Re: What Did You Watch? 2024-04-16 (Tuesday)

On 4/17/24 12:01 PM, shawn wrote:
>

On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:39:21 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:

Ian J. Ball <ijball@mac.invalid> wrote:

On 4/17/24 8:56 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>

Although there were many opportunities in the screenplay, the Wilhelm
Scream was not used in this film for a falling or injured character.

>
Pretend you heard it from me when you mentioned the number of effects
shots. How many are there in a Jackie Chan movie fight scene? That would
be none whatsoever. What's the point in learning how to fight in so many
styles when it's just going to be a special effect?
>
You almost tempted me.

>
I thought it was just OK.
>
IIRC, I was actually more engrossed by "Eternals", which may actually be
slightly underrated by this point.

>
No. No, it’s not. It’s a lousy movie is the best that can be said for it.
And a few are at all familiar with the source material. It’s a dreadful
movie.

 
Agreed. I don't know how anyone can think the ETERNALS is anything
other than bad. Sure, there were some interesting ideas behind the
movie but it never came together.

>
It's still more entertaining than "Shang-Chi".