[QUOTE=Thund3rdome;16583511]We seriously need a Movies section on FP.[/QUOTE]
agreed
Ralph Fiennes is awesome. (leader of the mercs)
sorry but this movie fucking sucks
rather than having a really interesting story of soldiers in Iraq you get a movie that is made by a director that thinks that the more artistic camera angles and long, boring camera shots there are the better the movie will be
[QUOTE=nono345;16584376]sorry but this movie fucking sucks
rather than having a really interesting story of soldiers in Iraq you get a movie that is made by a director that thinks that the more artistic camera angles and long, boring camera shots there are the better the movie will be[/QUOTE]
You're a hardcore 13 year old CoD4 player that thinks all movies should be millions of different shots of people getting killed right?
I'm suprised this isn't around in all the theaters, Better than half the other movies.
Saw this yesterday in the theater, one of the best movies I've ever seen.
94 at Metacritic [url]http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/hurtlocker?q=the%20hurt%20locker%27[/url]
and a 98 at Rotten Tomatoes [url]http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hurt_locker/[/url]
Poor Guy Pearce :frown:
I saw the movie today
[sp]I feel sorry for the Arabic guy that had the bomb strapped to him[/sp]
[QUOTE=kirderf;16581781]It's used for very long-range sniping.[/QUOTE]
Not really. It's used as a special application rifle. Originally, it was intended for disabling small vehicles and explosive demolition from a safe range, but due to the round, it's ideal for dug in targets because the .50 BMG round achieves high penetration where smaller rounds like the 7.62 and 5.56 don't, making it ideal for high urbanization environments like seen in Iraq. However, contrary to popular belief, it was never primarily intended for anti-personnel usage, but much like the M14, soldiers obviously see the benefits and adapt accordingly.
But yes, you are partly correct, the .50 BMG round allows it to achieve more range than say a 7.62x51mm rifle.
"makes me want to swear"
-facepunch
[QUOTE=Valdor;16619906]You're a hardcore 13 year old CoD4 player that thinks all movies should be millions of different shots of people getting killed right?
I'm suprised this isn't around in all the theaters, Better than half the other movies.[/QUOTE]
No, he's right.
[editline]12:36PM[/editline]
And your reply makes you seem like the 13 year old retard.
[QUOTE=Reaver1991;16622406]No, he's right.
[editline]12:36PM[/editline]
And your reply makes you seem like the 13 year old retard.[/QUOTE]
Nah, Not really.
i'm going to join the air force then crash my plane into a flaming tower of Sean Connery
[QUOTE=nono345;16584376]sorry but this movie fucking sucks
rather than having a really interesting story of soldiers in Iraq you get a movie that is made by a director that thinks that the more artistic camera angles and long, boring camera shots there are the better the movie will be[/QUOTE]
Last time I checked, the war in Iraq didn't have tens of thousands of soldiers dying. Go watch [U]Saving Private Ryan[/U] or [U]We Were Soldiers[/U] if you want pure action.
Anyway, I saw this movie and it was epic! The drama, the beginning, the action, the ending, the slow motion, everything! It was amazing. I was a tad disappointed with the lack of real ACOG and with some of the music choices. Other than those 2 problems, beautiful movie. The [B]most realistic movie[/B] I have ever seen [B]based on the War in Iraq[/B]. I would have to give it a [B]4 1/2 out of 5 Stars[/B].
I don't get it. Where in his post is he saying that he wants to see tens of thousands of soldiers dieing.
[editline]09:39PM[/editline]
Nowhere does he say he wants more action.
[QUOTE=Dclone2;16580394]Since that's what they were designed for? :raise:[/QUOTE]
The Barrett rifles are anti-material rifles used to penetrate thick armor that a smaller round couldn't, and are in no way classified as sniper rifles. However using it as a sniper rifle is retarded as that's basically overkill since a a standard rifle round is going to get the job done.
I really want to fucking see this!
Loved this movie. And it's not another dumb 'marines are hardasses' movie, it actually has modest people.
