BoonDocks Saints 2

[HeDGi]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjMBd9XSLgI"]YouTube- The Boondock Saints 2 Trailer {All Saints Day} official 2009 {HD}[/ame]

surprised i just saw this comercial..
so what do you think? flop or hit?

 

[KNUBB]

Went and saw it tonight. If you loved the 1st one then you are gonna love this one. I'm gonna go see it again

 

[A Tasty Burgerr]

The first one is unbelievably overrated. The acting was straight up terrible.

 

[KNUBB]

The first one is unbelievably overrated. The acting was straight up terrible.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

FUCK YOU SON. I fucking hate people who judge a movie by it "acting". What about the "acting" was terrible. That shit sounds fucking stupid and straight up gay. Dumb fucks who are so turned off by the "acting", like these fuckers even know how to "act", refuse to see the amazing story being told. It's like you don't go see a movie for the acting. You go to see a story shown through moving pictures. If the "acting" at least tell the story efficiently and entertains then the movie has done its job. It's like people who only go see movies that the critics say were good. You know what, FUCK THE CRITICS, how about you go make a judgment for yourself and stop conforming like a nazi. Fuck that shit just irks me and it amazes the hell out of me when people make fucking special ed statements like that.

/rant

 

[A Tasty Burgerr]

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

FUCK YOU SON. I fucking hate people who judge a movie by it "acting". What about the "acting" was terrible. That shit sounds fucking stupid and straight up gay. Dumb fucks who are so turned off by the "acting", like these fuckers even know how to "act", refuse to see the amazing story being told. It's like people who only go see movies that the critics say were good. You know what, FUCK THE CRITICS, how about you go make a judgment for yourself and stop conforming like a nazi. Fuck that shit just irks me and it amazes the hell out of me when people make fucking special ed statements like that.

/rant

I don't even know where to start, man. You're basically saying you don't understand what "acting" means? The people that portrayed the characters didn't do so in a believable manner, which made it a much less enjoyable experience for me. The premise was very good, there were some solid action scenes but the "acting" (as you put it) really ruined the film for me.

lol I didn't really mention the critics in my one sentence either, I think I've seen the film multiple times.

 

[KNUBB]

I don't even know where to start, man. You're basically saying you don't understand what "acting" means? The people that portrayed the characters didn't do so in a believable manner, which made it a much less enjoyable experience for me. The premise was very good, there were some solid action scenes but the "acting" (as you put it) really ruined the film for me.

lol I didn't really mention the critics in my one sentence either, I think I've seen the film multiple times.

The critics comment was just an extension of my rant not directed towards anyone. I know what acting means. I just don't understand how people let it get in the way of an amazing movie. I don't go into movies expecting Oscar worthy performances which is possibly why I am able to find something enjoyable in even the shittiest movie. I WOULD like an example of how the acting is terrible though. A scenario that happened or what is going on through your mind. I don't mean looking at the movie and going "Damn the acting sucks". If you are able to make that statement then you should be able to go in-depth of your thought process to make that conclusion

 

[padman59]

I liked the first one. Pretty good shoot 'em up flick.

I've wanted to see this for the past few weeks, but I've been too busy. Probably won't be able to see it for another couple of weeks.

 

[KNUBB]

Is this any good, First one is one of my most fav movies. ima have to go look for a boot leg cuz it aint playing near me

See the 2nd post. Awesome movie

 

[Nukleopatra]

It's already being called one of the worst movies of 2009.

And looking at the Rotten Tomato score (21%, lmao) I'll be passing on this piece of trash. I think the first one got like 19%. And that fucking blew ass, too. What straight guy watches and actually enjoys anything with Sean Patrick Flanery, anyway?

And you guys think I'm queer.

 

[KNUBB]

It's already being called one of the worst movies of 2009.

And looking at the Rotten Tomato score (21%, lmao) I'll be passing on this piece of trash. I think the first one got like 19%. And that fucking blew ass, too. What straight guy watches and actually enjoys anything with Sean Patrick Flanery, anyway?

And you guys think I'm queer.

ANNNNNNND

This is where the critics comment came from in my rant...........

:smh:

 

[Pitty]

The first one is unbelievably overrated. The acting was straight up terrible.

GROAN!

 

[Pitty]

It's already being called one of the worst movies of 2009.

And looking at the Rotten Tomato score (21%, lmao) I'll be passing on this piece of trash. I think the first one got like 19%. And that fucking blew ass, too. What straight guy watches and actually enjoys anything with Sean Patrick Flanery, anyway?

And you guys think I'm queer.

Oh no, it got bad critic ratings? Better go fucking kill myself for liking it.

 

[Nukleopatra]

Oh no, it got bad critic ratings? Better go fucking kill myself for liking it.

So, let me look at my options here.

Critics (a lot of them,) + the people I know (a lot of them,) or the word of two people here at VSN, one who is a complete fucking moron (Not you, Pitty.)

Yes, I'm going to go with the critics and my ''friends.'' But, by all means, Pitty, enjoy Sean Patrick Flanery. I know a couple guys who had that pleasure already.

Even gays need an action hero. I'm all for it.

