… that sucked balls
For me the list starts like this:
2012
Reign of fire
Funny people
Spiderman 3
Superman returns
Ghost Rider.
[quote]roybot wrote:
Ghost Rider.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more.
Actually pretty much any nicholad cage film for the last 5 or 6 years
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
Actually pretty much any nicholad cage film for the last 5 or 6 years[/quote]
You could be right, but I wouldn’t know because I’ve been avoiding that oaf’s films for the past 8 years.
lol
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.
[quote]DJS wrote:
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.[/quote]
Yeah, something was definitely missing in the first movie. How would you feel about Bill Paxton as Langdon? Apparently he was first choice.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]DJS wrote:
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.[/quote]
Yeah, something was definitely missing in the first movie. How would you feel about Bill Paxton as Langdon? Apparently he was first choice.[/quote]
hmm… not sure. It’s hard for me to imagine who would of been right for the roll. I’m thinking someone more animated but not silly. All I know is hanks was extremely wooden. Maybe it was the direction. Richie Cunningham isn’t directing the next one so we’ll see how that comes out.
Modigliani
Yeah, I’m probably the only person on these forums who saw it. But the story of the ill-fated, tortured painter was so miscast with Andy Garcia as the lead (shoulda been Johnny Depp), horribly scripted, and awfully directed.
[quote]DJS wrote:
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.[/quote]
Have to agree here, the main protagonist needed to be the modern day Indiana Jones, part scholar and part bad ass. Hanks is one of the best actors of our time in my opinion, however bad ass is not in the same sentence as Hanks.
Who would have been better?
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]DJS wrote:
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.[/quote]
Have to agree here, the main protagonist needed to be the modern day Indiana Jones, part scholar and part bad ass. Hanks is one of the best actors of our time in my opinion, however bad ass is not in the same sentence as Hanks.
Who would have been better? [/quote]
Viggo Mortensen?
Transformers 2 - I walked out half way through the movie.
Resident Evil: After life
Gamer
Never Back Down
The Final Destination
16 Blocks
Superman Returns
Man with a gun
Bangkok Dangerous
The Spirit
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
The Spirit
[/quote]
I personally really enjoyed this movie, granted, I went in with zero expectations.
Mine:
The Adjustment Bureau
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
… that sucked balls
For me the list starts like this:
2012
Reign of fire
Funny people
Spiderman 3
Superman returns
[/quote]
Completely agree on Reign of Fire. How could a movie with dragons shooting napalm, guys diving out of a C-130, and the rest of that mayhem have been so utterly unwatchable.
Plus, can I get a “Hell, yeah!” for Zardoz, easily the worst movie featuring Sean Connery in thigh-high boots that has ever been made.
[quote]batman730 wrote:
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]DJS wrote:
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.[/quote]
Have to agree here, the main protagonist needed to be the modern day Indiana Jones, part scholar and part bad ass. Hanks is one of the best actors of our time in my opinion, however bad ass is not in the same sentence as Hanks.
Who would have been better? [/quote]
Viggo Mortensen?[/quote]
Good call.
[quote]batman730 wrote:
[quote]DJHT wrote:
[quote]DJS wrote:
Davinci Code. I loved the book and thought the movie came out flat. Angels and Demons was better but it just seems that Tom Hanks wasn’t a good fit. And… I love Tom Hanks.[/quote]
Have to agree here, the main protagonist needed to be the modern day Indiana Jones, part scholar and part bad ass. Hanks is one of the best actors of our time in my opinion, however bad ass is not in the same sentence as Hanks.
Who would have been better? [/quote]
Viggo Mortensen?[/quote]
That could of worked or sounds like it could of.
[quote]byukid wrote:
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
The Spirit
[/quote]
I personally really enjoyed this movie, granted, I went in with zero expectations.
Mine:
The Adjustment Bureau[/quote]
Ah, now you see, I thoroughly enjoyed The Adjustment Bureau 
It was definitely better than The Spirit crapfest.
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
[quote]byukid wrote:
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
The Spirit
[/quote]
I personally really enjoyed this movie, granted, I went in with zero expectations.
Mine:
The Adjustment Bureau[/quote]
Ah, now you see, I thoroughly enjoyed The Adjustment Bureau It was definitely better than The Spirit crapfest.
[/quote]
I liked it for the first 45 minutes, then it was just… I dunno, I hated the weird moralistic turn it took. I was hoping for something more sci-fi and with a much better ending.
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
[quote]byukid wrote:
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
The Spirit
[/quote]
I personally really enjoyed this movie, granted, I went in with zero expectations.
Mine:
The Adjustment Bureau[/quote]
Ah, now you see, I thoroughly enjoyed The Adjustment Bureau It was definitely better than The Spirit crapfest.
[/quote]
Yea I dont understand the hate for the Adjustment bureau I also enjoyed it. The Spirit was a real let down after Sin City.