devoid of logic. The entire premise makes zero sense and the more you learn, the less sense it makes. The cliches are abundant and corny to the point of hilarity. Sean Bean was the only good in this whole movie, but that lasted all of 5 minutes.
Anyone that likes this film has no idea what a good sci-fi story/film is.
[If someone left ''1984,'' ''Fahrenheit 451,'' ''Brave New World,'' ''Gattaca'' and the Sylvester Stallone potboilers ''Judge Dredd'' and ''Demolition Man'' out in the sun and threw the runny glop onto a movie screen, it would still be a better picture than ''Equilibrium,'' a movie that could be stupider only if it were longer.]
-FILM REVIEW; Preventing World War IV By Outlawing All Emotion(http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/06/movies/film-review-preventing-world-war-iv-by-outlawing-all-emotion.html) -
nycishomexxx — 12 years ago(August 05, 2013 12:41 PM)
Lol wow look at all of you. People are hilarious.
"I'm incredibly correct and you're a moron for thinking otherwise"
"Uhh no buddy, it's the other way around"
Fact is, this movie can easily be enjoyed. That, or plot holes will have you throwing up towards the end.
I don't have a hard-on for this film, but I would just like to point out - You can easily check the message board's of all the films that are suggested to be superior to "Equilibrium" in this thread.
And you'll find the same thing. People who enjoyed it. People who hated it. People who put down other people for enjoying it and vice versa.
Just get over yourselves. This beep is watchable. -
the_la_baker — 12 years ago(November 15, 2013 08:24 PM)
Stop defending this piece of sh!t. It has no redeeming qualities(except for Sean Bean).
No one said you can't enjoy it, I like some crappy films myself. Just don't go around trying to convince people its a good movie. It is far from it. -
Raven623 — 12 years ago(January 08, 2014 12:48 AM)
I know I'm a "little" to this thread, but I have to respond your obtuse "review" of. EQUILIBRIUM. Yeah, that's, obtuse. I don't know what offends me more about your post. It being obtuse, or your lengthy pseu-intellectual drival.
YES! This a dystophian story. From the lengths to which you go, enumerated yet, which as a behavioral health provider I find more than a bit OCD, I can only surmise that you are not a true SF fan deep in your soul. Seems you are more interested in dissing excellent films and those who do appreciate them. You sound like a flamer at heart. Sure would never have a drink with ya. You seem wound way too tight. I would not want to be around you when that winding broke apart.
Now, about the film. I saw it for the first time tonight and was enthralled from the by the opening narrative. The aspect that I felt that Sean Bean was gone so quickly. Preston was a character that far exceeded Nero. The whole plot was much clearer and tighter than Matrix. Yeah, it was a bit of a redo of 451, but that film has become so dated. This film has legs and will be just as meaningful 30 years out.
But what do I know. I'm 65 and I have been devouring SF and apocalyptic as fast as I can go through them. This story is as good as those of the early GIANTS of SF. It's based on a book? Can't wait to get my hands on it. BTW, did you know Jack London is considered by many to have given birth to the apocalyptic genre? Check him out. -
TrippingABlindMan — 12 years ago(January 13, 2014 05:58 AM)
This entire thread is hilarious. Just because one does not like this film and gets "intellectual" about it you know what I mean big fancy words, overtly long paragraphs taking another's opinion far, far too seriously too. much. SMUG
-
Arkoth — 11 years ago(July 02, 2014 10:37 AM)
This entire thread:
http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/lol_idi_amin.gif -
Dextrousleftie — 10 years ago(April 11, 2015 03:35 PM)
Listen, OP, my brother-in-law, who is ex-Special Forces, watched this movie. And not only did he enjoy it, he told my sister that the gun kata is merely a variation on the Slapping Hands kata, a form of martial arts. Of which I'm guessing he knows far more about than you. They simply added a gun to an existing form of martial arts to make a variation. There are many, many variations of existing martial arts forms. So the gun kata is not stupid, nor is it an attempt to rip off the Matrix(which was a rip off of dozens of other movies already). You don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Obey My Dog! -Mugatu