 

[Pitty]

So, let me look at my options here.

Critics (a lot of them,) + the people I know (a lot of them,) or the word of two people here at VSN, one who is a complete fucking moron (Not you, Pitty.)

Yes, I'm going to go with the critics and my ''friends.'' But, by all means, Pitty, enjoy Sean Patrick Flanery. I know a couple guys who had that pleasure already.

Even gays need an action hero. I'm all for it.

So people you know don't like it, but tens of thousands have given it a 7.9 on IMDB?

And gay people can't be actors apparently?

 

[Nukleopatra]

So people you know don't like it, but tens of thousands have given it a 7.9 on IMDB?

And gay people can't be actors apparently?

L M A O.

That's says it all. My 10 year old nephew rates movies at IMDB.

Seriously, Pitty, if you enjoy the shit, that's all that matters.

 

[Pitty]

L M A O.

That's says it all. My 10 year old nephew rates movies at IMDB.

Seriously, Pitty, if you enjoy the shit, that's all that matters.

I do enjoy it but IMDB is about as important as using critics to base whether or not a movie will be good.

Is Boondock Saints:

A.) Entertaining: Check

It's a good movie, because all action movies need are entertaining action scenes.

 

[Nukleopatra]

Is Boondock Saints

A: Completely fucking gay - Check.

It did get a 24 at Metacritic.. I'm impressed.

All action films need - is a group of homophobic followers, who believe that by enjoying bad acting, numerous random explosions, will make them less gay. It doesn't work. I have an eye for my kind.

 

[A Tasty Burgerr]

The critics comment was just an extension of my rant not directed towards anyone. I know what acting means. I just don't understand how people let it get in the way of an amazing movie. I don't go into movies expecting Oscar worthy performances which is possibly why I am able to find something enjoyable in even the shittiest movie.

I suppose that explains it then, I'm not able to enjoy a movie very much if in my opinion the characters are not believable, which was the case in this movie.

I WOULD like an example of how the acting is terrible though. A scenario that happened or what is going on through your mind. I don't mean looking at the movie and going "Damn the acting sucks". If you are able to make that statement then you should be able to go in-depth of your thought process to make that conclusion

:confused2: I said I've seen the movie multiple times, you can point out any scene in the movie with the main characters.

 

[dell71]

I do enjoy it but IMDB is about as important as using critics to base whether or not a movie will be good.

Is Boondock Saints:

A.) Entertaining: Check

It's a good movie, because all action movies need are entertaining action scenes.

Hmmm, can't say imdb is as important as critics. At the very least, even if they have an agenda or are movie snobs, most critics will give you an idea if a movie is the type of film you would like, whether they did or not. Imdb does give you a solid idea of what most movie-goers think but even they have agendas. People go on there & rate movies they haven't seen or automatically grade it low because of what type of movie it is or who's in it. At least with critics you know that they've at least watched it and if they're biased in any way, its pretty hard to hide in a review.

BTW, the worst thing that I know of, or at least heard of, was the imdb users campaign to make The Dark Knight #1 on the site's top 250 of all time. This not only included a massive number of people giving it a 10, which I have no problem with, but it also included most of those same people simultaneously giving The Godfather a 1 to drop its average. This is largely believed to be the reason GF has dropped from its perch at the top.

Just my $.02 on that.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

FUCK YOU SON. I fucking hate people who judge a movie by it "acting". What about the "acting" was terrible. That shit sounds fucking stupid and straight up gay. Dumb fucks who are so turned off by the "acting", like these fuckers even know how to "act", refuse to see the amazing story being told. It's like you don't go see a movie for the acting. You go to see a story shown through moving pictures. If the "acting" at least tell the story efficiently and entertains then the movie has done its job. It's like people who only go see movies that the critics say were good. You know what, FUCK THE CRITICS, how about you go make a judgment for yourself and stop conforming like a nazi. Fuck that shit just irks me and it amazes the hell out of me when people make fucking special ed statements like that.

/rant

Even in an action movie, actors need to be at least believable and not wooden (stiff or sounding like they're reading) or at least have some sort of star power that excuses a lack of skill in some areas.

Personally, I didn't think the leads were THAT bad in the first and I actually though Willem Dafoe was fantastically over the top. Overall, I liked the first one, not loved it. It was okay. Hated the ending.

All that said, the point I'm really getting at is acting does make a difference whether you like to think so or not. Back in the day, Michael Mann directed something called L.A. Takedown. He would later remake it as Heat, one of the greatest movies of all time, imho. There is a scene in Heat in which Pacino & DeNiro meet and chat over a cup of coffee. Of course, L.A. Takedown had a nearly identical scene. Watch them both. If you can honestly say that neither is more believable, enjoyable or better done than the other then okay, congratz, you really do pay no attention to anything other than gunfights and explosions. However, I think you'll see a marked difference.

L.A. Takedown
[youtube]YQTn0psH_bM[/youtube]

Heat
[youtube]7oTNNjRuqbE[/youtube]

 

[Buzzman]

yea IMDB is dumb most fo the time, if there is a general actor or actress the public doesnt like there movies automatically dont get good ratings regardless of the film.