[QUOTE=Reaver1991;16631455]I don't get it. Where in his post is he saying that he wants to see tens of thousands of soldiers dieing.
[editline]09:39PM[/editline]
Nowhere does he say he wants more action.[/QUOTE]
There are mainly two types of war movies.
1) A war movie that is filled with pure action. Some drama, and such.
2) A movie like this, Jarhead, or Full Metal Jacket or etc where there are some action moments, but mainly focused on the "real" point of war.
All he said was that all the pretty camera shots didn't make up for the movie's lack of substance.
I saw it, great movie.
It makes you really think about how much life sucks when you leave the theater.
[QUOTE=Reaver1991;16632273]All he said was that all the pretty camera shots didn't make up for the movie's lack of substance.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=nono345;16584376]sorry but this movie fucking suck
[B]rather than having a really interesting story of soldiers in Iraq (But this is interesting?)[/B] you get a movie that is made by a director that thinks that the more artistic camera angles and [B]long, boring camera shots[/B] [B](Jarhead?)[/B] there are the better the movie will be[/QUOTE]
Uh huh. Sounds like he doesn't like slow war movies.
Are you retarded?
[QUOTE=Reaver1991;16633244]Are you retarded?[/QUOTE]
I was going to ask you the same question. Look, I'm not going to continue arguing if you won't accept the fact that guy hated the movie because of the lack of action. If you were to take a battle scene filled with explosions, tanks, bullets flying everywhere, and soldiers running over their dead comrades but were to only film it from ONE angle, you would get millions of lovers. Why? Because today's society and generation expect nothing more than pure action from a movie. That was the reason why Jarhead was hated by a majority of its viewers and that's the reason why this movie isn't showing in all theaters.
He said the story wasn't good, and the director tried to make up for it with pretty camera angles.
Was a great movie, loved it. I'd say it's my #3 favorite war movie, with Saving Pvt. Ryan being #1 and Black Hawk Down being #2 :D
baawww the movie was great but being a war veteran my view on it HAS to be differed from the general opinion
if you didn't like this movie, i would find it [b]painful[/b] to watch a movie with you
this was such an emotional, intense, and all-around incredible ride of a movie that anyone who rates it below a 7 obviously wants attention
[QUOTE=azndude;16634491]I was going to ask you the same question. Look, I'm not going to continue arguing if you won't accept the fact that guy hated the movie because of the lack of action. If you were to take a battle scene filled with explosions, tanks, bullets flying everywhere, and soldiers running over their dead comrades but were to only film it from ONE angle, you would get millions of lovers. Why? Because today's society and generation expect nothing more than pure action from a movie. That was the reason why Jarhead was hated by a majority of its viewers and that's the reason why this movie isn't showing in all theaters.[/QUOTE]
This is wrong on so many levels.
Jarhead didn't bottom out and get bad reviews because the critics were like "LOL NOT ENUF EXPLOZIONS K?", Jarhead was just generally a shit and misunderstood film. When you release a trailer getting everyone geared up thinking it's the Full Metal Jacket of the Gulf War, and then it comes out as a character piece, people are going to feel misguided. Also, Jarhead actually did well critically, so try again, insert more coins.
Furthermore, your assessment that todays moviegoers only want pure action is also wrong. If this were true, movie awards would cease to exist, specifically, the oscars and the academy awards. Shh, don't tell anyone, but maybe we like watching actors, to see them, ACT?
I can name plenty of movies that have either no action or loooong periods between action, that have done incredibly well in both the box office and in critical reception.
Movie was alright.
Jarhead was great to watch, I liked the overall story.
This movie is one of the greatest war movies EVER. I shat brix.
[QUOTE=arcaeu;16642537]Movie was alright.
Jarhead was great to watch, I liked the overall story.[/QUOTE]
This movie destroyed Jarhead
Watched this earlier today, was really good. Not my favorite movie ever ( Hi, Donnie Darko ), but it was one of the better ones.
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/PPYPJl.png[/img]
How does he snipe with his eyes closed?
Fixed:
[img]http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/4029/ppypjl.png[/img]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
