It's not kick-ass (nor female empowering) it's a smug, under-written, ego-trip for the undertalented, over-paid shapeless non-entity that is Charlize Theron.....and little else.
(Cue a gang of jaded 'Cinema-buffs', who've seen about about 6 films in their lifetime, telling me I'm wrong, and that actually it's the next best thing since either 'John Wick' or 'Fury Road'.....which are both equally as garbage?)
You're not wrong,dolemite72...but some people like these kind of...movies.
shareI feel officially old when watching stuff like this at the cinema. Even other members of the audience (who were probably looking forward to it) could be heard snoring (and some even walked out early)
Whatever happened to good action movies?
They're gone,dolemite72...now,if you noticed they relly on special effects and no story.
shareI've never known anyone to like completely boring movies before. Wow... that's crazy.
Atomic Blonde, John Wick, Mad Max: Fury Road, all great films.
What I've watched this week;
The Party (1968)
The Handmaiden (2016)
Atomic Blonde (2017)
Manchester by the Sea (2016)
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939)
Harvey (1950)
Didn't think it was great but I do think it's action sequences are some of the best filmed we've seen. And nothing about this film has to do with special effects, but more practical action skill which Charlize has a lot of by the way. Not the best story, but the action is fantastic.
I'm trying to go for an engaging, funny youtube channel so, if you have the time, take a look. Hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance. A review of the movie here- https://youtu.be/FJHDz39T6wo
The story was the weakest part of the film, a bit confusing. But the action made up for it. I really enjoyed the style and feel of the film. Charlie's acting performance reminded me of Cate Beckensale in Underworld. She had that accent and her facial expressions were similar. The fighting choreography was better than Underworld though.
My favorite scene was between Lorraine and those 5 hit men that had her pinned in that building as she trying to get Spy Glass out.
I can compare it with fight scenes in the final chapter.
shareYou haven't even seen the film yet.
shareNo,Barclays,i haven't...yet,but i saw some scenes on youtube and for me is good enough...at least for now.
shareWatch the entire movie and then we will talk not about comparisons because I'm not going to argue with you based on a YouTube video that only shows part of the movie.
shareFair enough,Barclays...but what can i tell you right now is one thing,that both movies have in common is fast cutting scenes.
shareYou wanna argue so bad that you're trying to cheat the process by pulling information out of me in order to find a way to argue this topic. Shame on you. No cheating. No YouTube videos. Watch the entire movie and then we will discuss comparisons.
shareYou, of course, have a right to voice your opinion. So do I, and I tend to disagree with your remark - "the undertalented, over-paid shapeless non-entity that is Charlize Theron". Example: "Monster". (She won the Academy Award for Best Actress for that role and she is phenomenal in it!)
shareDo you think she was (quote) "phenomenal" *because* she won the oscar?
Lots of actors have won Oscars that they didn't earn (in fact, only a few actors have actually deserved theirs) The Oscars still exist, regardless if someone actually deserves one....and maybe MONSTER got lucky that year?
Sadly, the Oscars have just become a box-ticking exercise in proportionate 'entitlement' over the years (and little else)
Theron (made-down....i.e. without her usual make-up) screaming ranting and raving whilst being abused, might be "phenomenal" to you...but left me cold (dozens of actors could have played the same role)
In fact, ATOMIC BLONDE was like an 'Action' follow up to MONSTER (in which the victim fought back in a series of 'stylistic' and unrealistic rumbles with dozens of men, thrice her size) In fact, why not get Christina Ricci to play her lesbian lover in this movie, as well?
But hey, taste is subjective...right?
But if you're best defence of (the turgid) ATOMIC BLONDE is to cite an Oscar that Theron won over a decade ago....then may I suggest you get a job as a (well-needed) PR campaign manager for fellow 'Oscar' recipients Cuba Gooding Jr. And Halle Berry (all three of these 'phenomenal' talents couldn't pick a good movie, if *your* life depended on it)
Size is not the best indicator of strength. Muscular bulging is an unnatural training regimen, and not the healthiest.
shareThe men she fought weren't particularly muscular (and whilst I wasn't expecting the movie to be a serious documentary about fighting) the makers could have tried to make it little more realistic.
So anyhow, getting back to my original question "How can people defend such garbage?"
