absalutely rubbish


it seemed like copy of many movies.
the story was weak. the actors were average, no special dialogues or scenes to remember. the editing seemed pretty bad. there were many scenes ending abruplty.
the lead actor was pretty lame. he had no specialty, not physical or facial or acting specialty. just plain dumb.

gave it 3/10.

reply

Ok, then tell me a better historical/fantasy action movie in the last 5 to 10 years, mate.

reply

He/ she can't. That's why they won't be back. They just decided to jump on the SK haters bandwagon.

"Your speech is wild and godless... but I find myself liking you." - Solomon Kane

reply

Lord of the Rings, Pan's labyrinth, Amelie, 300, Pirates of the carribean, new star wars, hell even the Harry potters and Peter pan were better than this!! Oh and even the BADLY acted Chronicles of Narnia was better and does a much better job of christian propaganda.. fairy muff it's from a book but still!

Saying name a better film is a poor defence to be honest! Why don't you explain what you think is good about this film? The list should be shorter..

Looked pretty on my plasma and sound editing was good.

However dialogue was fairly poor, story was EXTREMELY poor and predictable I was just waiting for the revelation that it's his brother, I mean he pulled him self DOWN from being crucified.. if only Jesus had thought of that!

He battles and escapes from death in a pooooor intro.. he let's the boy die because he's promised not to fight- a promise which he breaks 2 secs AFTER the boy dies (great timing), ALL his sins and his soul is forgiven by saving a girl as prophesised somehow by her dying father, we have a big monster at the end for NOOO reason which just disappears after he kills Malaki.. I mean it couldn'r really BE any worse!!??

reply

Dude, your entire argument became nullified when you mentioned Amelie. you mention all of these genre movies, then out of left field you bring up Amelie. A great film, but entirely removed from the associated genre.
Kane was a great film. Much better than a lot of the crap that has come down the pike this year *cough cough* Clash of the Titans *cough*

"Your speech is wild and godless... but I find myself liking you." - Solomon Kane

reply

Amelie is classified as a fantasy/romantic or whatever.. although I was surprised when I found this out..

I usually find the good in almost ANY film and suck the enjoyment out, I really don't know why I couldn't with this film but I guess it's just the way I looked at it.

I think pulling himself down from the cross reeeeallly ended any respect I had for it. Plus I'm also not someone who likes to try and guess the story, I just let the director lead me.. so if I find it predictable it means it just popped into my head passively so it's TOOO predictable!

reply

That's interesting! I know that it was slightly absurdist, but I never would have classified Amelie as a 'fantasy'. Great film, though!
Sorry you didn't enjoy Kane. You should check out the original short stories, though, if you enjoy sword and sorcery.

"Your speech is wild and godless... but I find myself liking you." - Solomon Kane

reply

[deleted]

This movie had so much potential, but sort of fell flat on the ground a couple of seconds into it and then never managed to get back up again. Overall, the pace of the movie is just bland. Yes, the scenery is fantastic, the atmosphere is dark and gritty, and the acting isn't bad (though the guy playing Solomon was grinding my gears at times).

The major problem with this movie is that it's a "vengeance" film. You know, where something happens to the protagonist that sends him on a murderous rampage to avenge his loved ones, the world or his cat, Mittens. Often, the protagonist turns out to be some retired agent/soldier/ninja, or whatnot, leading to some major ass-kicking.

Considering Solomon Kane is supposed to be this finely crafted killing machine, the opening was just bland. You see him kill some dudes with a sword and execute a poor guy with a pistol. Fair enough, he can use a sword and pistol, just like most of the people at that time. I'm not saying he should be doing parkour and ninja style fencing, but the opening fight scene could have been improved a lot, to at least give off the impression that he's above average.

For an example of an excellent scene like this, look at V for Vendetta - the fight scene with Creedy near the end, where V takes out all the soldiers and the boss in a couple of seconds.

YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGGPufySwZ4

For a classic vengeance movie, watch The Patriot (with Mel Gibson). The early scenes where his kid is killed and he dons the kick-ass tomahawk is just iconic for that movie type.

Those are awesome scenes that provide you with a "Go, good guy! Go kick some ass!" cheering feeling, and while the protagonist might suffer throughout the movie, once he dons that kick-ass hat, he just turns into almost a superhero and delivers nothing but self-confident action. It enables you to identify with the protagonist and his suffering, and when he then activates those super powers and does what is realistically not possible, we cheer because that's what we wish he would do.

