I wouldn't be on this board with this rant but I was lead to believe this was a good movie from critics. I was bamboozled! This movie is just plain bad. I wouldn't expect it to be so since Peter Weir's Green Card was an excellent movie.
This movie would is on par with TV movies. The acting is really subpar and the characters and not really engrossing. The story is just plain boring.
An overall bad movie.
For you to equate Green Card to Fearless shows you missed the point entirely. It just shows, I suppose, what a wide range Weir has.
shareOH my goodness, I was just about to write a post saying "Doesn't ANYONE else think this movie sucks?". I had to watch this in class today, and though I disagree that the acting was terrible (Rosie Perez, Jeff Bridges and Isabella Rosellini are great actors, even in this mess of a movie) the plot was empty and the movie was literally unwatchable. Though they had a great idea, guy survives plane crash and is now fearless, there was no point to the whole thing!!! I agree, a terribly bad and boring movie.
shareThank you! I didn't like this movie either. Glad I'm not alone in that. The ending was especially bad. Impossible and Lame!
share[deleted]
He's not fearless at all he's kidding himself that he is.
You really need to grow up a bit before you comment on films dealing with deep themes - watch transformers or something.
I think the OP needs to learn a bit of humility.
It's okay to not like the movie, but it shows a lack of maturity/taste if you cannot comprehend the depth of this movie.
And Jeff Bridge's acting was horrible? You have a right to an opinion, but the moment you said this you lost a lot of credibility. Name your favorite actor, go to his imdb name, and you'll find at least one post which says 'he/she' cannot act. Opinions are merely opinions.
It is not meant to be appreciated like an action or romantic movie... there is a raw psychological edge that is intense to watch, at least for me... though most kids or less attentive people would find it hard to swallow.
It's not meant to be wholly realistic, more a well-made, hollywood-exaggerated perspective on one man's fight against his inner demons.
plot was empty? i can't even wrap my head around that summation. this plot is anything but empty. like some of the other posters have pointed out, while thankful you haven't experienced any major trauma, your viewing of this film may be a bit pre-mature.
to me, this movie was thought-provoking, my favorite kind of film.
serva me, serva bote
http://www.myspace.com/naervana
"I had to watch this in class today"
"the plot was empty and the movie was literally unwatchable. Though they had a great idea, guy survives plane crash and is now fearless, there was no point to the whole thing!!! I agree, a terribly bad and boring movie."
I was lead to believe
Do you mean "led"?
This movie would is on par with TV movies.
"would is"?
The acting is really subpar and the characters and not really engrossing.
Did you forget to finish your thought about the characters?
I know this: "Fearless" is not nearly as bad as your use of the English language.
"Push the button, Max!"
PF
Don't be so smug and petty because others don't get moist, like you, over bad sappy movies.
Make my day and correct my english and grammar. I would rather spend time searching for a decent movie to watch.
I'm glad that you've obviously never had life experiences that would lead you to understand the complexity of this movie. In my profession I have recommended that people with post-traumatic stress disorder watch this movie as a way of processing their feelings. This movie is incredibly impactful for anyone who has experienced a traumatic event. I'm glad that you haven't experienced an event sufficiently traumatic for you to understand its meaning. But don't put *beep* on the people who have. Let's see what you have to say about this movie after wearing another 20 years or so.
shareI truly believe there are some films people should be barred from watching. I'm not saying this because I can't tolerate discord or fair criticism, that's not the case. Nuance, look it up. The fact you used "Green Card" for comparison shows you have a superficial appreciation of film in general. I had the opposite feeling, thought "Green Card" was okay, very commercial, and Weir must have needed money. I hope you never need to understand PTSD. This is a remarkable film.
shareWell, if Green Card was the only Weir's movie that OP had watched before Fearless, it's no wonder why he was so uncomfortable and disappointed wathing the latter. If he had previously seen The Mosquito Coast or at least Witness, let alone Dead Poets Society or (what a heretic idea) Picnic at Hanging Rock, he would know what to expect from Weir. (But I guess there was no real chance for him to ever watch these masterpieces.) Not that I dislike Green Card, but it is more like a Nora Ephron or Nancy Meyers movie...
shareNah, not that bad. Good premise, a little slow in the middle, but a nice finish. I'm glad I watched it, or I wouldn't be on this board. Just a few too many examples of how warped you can get with a catastrophic near-death experience.
shareto the OP: when you have such an uninteresting, immature opinion without any argumentation, please keep it to yourself
it's one of the diseases of the internet that everyone thinks their little opinion matters. it doesn't
I really agree with you. I hadn't watched this film in years, but it has a good premise maybe not executed magnificently, nonetheless it's still good. As for the acting I think Bridges is good in it, as for the rest there'll all pretty solid (except for Perez who I have trouble watching). The one think that strikes me about this film, is that for a pretty non-spectacular film, it has a fantastic ending. Having said all that, 7.1 is probably about the right rating for this film.
share"This movie would is on par with TV movies. The acting is really subpar and the characters and not really engrossing. The story is just plain boring. "
Yeah, I thought it started well, but then I lost total interest as it went along. Bridges and Perez were really good though, and it was gorgeously scored.
Jesus, come closer. I think my time is near
I wouldn't say it was 'truely bad' - but I didn't really get into it except for a few key scenes - mainly those between Bridges and Perez (whom I thought was very good.) - although I didn't really find him a very likeable character.
I guess the film just didn't really grab me.
I think I got into it more towards the end - or at least from when they go shopping and smash the car into the wall.
Although at the end, boy i was sitting there going 'no, you can't kill of Jeff Bridges with a strawberry after everything he's been through!' lol It was nice the wife got to save him literally.
Do you have monkeys in Scotland?
~No, but if we did we'd probably deep fry them!
Exactly. I just didn't find the characters likable enough. And the pacing isn't that great.
Maybe I just don't get this film, and if people on the board enjoy it, that's perfectly fine.
Sure, Bridges has woken up and realized that life is short, but can't he be fearless without ignoring his family?
Like I said, Fearless was not my cup of tea.
Now I have three sequels. Ho ho ho.
http://astrolupine.deviantart.com
[deleted]
I wouldn't be on this board with this rant but I was lead to believe this was a good movie from critics. I was bamboozled! This movie is just plain bad.So you're taking it out on us, instead of these misleading critics who "bamboozled" you into watching it? Gee, thanks.
I wouldn't expect it to be so since Peter Weir's Green Card was an excellent movie.That's funny, you just said critics gave you bad suggestions, yet in the same breath you admit that you personally expected the movie to be good because of the director's other movie. Sounds like 50% of the blame should be on your own head, not those "misleading critics." Yet still, the IMDb community gets the brunt of your miserable anger & disgruntlement. Thanks again!
This movie would is on par with TV movies. The acting is really subpar and the characters and not really engrossing. The story is just plain boring. An overall bad movie.Well at least unlike most trolls, you made a meager, mediocre attempt to explain why you think the movie stinks. Your explanation is pretty sub-par, your comments are nowhere near engrossing, in fact your entire topic is boring and barely one step beyond the usual "THIS SUCKS!" topic. Just felt the need to let you know that, since you took your own personal time to inform a bunch of anonymous strangers on a message board that you thought this movie sucked, I figured I could waste a few minutes of my own personal time letting you know that your post is next to worthless. If you'd elaborated a bit more on why you feel that way, there might actually be something worth discussing, but you've done the bare minimum and there's hardly anything to take any further. This topic is truly bad.
"Well at least unlike most trolls, you made a meager, mediocre attempt to explain why you think the movie stinks. Your explanation is pretty sub-par, your comments are nowhere near engrossing, in fact your entire topic is boring and barely one step beyond the usual "THIS SUCKS!" topic. Just felt the need to let you know that, since you took your own personal time to inform a bunch of anonymous strangers on a message board that you thought this movie sucked, I figured I could waste a few minutes of my own personal time letting you know that your post is next to worthless. If you'd elaborated a bit more on why you feel that way, there might actually be something worth discussing, but you've done the bare minimum and there's hardly anything to take any further. This topic is truly bad."
If you look at the OP's posting history, there are a number of "classics" that he/she has watched and declared mediocre, usually with less explanation than here. I would guess that communication is not their strong suit.