I guess the answer is.....They can't
(but will bring up a previous oscar win, or muscle mass limitations.....to cloud such truth)
I know you can't be dumb enough to actually believe that a quick discussion on "muscle mass vs. muscular strength" is intended to "cloud" the "truth" of a movie being "garbage." You're obviously just being an antagonistic troll. Obviously I had no intent on engaging with you on that level.
Good job proving my suspicion, though.
=)
We could argue (or debate) the artistic merits (or de-merits) of this movie, and I'd never resort to using that (hoary old chestnut) of "Troll" (which is officially up there, in internet terms, with "Racist" as the most pimped-out pointless cop-out of all time) just because we disagree.
My question still stands....How can anyone defend this garbage.......and *YOU* in your infinate wisdom brought up muscle mass (not me) so I addressed it.
Whilst I expect (nay, demand) a slight suspension of belief in movies like this.....your assertion that some 40 year old Miss Eithiopia could beat up one (let alone ten) guys who probably weigh 10 stone more than her, because she lacks the unhealthy muscle-mass they have is just silly (and beyond name-calling)
If you've got more to say....say it (just leave that weak-ass "Troll-sh*t" in the playground were it belongs) The reason I accused you of 'clouding things over' is because you have chosen to only defend such a garbage movie with mere speculation on how muscle mass can be unhealthy and ineffective in a fight......or others have defended it by saying "Theron won an OSCAR over a decade ago" (and little else)
I'd love to be discussing/debating/arguing about cinematography, script, casting with you (or anyone else) right now...*HOWEVER*....none of you saw fit to fire back with anything of substance?
I only asked the question....the actual answers are down to however reads it, and would wish to defend such a movie.....but the answers given (so far) are severely lacking in content (just like, it would seem, the target audience for this movie)
But *PLEASE* don't insult your own intelligence by resorting to calling me a "TROLL" just because I dislike something you don't. I've given this dreadful movie more time (and text) than it deserves. If I was a Troll, I'd be content to say "It's sh*t" and then move onto the next board.
Firstly, dolemite72, film/art/entertainment is subjective, so people can defend it by virtue of liking the very thing you're criticising. (One man's gold is another's mould, as it were.) Secondly, as unrealistic as this film may be (it is entertainment and not a documentary, after all), it would be just as unrealistic if it were a single man taking down a bunch of bigger, stronger men. I mean I love Batman, but if a guy tried to become the Dark Knight in real life, he'd barely last a week.
Thirdly, I happen to think Charlize Theron is a superb actor with a rather weighty screen presence. If you don't like her, that's fine; at the end of the day, any kind of performance is down to the personal preference of the viewer.
Fourthly, I thought Atomic Blonde was okay. There were some things in there I didn't like - I found the fractured narrative a bit unnecessary and I didn't care for James McAvoy's character or performance - but I thought the film was beautifully shot, had an engaging central performance from Charlize Theron and had some superb action scenes. Not a bad day at the office!
I should remember what someone much wiser than me once told me about arguing with idiots. It's pointless. You will never convince them of anything. They will always have an answer, even if it sounds like it is coming from out of their a$$.
So, I guess, we will agree to disagree. Goodbye dolemite.
Wow.....the time-honoured "Don't argue with idiots" line.....I'll wager that 'zinger' has gotten you out of a few debates, that (obviously) you had no reason to be part of in the first place, eh?
Like I said....I ask how can anyone defend such garbage....and all I get is "cliché 101" class in cop-out replies (yet somehow *I'm* the troll?)
Which confirms my suspicions that (sadly) the next generation of moviegoers are crosscut with the SJW crowd (nothing to say and all day to say it) Quick...Google a snappy comeback
More power to you if you enjoyed this movie (But methinks fans of such movies are just mindless sheep, lacking in an actual opinion of *why* they actually like something) I guess you're all too busy burning down your local coffee-shops, to bother elaborating anything?
Silly me, expecting this place to be frequented by people with a passing interest in cinema?
I would agree with most of it... but come on you can't lump John Wick with crap as bad as Fury Road or Atomic Blonde... I would agree you could have lumped John Wick 2 with that garbage but at least the first one kept you awake and had a few well choreographed fight scenes. Atomic Blonde was just boring from start to finish... One of those movies where the trailer appeared to have been from a totally different film.
share
There are a LOT of stupid people in the world.
😎