Maybe the movie will still be popular anyway. I’m not hearing a lot of positive reviews. Clint made three movies in the last five years. Perhaps he should have slowed down the production. We will see. It remains a good story.
I’ve been surprised how successful Eastwood has been at directing. He’s entitled to a dud, if this film turns out to be one.
The bad reviews for this movie are primarily due to PC attitudes, which can’t abide Eastwood’s painstaking efforts to create an ultra-faithful representation of the people involved in this story, and the beliefs they hold and reflect...
We’re seeing it for three reasons, 1) proud of the heroes on the train, 2) Loved all Eastwood’s movies-josey Wales is a favorite 3) Owe Eastwood eternally for his performance at convention where he spoke to that empty chair that was Obama.
interspersing quick cuts to the train ride with a thuddingly boring back story of average, slightly hyperactive kids who maintained a lifelong friendship.
And the critics just can’t wrap their minds around
average kids who are friends who rise to the occasion
and perform like heros. This is always what has made
America a thing to be proud of, and yet they hold it
in disdain. How sad for them. Sad.
I would like to support it, just because of Clint letting the guys play themselves; I appreciate him doing that bold move which flies in the face of the Hollywood jerks.
Haven’t checked local listings yet since I rarely go to a theater.
I feel we’ve reached a point of divergence with these people, these endless moaners and hivemind gnawing beasts.
I have noticed in the trailer the attacker appears quite light-skinned; he was Moroccan I think and I saw a pic of his perp walk. Who made this nod to PC and not depict him in his real appearance?
Shocker.
/s
"Don’t believe the mixed or bad reviews coming in early for Clint Eastwood’s “15:17 to Paris.” I saw it tonight, and like A.O. Scott in the New York Times, I found it fascinating and much more complicated than a snarky dismissal."
REVIEW Clint Eastwood’s “15:17 to Paris” Is An Eclectic Mix of Patriotic...
I hate to judge a film (or agree with a critic) without seeing the thing for myself, but I have to admit that this review sounds plausible. If the movie is indeed 10 minutes of the train attack and 83 minutes of backstory of these guys just being good pals, then, yeah, I could see the film being something of a bore.
I’ll bet this wiener of a movie critic didn’t care much for Eastwood’s production of The Empty Chair, either.
Oh, well.
If the three friends had bee three homosexuals, the critics would probably been more enthusiastic.
Critics hated the spaghetti westerns at first too except the Ennio Morricone scores
Josef Wales was so good nothing else matters
For decades my rule of thumb on films has been;
If the critics don’t like it then it’s pretty good,
And if they love it then it’s a stinker.
Maybe what seems boring in America is because we aren’t the intended audience. Europe may be where his focus is.
Many Americans find European movies to be “boring” and they always have.
Movie critics think that growing up in a moral manner is boring.
Pathetic
Even if this movie is a dud, I’m going to see it. I’ll never forget his conversation with an empty chair representing 0. For that alone, he has my loyalty.
Never understood why people should listen to a “critic” who gets paid to tell us if we should like or dislike a movie. If it sounds appealing go see it. If you like it, great. If you don’t, so be it.
Translation: They didn’t get high and kidnap little boys to have sex with.