This is the worst movie I have seen in a long time. (Spoilers)
-
spookyrat1 — 11 years ago(May 27, 2014 03:44 AM)
First of all, you have a lot of hostility towards me
Oh really based on what?
Simmer down. Debate is much more enjoyable when there is a mutual respect, rather than bickering.
Seems I actually said a in previous post I was having a lot of fun with you. You're a really funny, macho, mucho guy. Really, you are.
It's always fun with posters such as yourself who demand "mutual respect", but seem so reluctant to give it themselves.
I challenge you to show me any where in any of my posts where I have been "hostile" to you. I described your criticisms as carping and in fact nothing you've said since has made me change my mind.
You on the other hand are liberally throwing around adjectives describing me as "deceitful", "disingenuous" etc. I'd see that as being more than a mite hypocritical, wouldn't you?.
I must be extremely clever to have taken
all
these quotes out of context as you claim. May be you 'd be well advised in future to construct your arguments on a more logical and sound basis to avoid this occurring.
The fact is all I see above, is you desperately trying now to switch the goal posts around attempting to shake off an ignominious defeat.
No matter where it was filmed or who starred in the movie, it's the script I'm talking about.
In fact you said
the
portrayal
of "slums" in this movie is not based on reality.
Sounds pretty clear to me what you meant. But now I'm accused of taking you out of context, because you meant to say something else. Gee I'm really sorry.
Another example you clearly offer about Sid
They could have shown he was nice to them to throw off the plot twist a bit but make it much more believable.
I justifiably criticise this rather extraordinary statement only to have you come back again saying I didn't say this and I didn't mean that, when everyone can clearly see what you posted.
I really can't be bothered wasting the time of day on the rest of your stuff.
It's the same old tired guff. You either repeat earlier opinions or whine about you being taken out of context.
I sincerely hope you can develop those writing skills in the future, to the point that you can contextually write, what you actually are trying to say.
Good luck! -
avia2 — 11 years ago(December 04, 2014 04:59 AM)
The senseless violence going on all around this man was over the top.
Until recently London was full of places like this. Chalkhill in Wembley, Brunel Estate in Westbourne Park, Stonebridge
why would a law abiding citizen not report this?
The law didn't help his friend, so he knew it was hopeless to rely on the police.
"Young punks" being interrogated verbally assault and threaten police officers and then are allowed to walk free without reprimand.
You make it sound like this doesn't happen in Britain. -
I_Created_U — 11 years ago(March 19, 2015 11:40 AM)
Sorry but after having read the whole debate, i have to say i agree with OP: You have indeed been disingenuous and pretty much intellectually dishonest in your responses. The fact that you choose to not see your own obvious hostility is a prime example of it.
Not to mention that an overwhelming majority of the time, you completely missed the very substance of OP's arguments and have answered beside the point most of the time.
People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs -
Shiva116k — 10 years ago(July 12, 2015 06:31 PM)
Some of your points in response to the OP were valid, some weren't; this movie is massively over the top and silly at times, but it's a movie, so that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad - which would have been a far better defence than presenting it as realistic. Either way, you let yourself down with that last reply, it was unnecessary.
-
spookyrat1 — 10 years ago(July 12, 2015 10:44 PM)
this movie is massively over the top and silly at times, so that doesn't necessarily mean it's bad
Thanks, but I really don't need advice from someone who just drops a couple of vague, contradictory, non-specific generalisations and then wanders off. I'd suggest the OP has been taking similar advice in attempting (but failing) to build any sort of argument. -
JaneDough42 — 9 years ago(September 04, 2016 01:33 AM)
For what it's worth more than 12 months since you posted - you made valid points. I lol'd at your Guantanamo Bay reference. I really enjoyed this film, maybe even more so because Michael Caine was in it.
~ Goodbye Gene Wilder and thanks for the many laughs ~ -
Matthewkay — 11 years ago(May 27, 2014 06:50 PM)
I am a Police officer of some 15 years who has had the "pleasure" of Policing London. I was based in Greenwich borough which included such areas of beauty as the Ferrier Estate., Woolwich Common estate, Coldharbour Estate and the Cherry Orchard Estate. After watching Harry Brown I'm agraid to say that it is frighteningly realistic. I have been sworn at and threatened in many an interview, you just accept it. Nothing will happen to the delightful young men who make such comments as the case would never get past the CPS decision to charge stage. The depiction of the underlying social collapse on these sink estates is very accurate alongwith the youth gang problem. The only problem I could see with the movie is the scene where Harry shoots the drug dealer through the car windscreen. That was one hell of a shot at that distance.
-
BrunoAntony — 11 years ago(September 04, 2014 02:18 PM)
MuchoMachoMuchacho I agree with you. This film played every single aspect of criminality to such an extreme that it was like watching some sort of post-apocalyptic sci-fi.
Pretty much every plot twist and thinly written character is designed to justify Harry's murder spree and happy ending.
IMDB is the wrong place to discuss this film. If you want to see how even-handed the online commentators are around here regarding chavs, youth crime, etc, look no further than the "Attack The Block" board, where every second post is basically an appeal for ethnic cleansing in London. -
avia2 — 11 years ago(December 04, 2014 05:06 AM)
London is too diverse to generalise whether this film is 'accurate' or 'inaccurate'. There are places like this across England, including London.
Are you honestly saying you can't imagine this scenario ever happening in the capital city? The film doesn't claim to represent all of London, but there are ordinary people out there living in terror of local trouble-makers.
These films may exploit fear, but ask yourself why the fear was there in the first place. -
xlos_crudosx — 11 years ago(October 21, 2014 11:30 PM)
You obviously haven't seen many movies If you think it's the worst you've seen . I think this movie was actually really well done . And just because something doesn't seem believable to you in, doesn't mean it can't be realistic , people do horrible things all the time and mentalities are different everywhere .
-
kicke_blueblack — 9 years ago(September 03, 2016 08:00 AM)
Well, he got cut as he stabbed the guy next to the river in case you missed that.
And also, why do you expect logistics with an addict?
You said it yourself, he's a user, yet you don't understand why there ain't any reasonable explanation for his behavior?
What?
And you think police officers lock up thugs for using mean words?
Get a grip.
And even they did, what good would it do? You think they would get 20 years for talking trash?
You're cracking me up! I can't even read any more of this, it's impossible to take seriously.