MovieChat Forums > Rolling Thunder (1978) Discussion > God i hated this piece of crap.

God i hated this piece of crap.

posted 15 years ago by Namelessman
36 replies | jump to latest

I'm sorry, but this movie bored me to tears from the start. Now from the opening credits, i could of swore that Tommy Lee Jones was going to be the Lead, but how it turns out, William Devane was the lead. Now i dont ever recall seeing him in a movie before. But goddamn he was so boring, he carrys on through the movie like nothing bothered him at all, like he wasnt affected by anything that happened, not the war, not losing his hand or his family, wife cheating on him, he acts like he doesnt care about anything. When the movie started i notice Tommy Lee Jones was especially intense which is to be expected from a real actor and as soon as i saw them both together i kept on wanting the camera to stay on Tommy Lee Jones and not William Devane and it was like that the whole time as i watched it. I only watched about an hour or so of the movie on Demand and i had to turn it off. My god i thought i was waiting for a corpse to move. If only Tommy Lee Jones was the lead. I mean i really was not convinced that William Devane just cameback from the war, it just looked Tommy Lee Jones came back from the war and William Devane just took a flight over just to pick him up and bring him home. HE WAS SO F@@KING BORING!!!!!!!!

What do you call a coffin full of children? A school bus.

[–] Reality-Bites 15 years ago

I agree with a lot of what ur saying specially about the believablity of William Devane's character actually coming back from a long POW stint at the Hanoi Hilton. Nope, didn't buy that. And i too was about to give up on this movie, but I'd recommend you at least watch it to the end next time you get a chance because it DOES have a kick-ass finish. i won't give it away, but there's a really good gun battle at the end and a lot of people get blown to smithereens. And Tommy Lee jones utters one of the best lines in a movie anywhere: "I'm gonna' go kill a bunch of people."

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] koppa 15 years ago

I agree with you Drunk as Mel. Devane gave a "less is more" approach to his character. The film is a revenge/character study piece. Today's movie fans are expecting the film to do the thinking for them. Therefore, not appreciating films like Rolling Thunder.

[–] ccr1633 15 years ago

Devane had the perfect pitch for this role. He's playing a guy who has had the life sucked out of him in a POW prison, only to return home and find out his wife wants a divorce. He's pretty much numb to the daily travails of life as a civilian. What, the OP wants him to be a loud schmuck like Vin Diesel or something? Man, kids of today are so damned dumb.

[–] Jefbecco-1 14 years ago

I agree. The movie requires the viewer to think somewhat. It wasn't made in 2007 after all.

[–] oiltanker 13 years ago

clap clap clap

These dudes are fuelling movies like the Mechanic (remake)

Lead guys in action films showing character and weakness is lost on today's short attention span retards.

[–] Degree7 14 years ago

Bad acting is... bad acting.

We all got balls and brains. But some's got balls and chains.

[–] ccr1633 14 years ago

Degree7 wrote:
"Bad acting is... bad acting."
-------------------------------------

Except Rolling Thunder had no bad acting.

[–] Degree7 14 years ago

Bad script, bad delivery... something was amiss there.

It was the villains, when they break into his house, that really sealed the deal for me that this was a proper B movie. Hammy performances withall.

We all got balls and brains. But some's got balls and chains.

[–] ccr1633 14 years ago

Degree7 wrote:
"It was the villains, when they break into his house, that really sealed the deal for me that this was a proper B movie. Hammy performances withall."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I guess I can't disagree entirely. Some of us just have a taste for that sort of thing. We all had high hopes for Machete...

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hitman187 14 years ago

I just watched it last night for the first time. I thought it was a well made revenge film. I do agree with some people on here that it did drag in parts, but the climatic shootout made up for it. I also do wish Tommy Lee Jones was in it more too, since I thought he was the best character in the movie.

[–] Redux006 14 years ago

I agree about the Tommy Lee Jones thing, I thought the same thing. You can tell Jones had way more presence the way he delivered the "I'm gonna kill a bunch of people" line. He could have pulled off the lead character much better. But had he been in the lead, then pretty much the movie would just be a duplicate of "The Park Is Mine" which came out about ten years later. In that movie Jones plays another Vietnam vet who goes on a killing spree, but it was made for TV and sucked. And I agree about Devane's lack of depth. He is in the hospital smiling and eating jello, you don't even realize his kid is dead until Cliff mentions their graves. Had that been Jones in the role, you would have sensed something terrible had happened, he has better depth and can show more without words, and you would have instantly known for sure the family was dead.

[–] mobocracy (901) 9 months ago

Jones' character was a shitkicker enlisted man, Devane's chararacter was an Air Force Officer, almost surely a pilot captured when shot down.

My uncle flew F-4s in Vietnam and he was a VERY reserved guy, not at all excitable. I think its a combination of personality and training -- you can't get wound up with a Mig on your ass flying Mach 1 at treetop levels.

I think what was missing was backstory for both men. You'd expect an Air Force officer to be much more reserved -- they should have shown a brief scene with Devane flying, getting shot down and then captured. A ground pounder like Jones would have had a bigger mouth and more excitability, something that seemed on tap with his character but suppressed.

And both went through hell in POW camps, so we know some of the lack of expression is due to their POW experience.

[–] oiltanker 13 years ago

maybe after being in a prisoner of war camp for 7 years changed his outlook on some facets of suburban life that are held so dear to regular folks.

Maybe having to get close to his wife was going to be his biggest problem when he got back and this was an easy way out. He still wanted to be with his son which is understandable.

In real life people are not like the characters portrayed by Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson in their big shows.

I liked it and thought it was more real and something that just might have happened.

Willis driving of a bridge and into a helicopter less so.

Horses for courses but I watched this show for a laugh and ended up loving it.

[–] intexor 13 years ago

I was surprised by the small part Tommy Lee Jones ends up having in this movie, but I still liked it. Yes, the pace is pretty slow and nothing happens for a long time, but they do some good character building and it all leads up to an ultra-violent ending. Nothing wrong with that. I mean, if you can't handle that you might claim that Taxi Driver is boring too. I don't know what OP's problem with William Devane is, unless you really only watched this movie because you're a Tommy Lee Jones fan and hoped to see a lot of him. Devane is a great actor too and it's nice to see him in a starring role for once. I think a lot of the character building and themes of this movie went lost on the OP. If it's too much to handle, you better stick to Rambo (and I like those movies too but except in the first one, the character of John Rambo is pretty much a travesty).

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Doom 13 years ago

I agree.

------

Wait a minute... who am I here?

[–] PRiiCEY 13 years ago

All of you saying anything negative about this seminal classic deserve to die.

I wish I could line you all up against a brick wall and empty 33 slugs into each of your hollow *beep* skulls.