Well I happened to catch an early show of this today, and it was pretty good. It doesn't quite measure up to the first one but it is still a lot of fun. I think my only real complaints are that the puzzles/situations seem a little more absurd from a believability standpoint...definitely more-so than the first one. Spoiler I sure hope it's not that easy to penetrate Buckingham Palace and the White House, or "kidnap" the President in real life Still despite that absurdity it's still a lot of fun. I wouldn't mind seeing more of these flicks...and the ideas are practically limitless.
That's what I was thinking. I could've easily seen the sequel surpassing the original in this case, but I guess not.
i saw it today, it was just like the first one only worse, and i didnt even really like the first one all that much. biggest complaint-too long
I opted to see Sweeney Todd over National Treasure, and judging from Rottentomatoes.com (36% for NT:BoS), it looks like I made a good choice.
Man, when helen mirren was on the ground in that rock cave and her cleavage was showing I was so hoping one would pop out. I have a new category, gilfs. Yeah, you all knoew what I mean!
Also, did anyone notice that charles barkley was at the party where cage talks to the president? Was that him?
i thought it was him. it wasn't as good as the first one but if you liked the first you'll like this one and if you hated the first don't even bother watching this one. how's that for a review. i thought it was good entertainment.
Oh please. Rottentomatoes has never steered me wrong. 1 individual critic can be wrong, but a 100+ critics indicates a trend.
Well if you're basing your viewing on RT, you're missing a ton of great movies. Film critics suffer from a severe case of groupthink and the "if I say this movie is cool, the other guys won't think I'm good" mentality.
Like what, exactly? Here are the movies in the past few months that have NOT gotten "fresh" tomatoes. YOU tell me which movie I'm supposedly missing out on: Alvin and the Chipmunks (24%) P.S. I Love You (20%) Fred Claus (23%) The Golden Compass (42%) This Christmas (50%) August Rush (36%) Hitman (13%) Awake (18%) Bee Movie (53%) Mr. Magorium's Wonderful Emporium (34%) Lions for Lambs (27%) Across the Universe (52%) The Game Plan (28%) Saw IV (19%) The Comebacks (7%) Revolver (16%) Underdog (15%) 30 Days of Night (52%) Southland Tales (35%) Mr. Woodcock (14%) The Brave One (44%) Martian Child (28%) I don't understand where you get groupthink from. This isn't the space shuttle Challenger tragedy we're talking about; reviewers are scattered all over the world and write their pieces at different times. Reviewers stake their reputations on movies. If they get it wrong with the general public (why would they care about other reviewers?), their credibility is shot. Thus, there's no reason NOT to call a spade a spade. (Unless you're Peter Travers, of course, and you're most likely getting paid off by the studios to like every crap movie, but that's hopefully an isolated incident.) Sure, I can see reviewers wanting to stand out, but that would mean going against the grain, not with it. And when you're tallying up a sample size of 100+ reviews, those outliers won't make a big dent, anyway. You act like every "fresh" movie on Rottentomatoes is some artsy flick or something, and it's just not the case. Beowolf got a 70%. I Am Legend got a 64%. Simpsons Movie got an 88%. Live Free or Die Hard got an 80%. Heck, Transformers was close to fresh with 56%. In the case of "event" movies, I'm probably going to see them, anyway, no matter the rating and quality of the movie. But with borderline movies, like National Treasure, I'll use the site to dictate my viewing. And it hasn't steered me wrong yet. Like I said, 1 reviewer could be off or have a hidden agenda. But a 100+? Not likely.
I use Rottentomatoes heavily myself...but I certainly don't take it as the be all to end all. For example...I loved Across the Universe even though it didn't get a fresh rating (though imo, I think a fresh should be majority vote, which it did get). Most of the Bruckheimer movies get rotten ratings (usually in the 40-50 range) and I generally like them (though not all). On the flipside, most reviewers loved Hellboy but, as I have never been shy to admit, I hated the film. Point is, all the critics in the world can say they hate or love a movie, but at the end of the day, that is just their own opinion. National Treasure is worth a look whether that's in the theater, on video or on cable. Hell I even gave Gigli a chance...if for nothing else than to see how bad it truly was...and in that vein I certainly wasn't dissapointed.
I thought the film was enjoyable which was only spoilt by a bad case of hayfever on my part. In some ways, the movie reminded me of the Amazing Race. Clues, puzzles and lots of running around minus the goons, obligatory car chase using expensive cars and hacking into security systems.
Posting this as a test, because apparently no one has posted on the BBS for about 45 minutes... I'll contribute to this thread once I actually watch the movie
Veryy fun movie. There really isn't much to debate becuase it was soo fake & it seemed like they made it that way. Kind of like don't take it to seriouse, just sit back relax & enjoy the show....
mr.woodcock was very funny...bee movie wasnt that bad, 30 days of night , wasnt dreadful....ofcourse I watch most my movies online sooooooooo....find a screener version and enjoy
We just watched the DVD of this here at our house, and I loved it, thought it was better than the new Indiana Jones movie. DD