Nobody wants to watch one of these vengeance movies if the protagonist stumbles his way through some fights while sobbing and moaning the entire time, only to give up halfway and turn into a drunkard, after which, in a fit of renewed defiance, he almost has himself killed except for some random scrub guy saving him. That's the sort of plot you see in those realistic movies, like Edge of Darkness and Death Sentence.

To sum it up, the feeling this movie left me with was "Is this it?"

Not a bad movie per se, but it could have been so much more. When you're making a sword-and-sorcery movie, don't be afraid to move away from realistic fighting capabilities. After all, the antagonists in this movie are anything but realistic. If the antagonist can wield dark magic, why can't the protagonist wield supernatural fighting skills?

reply

<i>The major problem with this movie is that it's a "vengeance" film. You know, where something happens to the protagonist that sends him on a murderous rampage to avenge his loved ones, the world or his cat, Mittens.</i>

I don't know if it strictly counts as a "revenge" movie, considering he only goes on said murderous rampage a good part of the way through the film.

Considering Solomon Kane is supposed to be this finely crafted killing machine, the opening was just bland. You see him kill some dudes with a sword and execute a poor guy with a pistol. Fair enough, he can use a sword and pistol, just like most of the people at that time.


Kane killed "some dudes" within the space of a few seconds, and made it look utterly effortless. He made it look like he was toying with them. His executions were to show that he's a dastardly scoundrel who'll shoot someone without remorse, even his own men. It did that quite well.

Nobody wants to watch one of these vengeance movies if the protagonist stumbles his way through some fights while sobbing and moaning the entire time, only to give up halfway and turn into a drunkard, after which, in a fit of renewed defiance, he almost has himself killed except for some random scrub guy saving him. That's the sort of plot you see in those realistic movies, like Edge of Darkness and Death Sentence.


Why should every vengeance movie stick to the norm? Surely providing something different is a good thing, no?

When you're making a sword-and-sorcery movie, don't be afraid to move away from realistic fighting capabilities. After all, the antagonists in this movie are anything but realistic. If the antagonist can wield dark magic, why can't the protagonist wield supernatural fighting skills?


This argument always bothers me. No, we know that the scientific community refutes the notion of magic. That does not mean a film involving an element which isn't real automatically discounts all realism. Rather, the film is asserting that magic, whatever it is, happens to be real, not that the world is unreal. Unless this is something like "Inception" or "The Princess Bride". According to the film, magic is in fact a quantifiable phenomena, which might not be understood or even widely known, but can be treated as an actuality. This doesn't automatically give free reign for all and sundry.

Put it this way: Charles Foster Kane is not real. He did not found a multi-million newspaper, he didn't make a fortune, he didn't have a sled. Does that mean we can depict him as having the ability to transform into animals? Or what about the fictional Motaba virus from "Outbreak": it doesn't exist, and it's far more virulent than any real virus we know of, but does that mean Dustin Hoffman can do gravity-defying kung fu? Just as we can accept that Charles Foster Kane and the Motoba virus are not real *in real life*, but real *in the film,* we can accept that magic in films like "Solomon Kane" can be real *in the film* - without giving carte blanche for any old garbage.

reply

amélie's a romantic comedy, which i'm guessing you now know. it's always better to be honest and admit that you messed up rather than inevitably dig yourself any deeper. lesson learnt!

reply

I thought it was perfectly obvious that the reason for the fire demon's disappearance after the sorcerer took a bullet to the dome is because, without the sorcerer's dark magic to sustain it, it could no longer exist in the mortal realm. As to that other poster's complaint about Kane pulling himself off the cross, they must not have heard when Kane clearly asked God to give him strength.

reply

His impure blood splattered on the mirror drew the demon back in.

reply

[deleted]

by - blues1234

it seemed like copy of many movies.
the story was weak. the actors were average, no special dialogues or scenes to remember. the editing seemed pretty bad. there were many scenes ending abruplty.
the lead actor was pretty lame. he had no specialty, not physical or facial or acting specialty. just plain dumb.

gave it 3/10.

What was rubbish about it? It was a pretty tight film for such a low budget. The only thing that's rubbish is your spelling of the word "absolute"...

reply

"absalutely" ? You should always check your spelling before trying to put something down.

"I told you it's not fat, it's power!"

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]