Gladiator

They didn't use that armour then! God I hope somebody
got fired for that blunder...         Image: SMH

Today we have a film that won 5 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Actor for Russell Crowe. That's right, Gladiator. Be warned, the first review contains spoilers (But really you should have seen this by now. It's been out 10 years):

I have just read some of the reviews nad had to laugh out loud (Really? I'm willing to bet that you didn't. Maybe a chuckle, but not literally 'laugh out loud'). One person suggested that Maximus had to die because otherwise it wouldn't have been true (He had to die to give the story cinematic weight, I'd say). Does this mean some people actually think this is historical? (You do realise this wasn't trying to be accurate don't you?) Historically the battle at the begining was not won, Marcus made Comodus Commodus Caesar 10 years before his death so there was no question of accendancy. And finally Comodus Commodus was murdered by his wife and sister in his bath (Actually, his mistress poisoned him, but that didn't work so she and her fellow conspirators [who were a Praetorian prefect and the Emperor's chamberlain] hired a wrestler named Narcissus to strangle him in the bath. Probably best they didn't hire you to help with the history then...). See the resemblance in the film? I thought not. But as a film in its own right ignoring history and reality, not bad, effects were great characters were bland, but the ending was so pathetic I felt sorry for the script writer. (So you gave one star because you didn't like the end? Was the end so awful to you that it dragged the whole down to 'Transformers' level?) 

This film had the potential to be an all time great (Most would argue that it is) had they got a decent script, the cast were superb the effects awesome it was just the story and the script that spoilt it.

Now we have this in depth analysis of why Gladiator failed both commercially and critically (hmm... something doesn't sound quite right there...):

APART FROM THE MOST ABSOLUTE LACK OF HISTORICAL ACCURACY, IT'S ONE OF THE MOST STUPID MOVIES YOU'LL EVER WATCH. I DON'T WANT TO WASTE MORE WORDS, AND I ADVICE EVERYBODY NOT TO WASTE YOUR TIME AND/OR MONEY IN THS FILM. I'D RATHER HAVE IT RATED WITH A MINUS FIVE STAR, BUT IT'S NOT POSSIBLE (You do know that caps lock can be switched off, yeah? Aside from that, like the last reviewer, you seem to have become confused by films and reality. This film doesn't pretend to be true. It's just a story. And in what way is it stupid, please expand upon this point, or else you'll just look stupid yourself. Oh, wait, too late...)

Here's another delight for you, you baying crowd:

This production is probably financed by some religious Fund (It wasn't).If we look at the boring religious elements (There are only a few short bits, mostly to give Maximus some humanity), mostly stolen from other movies, I personally prefer "Gandi" (It's Gandhi, and it's an entirely different film). Great decorum, costumes and scenes are nearly annihilated by cliche text, bad acting (Most thought the acting was very strong. Clearly, however, you know far more than professional critics and actors) and pover (?) music and sounds. This production with its stereotyping false and fake sentiments is no match compared to "Galicula" (It's 'Caligula'. And it was panned by almost all critics and was practically a porn film). Even the batllescenes are worse compared to i.e. "Best of the Best" or "Beowulf" (Best of the Best was a martial arts film. How are the two comparable? And the Beowulf referred to here was made in 1999 and is a sci-fi film. Both were also slated by critics). The moral ending is in line with present day indoctrination for the youth i.e. "Titanic": follow the woman and sacrifice for a woman.  (Is it just me, or is this sound a little sexist?)

Finally, with Paul's Rules fresh in our memory I give you this extract from someone's one-star review:

So, with all the bad press going around about this Blu-ray i decided to cancel and re-order once the dust had settled regarding the quality of the product.  

However, a FULL FIVE DAYS before the release date i am unable to cancel the item as it will be "dispatched soon". (Yes. Well, pre-orders get dispatched a few days before release so that they arrive on the day)   

What a con!!!!!!!!!! (Not at all. Perhaps you should have cancelled earlier. I can guarantee that if they didn't dispatch till the day of release, you'd be here moaning about having to wait a day or so to get your item)  

If the item does not arrive on the release date it will just go to prove that having seen the negative press on the item Amazon have decided to rip off their customers who are loyal enough to pre-order it and block them from cancelling it. (I bet you think we didn't go to the moon and that the Earth is flat, don't you? Idiot. The Amazon review system is for the product, not a review of the service you have received. A pox on you, sir)

The Hurt Locker

If only he'd been a giant smurf... Image Musicfeeds

The Hurt Locker, as you may remember, won Best Picture at the Oscars earlier this year. The Academy Awards are decided by 6,000 professionals and leading figures in their field, such as actors Michael Caine and Tom Hanks and directors like Danny Boyle. However, instead the Academy should have asked these guys, they are obviously far better at determining the quality of a film:

how this movie beat the film avatar i have no idea, its the same old war film, things get blown up people die... (Well it wouldn't be a realistic war film if no-one died would it? Unfortunately the world's armed forces do not use Nerf guns to fight each other. And as for the explosions, it's a bomb disposal squad. Explosions are quite an important area of their work I understand. Also, IN AVATAR THINGS GOT BLOWN UP AND PEOPLE DIED! You can't complain about elements in one film, and praise another film ignoring the fact that it contains those exact same elements! Fucktard)

ok its not the worst movie ive ever seen but how!!! HOW!!! did avatar get beaten by this i will never know (Because Avatar was an astoundingly unoriginal film. The plot (if you could call it that) was ripped straight from Pocahontas with a few Smurfs thrown in. The only things it had going for it were the special effects and the 3Dness (which I still don't like). There was no character development. The acting was generally poor. The direction was good, but nothing particularly special. And the whole thing was just a little bit preachy. Oh, and the ending was pretty obvious from pretty early on. So, there's a bunch of reasons. Pick one.)

my advice would be not to buy this and pre order your copy of AVATAR (Or, better yet, ignore this Avatar fanboy's advice and read some real, unbiased reviews upon which to base your decision.) :) (I really want to punch that stupid smiley face)

 Right, moving on to a slightly less stupid review we have this person passing off opinion as fact:

Pure Hollywood fantasy. (And what film, may I ask, isn't?)

Turned this rubbish off less than half way through (Then how can you review the whole thing?). I appreciate it is only a film (I don't think you do), but I found the part where the British servicemen were being portrayed as idiots laughably, but at the same time offensive, as it shows a complete lack of respect to the brave servicemen who risk their lives in the REAL world (They weren't servicemen. They were a Private Military Company (PMC) so had practically nothing to do with servicemen).

Once again the U.S. of A saves the world! Maybe someone in Hollywood should start reading some history instead of inventing it before filming rubbish like this. (Unfortunately that's just cinema. As it happens, I felt that this film was less pro-America than most other war films)
Save your money and buy a decent film like Private Ryan or Black Hawk Down, far more realistic, believable characters and edge of the seat action. (So, you slate The Hurt Locker for being too American, but then choose Ryan which is far more 'U.S. of A saves the world!' I see. That makes sense. I would also like to point out that Ryan is not 'realistic' by your standards. No-one would send a whole military team through enemy occupied territory to save one man. These are just films. 'Real' and 'Realistic' are different things that's why they're two words.) This film is just pitiful. (I'm sorry to tell you that this is just your opinion. And as such, is no more important than anyone else's.)