SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: KLP who wrote (473869)2/25/2012 3:37:31 AM
From: SmoothSail3 Recommendations  Respond to of 793838
 
Imus interviewed the 2 producers on his show this morning. They, the producers, don't read the reviews and don't care what the reviewers say about the movie. It is destined to be a hit. They talked about considering actors at first but realized that only Seals could play Seals - and their families, who they considered to be a huge part of their success. I wish I'd saved the interview. It was really good. Also, they financed the movie themselves.



To: KLP who wrote (473869)2/25/2012 4:22:35 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 793838
 
Big Surprise - wiki:

"Reception

The film opened with generally negative reviews. Based upon 76 reviews, it received a 26% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Among 27 top critics, it obtained an approval rating of 19% with the consensus saying, "It's undeniably reverent of the real-life heroes in its cast, but Act of Valor lets them down with a clichéd script, stilted acting, and a jingoistic attitude that ignores the complexities of war."[13] Metacritic assigned the film an average rating of 42/100 based upon 28 reviews.[14]

Many reviews, both positive and negative, have expressed praise for the action sequences while criticizing the plot and acting. Claudia Puig from USA Today, for example, said the action in the film is "breathtaking," but gave the film an overall negative review, in which she wrote that "the soldiers' awkward line readings are glaring enough to distract from the potency of the story."[15] Similarly, Amy Biancolli from the San Francisco Chronicle wrote, "[Act of Valor is] intended to wow audiences with high-test action while planting a giant wet kiss on the smacker of the U.S. military - and it scores at both tasks," but that, ultimately, "the film gets snagged by its own narrative convention."[16] Michael Rechtshaffen from The Hollywood Reporter had a similar opinion, stating, "Although the film has its undeniably immersive, convincing moments, the merging of dramatic re-creations and on-camera "performances" proves less seamlessly executed than those masterfully coordinated land, sea and air missions."[17] Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film two and a half out of four stars, and complained that "we don't get to know the characters as individuals, they don't have personality traits, they have no back stories, they don't speak in colorful dialogue, and after the movie you'd find yourself describing events but not people."[18]"

en.wikipedia.org




To: KLP who wrote (473869)2/25/2012 7:56:11 AM
From: MrLucky1 Recommendation  Respond to of 793838
 
<A Pox on any so called movie critic that pans this movie....those people aren't worthy of even polishing these men's shoes.>

Hollywood types will pan anything that was "not invented here". Like other parts of the national media, they actually believe only "their" group can write a script, direct a scene, act, be a talking head or conduct an interview.

They hate it when the rabbit has the gun.