Hollywood's Hollywood Review

[John McHenry]

47 Ronin

Now I don't know the actual story of the 47 Ronin which this movie claims to be based on. There are a couple mythical elements to it the movie would have been better without imo. It's a good movie. All of Keanu's "flaws" are gone. Great acting good story. I didn't go in with expectations too high and I felt entertained while watching it got my moneys worth. Anyone who has an interest in mythology or martial arts should like it just fine. Actually when I left I told my friend "The only think that would have made this Episode of Star Wars better was if it were in space"

7.5/10

 

[Heisenberg]

I am disappointed that you go and see 47 Ronin, yet haven't seen TWOWS.

 

[John McHenry]

I am disappointed that you go and see 47 Ronin, yet haven't seen TWOWS.

When you learn to speak english maybe I'll know what movie you mean.

But one only plays twice a day due to its incredibly long run time. Also I have no desire to see a Scorsese comedy when I've already seen his best work.

 

[Heisenberg]

When you learn to speak english maybe I'll know what movie you mean.

But one only plays twice a day due to its incredibly long run time. Also I have no desire to see a Scorsese comedy when I've already seen his best work.

Still better than Ronin. Longer runtime is good and Leo as the lead is enough for me to see it. Especially when it's SCORSESE.

 

[John McHenry]

Still better than Ronin. Longer runtime is good and Leo as the lead is enough for me to see it. Especially when it's SCORSESE.

See this is why you're a fucking idiot. Longer runtimes do not make better movies. Scorsese doesn't make good comedic films which is what this is. Leo doesn't make good comedic films.and

47 Ronin is Visually Astounding so it's obviously going to make people shit themselves when they see it.

 

[Chris]

FUCK long runtimes. The 3 hour runtime is one of the reasons I don't want to see The Wolf of Wall Street in theaters even though it looks like a great movie and I'm a fan of most involved. I'll watch a movie 2 hours or less way before I watch any movie over 2 and a half hours no matter how good it is. I swear it took me three different days to watch Gone with the Wind and I loved that movie.

 

[Heisenberg]

See this is why you're a fucking idiot. Longer runtimes do not make better movies. Scorsese doesn't make good comedic films which is what this is. Leo doesn't make good comedic films.and

47 Ronin is Visually Astounding so it's obviously going to make people shit themselves when they see it.

I know that it doesn't make a better movie but I hear the movie is good so a longer runtime is more bang for your buck. In my case when you're paying $10-15 a ticket. I seen django in theaters and loved it. Didn't mind the run time.

Yeah but too bad no one is seeing it with Keanu being Sir Flopsalot.

 

[Heisenberg]

FUCK long runtimes. The 3 hour runtime is one of the reasons I don't want to see The Wolf of Wall Street in theaters even though it looks like a great movie and I'm a fan of most involved. I'll watch a movie 2 hours or less way before I watch any movie over 2 and a half hours no matter how good it is. I swear it took me three different days to watch Gone with the Wind and I loved that movie.

Didn't you see hobbit in theaters and that goes for a fucking eternity.

 

[John McHenry]

I know that it doesn't make a better movie but I hear the movie is good so a longer runtime is more bang for your buck. In my case when you're paying $10-15 a ticket. I seen django in theaters and loved it. Didn't mind the run time.

Yeah but too bad no one is seeing it with Keanu being Sir Flopsalot.

Name three theatrical releases he's been in that have "flopped"

Also you used a horrible movie as an example so you failed.

 

[Chris]

Didn't you see hobbit in theaters and that goes for a fucking eternity.

Yeah and I loved it but it was hard for me to sit through. The Lord of the Rings movies are some of my favorite of all time but I couldn't have watched them in theaters. Same goes for Django last year when I saw that one in theaters. I hate long runtimes but I recognize how good movies are despite their runtimes. I prefer 2 hours or less though.

 

[Keith]

@ Hollywood one of Scorsese's best ever films was a comedy that being King of Comedy.

As far as length goes as a rule I don't see the need for a film to be three hours, but there are classic examples of good three hour films so the rule doesn't always apply.

I would rather watch the Scorsese film than the Reeves one, but having seen the trailer I don't think it looks that good, to me just a lazy satire which is not going to test its characters or tell us much which we don't already know. And I am even less keen knowing that it is three hours!

 

[John McHenry]

I would rather watch the Scorsese film than the Reeves one, but having seen the trailer I don't think it looks that good, to me just a lazy satire which is not going to test its characters or tell us much which we don't already know. And I am even less keen knowing that it is three hours!

Scorsese or Reeves? Technically they are both almost three hours. Saw King of Comedy felt meh about it. I'll see Wolf of Wall street I just don't treat big names like the hot girl at school about to give me a handjob. They all have there flaws and a film like 47 Ronin or Grudge Match has just as much potential especially up against a film that looks as silly as Wolf.

Honestly Wolf looks like a shittier version of Pain and Gain set in New York to me. At least judging by the trailer. I also watched all the movies I hadn't seen Trailers for as I knew I wouldn't have expectations

 

[John McHenry]

Rush

Formula 1 of the 70s feels like a movie I've seen before. Feels exactly like Days of Thunder, this is based on a true story so that's probably where Thunder took the story from. Ironically they use some of the same soundtrack. Nothing wrong with the movie Story is pretty there, action is adequate. Bewbs. Acting is good but it's missing something that I can't quite put my finger on. It's no longer in theaters so watching it on DVD you'll get your moneys worth though you may just want to watch Days of Thunder instead.

 

[Keith]

Scorsese or Reeves? Technically they are both almost three hours. Saw King of Comedy felt meh about it. I'll see Wolf of Wall street I just don't treat big names like the hot girl at school about to give me a handjob. They all have there flaws and a film like 47 Ronin or Grudge Match has just as much potential especially up against a film that looks as silly as Wolf.

Honestly Wolf looks like a shittier version of Pain and Gain set in New York to me. At least judging by the trailer. I also watched all the movies I hadn't seen Trailers for as I knew I wouldn't have expectations

I did mean the Scorsese film, didn't know that 47 Ronin was close to three hours, neither films need to be that long.

You lost me a bit when you mentioned a Michael Bay film and suggested that a Scorsese could actually be worse, he could out direct that hack in his sleep! I don't see how the two films are that simlar.

By the way have you've seen the lastest Hunger Games yet? I am going tomorrow and based on the first part am very excited.

 

[John McHenry]

I saw it middle book was a bet of a miss for me so think it tainted the movie.


I'm just saying the based of the Trailer of Wolf it looks like a meh