I enjoyed it. Lot's of blood and bad language. A satire, but who is it making fun of? The libtards are pictured as insanely politically correct. Orwell references. It is very violent and opens with a guy getting his eye gouged out with a high heeled shoe. The fight at the end wasn't really needed. I think it will end up being a cult film. I am surprised that Hillary Swank is in it and Emma Roberts.
To: dynachrome
2 posted on
05/25/2022 7:35:50 PM PDT by
dynachrome
(“We cannot save Ukraine by dooming the US economy.” Rand Paul)
To: dynachrome
How about the new top gun. Anyone seen it yet?
4 posted on
05/25/2022 8:05:06 PM PDT by
Newtoidaho
(All I ask of living is to have no chains on me.)
To: dynachrome
I liked it a lot. Some nice twists and surprises. It’s not a movie to take too seriously or get you shorts in a knot about, like it seems a lot of people did. It’s actually a cool little dark comedy if you don’t mind the gore.
5 posted on
05/25/2022 8:23:59 PM PDT by
Bullish
(CNN is what you get when gullible children run a 'news' channel.)
To: dynachrome
It was a campy satire. A future cult classic type flick.
To: dynachrome
The film was very well made and a fun thrill ride. It was shot in the foot pre-release due to the political tensions at the time. In actuality it skewers right AND left and really drives that point home at the end. Bettie Gilpin was great in the Sigourney Weaver/Ripley-esque role.
8 posted on
05/25/2022 8:40:01 PM PDT by
avenir
(Information overload = Pattern recognition)
To: dynachrome
Cool.
The original advertising had it anti-right.
10 posted on
05/26/2022 2:02:23 AM PDT by
Gene Eric
(Don't be a statist!)
To: dynachrome
I suspect the money for Hillary Swank..... Emma? She got it very quickly at the start.... I also liked the movie very much.
11 posted on
05/26/2022 2:28:45 AM PDT by
Gaffer
To: dynachrome
13 posted on
06/11/2022 4:11:55 AM PDT by
spetznaz
(Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson