Is this a joke?

Pinpointer, yes. Nothing granted. It just fails this time for you. Is being a minority THAT new to anyone? Life goes on.

I know you posted this a while ago, but my old thread gets necro'ed too, and I pretty much called McCall a psychopath pretending to be a saint. I don't want to completely bash the movie, because I think Denzel is a damn good actor, but I just don't like the message this movie sends. I love horror movies, violent action films, and dark crime stories, but I don't like how they made McCall out to be this perfect human being when he's probably insane and very troubled.

They could have done a lot with this movie, like explore how McCall's methods make him cross the line, and threaten his morality and humanity. He never struggles with himself, he's a literal terminator who just kills evil people. He can do no wrong because he's just so awesome, and I think that kind of black/white portrayal of good and evil is what makes this movie feel so out of place. For example, I remember the scene where McCall sees someone stealing, then he follows them with a SLEDGEHAMMER and assumedly kills them. That is just extreme, though someone told me that thief was hinted to be a murderer as well. Either way, it just seems odd that the movie never questions McCall and his brutality, and rather than give him flaws, they just make all the bad guys extra-despicable so you never feel bad or think too much about it.

This movie could have been good if it 1) Didn't take itself so seriously, or 2) Treated it's subject material MORE seriously. Instead, it acts incredibly serious while presenting us with a modern day superhero who kills people methodically without any remorse. Even good guys are supposed to FEEL something, but instead Denzel strings a guy up and stares him dead in the eyes and watches him die slowly. That is sadistic and evil, and it would have been nice to explore that dark side of McCall rather than dismiss it. As it stands, McCall simply feels like a stand-in for people's desire for vigilantism rather than a fully fleshed out character.

Anyways, besides the character of McCall, this movie has some really dumb moments, the diner being my personal favorite. They send in one guy who McCall obviously kills, then they sit in a van and watch McCall take pictures of them, then they wait until he's out of sight before chasing him. They lose him, of course. WHAT!? I have no idea what the bad guys were trying to accomplish in that scene. Did they want to kill him? Were they taking him alive? Were they just doing surveillance? The main bad guy was the most incompetent unthreatening villain in almost any movie. He had multiple chances to kill McCall but did nothing, making him appear weak and useless. Again, a weak boring villain against our perfect infallible hero doesn't make for good story-telling.

Anyways, I don't think people are wrong for liking this movie, I just don't see what they enjoy about it. There are much better action movies with stronger plots, better action, more interesting characters, and more effective villains.

I know you posted this a while ago, but my old thread gets necro'ed too, and I pretty much called McCall a psychopath pretending to be a saint. I don't want to completely bash the movie, because I think Denzel is a damn good actor, but I just don't like the message this movie sends. I love horror movies, violent action films, and dark crime stories, but I don't like how they made McCall out to be this perfect human being when he's probably insane and very troubled.

They could have done a lot with this movie, like explore how McCall's methods make him cross the line, and threaten his morality and humanity. He never struggles with himself, he's a literal terminator who just kills evil people. He can do no wrong because he's just so awesome, and I think that kind of black/white portrayal of good and evil is what makes this movie feel so out of place. For example, I remember the scene where McCall sees someone stealing, then he follows them with a SLEDGEHAMMER and assumedly kills them. That is just extreme, though someone told me that thief was hinted to be a murderer as well. Either way, it just seems odd that the movie never questions McCall and his brutality, and rather than give him flaws, they just make all the bad guys extra-despicable so you never feel bad or think too much about it.

This movie could have been good if it 1) Didn't take itself so seriously, or 2) Treated it's subject material MORE seriously. Instead, it acts incredibly serious while presenting us with a modern day superhero who kills people methodically without any remorse. Even good guys are supposed to FEEL something, but instead Denzel strings a guy up and stares him dead in the eyes and watches him die slowly. That is sadistic and evil, and it would have been nice to explore that dark side of McCall rather than dismiss it. As it stands, McCall simply feels like a stand-in for people's desire for vigilantism rather than a fully fleshed out character.

Anyways, besides the character of McCall, this movie has some really dumb moments, the diner being my personal favorite. They send in one guy who McCall obviously kills, then they sit in a van and watch McCall take pictures of them, then they wait until he's out of sight before chasing him. They lose him, of course. WHAT!? I have no idea what the bad guys were trying to accomplish in that scene. Did they want to kill him? Were they taking him alive? Were they just doing surveillance? The main bad guy was the most incompetent unthreatening villain in almost any movie. He had multiple chances to kill McCall but did nothing, making him appear weak and useless. Again, a weak boring villain against our perfect infallible hero doesn't make for good story-telling.

Anyways, I don't think people are wrong for liking this movie, I just don't see what they enjoy about it. There are much better action movies with stronger plots, better action, more interesting characters, and more effective villains.

I took it of after 30 minuttes.

Er du dansker eller Nordmand?

"...I'm well aware that I probably get nothing constructive out of saying this..."

You be constructive first.

Your question is asked in an arrogant way, which deserves a trollish answer, but I'll resist.

The film is of a genre. The violence is expected. It is a question of how well it is done.

I don't blame anyone for disqualifying on principle any movie that has violence as its selling point. I feel a little dubious myself about watching this stuff. It is basically revenge porn. Intellectually, I don't support capital punishment, and yet here I'm finding entertainment and emotional release in the executions of any number of people, sometimes people whose crimes were simply to be employed as body guards. Many of these films are now depicting police officers being mowed down in the line of duty by the very heroes we're rooting for.

So, yeah, it's morally dubious. And I do have my concerns about the effect on culture and consciousness, including my own. Perhaps I am morphing into a vengeful person. Perhaps we are becoming a people who more and more lust to see the wrongs in the world righted with a ten pound hammer.

But existential questions aside, this is certainly one of the best films of its genre. Look at the opening shot. The camera work, cinematography, lighting. This is more than your average shoot-em-up. There is a lot of movie-making art. There's dialogue, character (our hero reads books!), and good story telling and pacing. I could certainly fault the plot in places, but it does keep you watching. Just don't ask too many questions.

*beep* off.

Hama cheez ba-Beer behtar meshawad!

For what it's worth, I've found that a combined User Score of 7+ and a Metascore of 70+ tends to be worthwhile.

This doesn't pass that test, nor do many other action type "guilty pleasures," which many people enjoy, but few would more than once.