So because you didn't like the movie you insult those who do? I'd like to know what kind of movies you find enjoyable
-
koga_ninja_Jubei — 10 years ago(October 02, 2015 01:41 PM)
Totally agree with the OP, this film was the most nonsensical contrived pile of stupid that I've seen in ages.
I wanted The Illusionist crossed with Inside Man, but I got Siegfried and Roy scripted by Dan Brown.
Dumb, lazy and awful. Just awful.
"Man's mind is so formed that it is far more susceptible to falsehood than to truth" -
theauxphou — 10 years ago(October 25, 2015 08:17 PM)
What do you mean MINDBLOWINGLY IDIOTIC? I thought it was very realistic. A 12-year-old kid who's just lost his father tries to exact the ultimate revenge by doing well in school, getting himself into the FBI, spend 20+ years rising up the ranks, then happening upon four random illusionists at the top of their game, bringing them all together in one room and convincing them to successfully undertake an unbelievably improbably international bank heist that goes off without a hitch, all so he can fill Morgan Freeman's range rover with money so he'll look like he was the perp, even though there'd be no evidence linking Freeman to the crime. See? Sensible plot.
-
Moesislak — 10 years ago(November 09, 2015 08:43 AM)
Let's be honest with ourselves, this movie was really stupid. It's got a 26% of top critics for a reason, anyone with a critical mind can tell the story makes no sense and all the "magic" was really dumb, especially their last trick.
-
SloppyJ30 — 10 years ago(November 09, 2015 12:32 PM)
It's always interesting to me which movies trigger hissy-fits like yours. NYSM seems to get certain types going more than most other slick popcorn flicks, and good for it. I would hope you've calmed down about this one a bit over the past couple of years. It's just not worth getting that bonkers about.
I thought it was fun, and that was all, but that was all it was trying to be. Why you thought it was trying to be, I think it was "the apex of cleverness" I have no idea. I detected no such pretentions, but maybe I missed some promotional interviews or something where someone made outlandish claims.
I often wonder how the likes of Ruffalo and Laurent view fan reactions like these. You clearly like them as actors, but then you've gotten so shrill about one movie you didn't like as to relegate yourself to the kiddie table. Would they say "thank you" or be insulted? Inquiring minds want to know.
My trigger is "Pay it Forward." I hate that movie with an irrational, Joe-Pesci-in-Goodfellas intensity. I become a raving lunatic whenever someone says they like it or suggest watching it.I have meddled with the primal forces of nature and I will atone.
-
newyorkcine — 9 years ago(June 29, 2016 07:44 AM)
Well, I didn't really mind the plot but completely agree that it was mindblowingly idiotic.
My problem was with the excruciating soundtrack and most of the staging. Every crowd is generic and full of extras having the same united, awestruck or upbeat reactions. No skeptics, no introverts, where did they find all these GAP models to hoot and holler in unison? Why are these idiots with video cameras in so many scenes? Two identical cameramen, spaced symmetrically, not aware of each other, no plot function, just there to fill out the frame, like the farcical New York crowd that magically appeared because movies targeted at vacuous audiences always need lots of witnesses in contrived unicorn moments. The news voice-overs were pathetic and completely without purpose. There is no reason to give a play by play, we are not asleep and this isn't radio. All in all I would say the film could have been a lot better if it had been more intelligently staged and it was severely reduced to garbage in post production.