Flags of our Fathers

OMG! How cool would pressure-sensitive keyboard keys be?! Then, when you GET PISSED, they automatically switch to CAPS!!!

There should also be a shortcut keystroke that'd get you this:

*@&$%!

e
 
don't go see this if you are looking for combat. many of my friends have said they didn't like it because there was alot of talking and not much combat. Well its more about the photograph not the combat.
 
c.g._eads said:
I agree about Eastwood. He is a seriously overrated filmmaker and benefits from three things. His age (people give him the benefit of the doubt). His time in the industry (been around this long - he must know what he's doing). And his films have such an intense uber-dramatic serious feel to them and are marketed as "intelligent thoughtful" films, that people are afraid to say that they dislike them in fear that *they* will not be looked at as intelligent.

Eastwood admits that he uses first drafts on all of his scripts and you can totally tell. Characters and storylines seem to go nowehre and/or are never resolved (that small white retarded boxer in Million Dollar Baby comes to mind). I'm all for feeling "unpolished" but I think if he just took some time to get rid of the fat here or focus a character's storyline there, that his films would be a lot better.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

The script for this movie was weak too, and I don't think the non-linear storytelling added anything. Having Doc's son come in to narrate the ending, as he writes his book, was hacky. I enjoyed a lot of the history, but the movie was full of undeveloped cliches, which I think is Haggis' trademark.

The action was pretty good, although it wasn't as frenetic or gut-wrenching as the first ten minutes of Saving Private Ryan. Speilberg perfected the WW2 genre with SPR and Band of Brothers, and as a producer on this, the movie gets a lot of the same look, but none of the heart.

The last twenty minutes of the movie, I was begging out loud for an ending. If this wins an Oscar, I'll punch myself in the nuts.
 
ramsaur said:
don't go see this if you are looking for combat. many of my friends have said they didn't like it because there was alot of talking and not much combat. Well its more about the photograph not the combat.
Click to expand...
I thought the combat scenes were pretty good. The movie overall was well worth the watch but I can understand why it's not up for any major awards.
 
I saw this last night and was a little disappointed. I actually had a hard time picking my jaw up off the floor after realizing that they cast Paul Walker! I thought some of the acting was distracting for one reason or another and found alot of it hard to follow (i.e. when the guys visit the mothers and they're asking about their kids.) I didn't really care so much about the people who got screwed because I never really saw much of them.

It was still a good movie, I was just expecting a bit more since I think Eastwood is the man.
 
This was a crappy film overall. The only redeaming quality was me. It was shot back when I was doing BG work to pay bills. I'm in the large kitchen scene (a cook). They walk by me and I clap a bunch. Best cinematic moment ever.

Oh, and I had the chance to briefly talk to the man with no name. Amazing, amazing man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top