Posted on 12/26/2007 10:28:22 AM PST by Soliton
"The fact-based political comedy "Charlie Wilson's War" earned $14.75 million...after 5 days."
(Excerpt) Read more at uk.reuters.com ...
I caught something the other night that I thought was a spoof at first. Ever see “Reign Of Fire” with Matthew McConaughy?
It’s post apocalypse and there are few people left on Earth. Matthew is the hardest charging military guy ever. The only thing is that the Apocalypse and every other major catastrophe in Earth history turns out to be caused by dragons. It’s one of those movies that are so lame you can’t stop watching.
Yup. And they slammed the TV with adds about the Cruise, Redford anti war flick. It crashed and burned. After its first week out, all those disappeared very quickly. Another anti American film that crashed and made me proud.
Think about it. Movies with Cruise, Redford, Streep, Jolie, Julia Roberts, and Tom Hanks all going belly up. They threw everything they had against the war and then tried taking credit for the first victory in Afghanistan.
We have to be into hundreds of millions of dollars squandered.
It was alright, but no way was it one of the best movies of the year.
Some of the deadpan quips that didn't get a laugh were pretty funny. It was also nice to see a movie that left-wing critics attacked for its anti-Communism.
"Charlie Wilson's War" took a basically positive view of our Cold War involvement and that was refreshing.
But Sorkin's sniping at the religious was grating. It seems like his desire to score political points sometimes got the better of his script.
My big complaint was that the acting was so flat. Hanks and Hoffman have done a lot better in other films. Julia Roberts was just picking up a paycheck.
So yes, it wasn't a bad movie, but it certainly didn't live up to the hype -- so far as I could tell at least.
Cool! My son is 9 and an absolute history buff! There are so many films that are inappropriate for him - just kind of on the edge that he can’t do.
Even the films that are supposed to be for kids, “Shrek” for instance, feels compelled to put in all the low-brow gutter humor and fart antics. It’s so lame.
I’d like to take him to National Treasure before the end of the holiday.
I too saw it on Christmas Eve! I am not as kind as you two reviewers. It was just okay. Much too repetitive from the first outing, too many plot holes and logical discrepancies, and worst of all, too much standing around talking. I loved the first one and watch it repeatedly on DVD. You can bet that one time was enough for the second one.
Like I said, I think that it is a setup for a third film. The first one was great fun.
If so, that does not bode well for a third installment. They brought in the writing duo from POTC on this one, and while they have had a string of hits over the years, each Pirate movie got successively worse. In that case “Dead Man’s Chest” was NOTHING more than filler for the third film.
I saw NT. If you’ve seen the first one, you’ve seen this one too.
Extremely predictable. To the max. Not bad, but nothing you haven’t already paid to see.
Wait for it on cable. Go see ‘Legend’. It rocks!
My nine-year-old daughter loved the NT II. He should have a good time.
I did see Legend and, while it was enjoyable, I felt that it deviated it a bit much from the source material for my taste.
Is that so. I never read the book, but it looks like a good one. Books are always better than the movies.
And the plot will probably have something to do with "Page 47"
I am sure that it will since they never reveal what is on page 47. That was my first thought when the ending credits started to roll.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.